THE
FYRST
BOKE
IS
OF
THE
TRVE
AND
CATHOLIKE
DOCTRINE
AND
VSE
OF
the
sacrament
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
our
Sauiour
Christe
.
THE
SVPPER
OF
the
Lorde
,
otherwise
called
The
holy
Communion
or
Sacrament
of
the
body
and
bloode
of
our
sauiour
CHRISTE
,
hathe
beene
of
many
men
,
and
by
sondry
wayes
,
very
much
abused
,
but
speciallye
within
these
fower
or
fiue
hundreth
yeares
.
Of
some
it
hathe
beene
vsed
as
a
sacrifice
propiciatorye
for
synne
,
and
otherwise
supersticiously
,
farre
frome
the
intent
that
CHRIST
dyd
fyrst
ordaine
the
same
at
the
beginning
,
doing
therin
greate
wronge
and
iniurye
to
his
death
and
passion
.
And
of
other
some
it
hath
beene
verye
lyghtly
esteemed
,
or
rather
contemned
and
dispised
,
as
a
thynge
of
small
or
none
effect
.
And
thus
betwene
bothe
the
parties
hath
been
muche
variance
and
contention
in
diuers
places
of
Christendome
.
Therefore
to
the
intent
that
this
holy
sacrament
or
Lordes
supper
,
may
here
after
neither
of
the
one
partie
bee
contemned
or
lyghtly
estemed
,
nor
on
the
other
partie
be
abused
to
any
other
purpose
,
than
Christe
hym selfe
dyd
fyrste
appoynte
and
ordeyne
the
same
,
and
that
so
,
the
contention
on
bothe
parties
may
be
quieted
and
ended
,
the
most
sure
and
playn
way
is
,
to
cleaue
vnto
holy
scripture
.
Wherin
what
so
euer
is
found
,
must
be
taken
for
a
moste
sure
grounde
and
an
infallible
truthe
,
and
what
soeuer
can
not
bee
grounded
vpon
the
same
(
touchyng
our
faithe
)
is
mans
deuise
,
chaungeable
and
vncertayne
.
And
therfore
here
are
set
forth
the
very
wordes
,
that
Christe
hym selfe
and
his
apostle
saynt
Paule
spake
,
bothe
of
the
eatyng
and
drynkyng
of
Christes
body
and
bloud
,
and
also
of
the
eatyng
and
drynkynge
of
the
sacrament
of
the
same
.
FYRST
as
concernyng
the
eatyng
of
the
body
and
drinkyng
of
the
bloude
of
our
sauyour
Christe
,
he
speaketh
hym selfe
in
the
.vi.
chapiter
of
saynt
Iohn
in
this
wyse
.
Of
these
wordes
of
Christe
it
is
playne
and
manyfest
,
Augustin
in
Ioan
Tractat
.
26.
that
the
eatyng
of
Christes
fleshe
and
drynkyng
of
his
bloude
,
is
not
lyke
to
the
eatyng
and
drynkyng
of
other
meates
and
drinkes
.
For
although
without
meate
and
drynke
man
can
not
lyue
,
yet
it
foloweth
not
,
that
he
that
eateth
and
drynketh
,
shall
lyue
for
euer
.
But
as
touchyng
this
meate
and
drynke
of
the
body
and
bloude
of
Christe
,
it
is
true
,
bothe
he
that
eateth
and
drinketh
them
,
hath
euerlasting
life
,
and
also
he
that
eateth
and
drynketh
them
not
,
Eodent
tract
.
hath
not
euerlastynge
life
.
For
to
eate
that
meate
and
drynke
that
drynke
,
is
to
dwell
in
Christe
and
to
haue
Christ
dwellyng
in
him
And
therfore
no
man
can
say
or
thynk
,
Aug.
de
Ciuitate
.
Lib.
21.
cap.
25.
that
he
eateth
the
body
of
Christ
or
drinketh
his
bloud
,
excepte
he
dwelleth
in
Christe
,
and
hath
Christe
dwellyng
in
hym
.
Thus
haue
ye
hearde
of
the
eatynge
and
drynkynge
of
the
very
fleshe
and
bloud
of
our
sauiour
Christ
.
Chap.
3.
Nowe
as
touchynge
the
sacramentes
of
the
same
,
This
thyng
is
rehersed
also
of
saynt
Marke
in
these
woordes
.
The
Euangelist
S.
Luke
vttereth
this
matter
on
this
wyse
.
When
the
howre
was
come
,
Hytherto
you
haue
heard
all
that
the
Euangelistes
declare
,
that
Christ
spake
or
did
at
his
last
supper
,
concernyng
the
institucion
of
the
Communion
and
sacrament
of
his
body
&
bloud
.
Nowe
you
shall
heare
what
sainct
Paule
sayth
concernyng
the
same
,
in
the
tenth
chapiter
of
the
first
to
the
Corinthians
,
where
he
writeth
thus
.
And
in
the
eleuenth
he
speaketh
on
this
maner
.
By
these
wordes
of
Christ
rehersed
of
the
Euangelistes
,
and
by
the
doctrine
also
of
saynte
Paule
(
whiche
he
confesseth
that
he
receaued
of
Christe
)
two
thynges
specially
are
to
be
noted
.
Chap.
4.
Fyrst
that
our
sauiour
Christ
called
the
materiall
bread
whiche
he
brake
,
So
that
no
man
can
contemne
or
lyghtly
esteme
this
holy
communion
,
excepte
he
contemne
also
Christes
body
and
bloud
,
and
passe
not
whether
he
haue
any
felowshyp
wyth
hym
or
no.
And
of
those
men
saynte
Paule
saieth
,
The
seconde
thyng
whiche
may
bee
lerned
of
the
forsayd
wordes
of
Christe
and
saynt
Paule
is
this
:
Chap.
5.
Euill
men
do
eate
the
sacrament
but
not
the
bodye
of
Christe
that
although
none
eateth
the
body
of
Christ
,
and
drynketh
his
bloud
,
but
they
haue
eternall
lyfe
,
(
as
apereth
by
the
wordes
before
recited
of
S.
Iohn
)
yet
both
the
good
and
the
bad
do
eate
and
drynk
the
bread
and
wyne
,
whiche
be
the
Sacramentes
of
the
same
.
shall
be
giltie
of
the
body
and
bloudde
of
the
Lorde
.
Here
sainte
Paule
saith
not
,
that
he
that
eateth
the
bread
and
drinketh
the
cup
of
the
Lorde
vnworthyly
,
eateth
and
drynketh
the
body
and
bloud
of
the
Lorde
,
but
is
giltie
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
the
Lord
.
But
what
he
eateth
and
drinketh
S.
Paule
declareth
,
saiynge
:
Thus
is
declared
the
summe
of
all
that
scripture
speaketh
of
the
eatyng
and
drynkynge
,
bothe
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
also
of
the
sacrament
of
the
same
.
Chap.
6.
AND
as
these
thynges
be
most
certainly
true
,
because
they
be
spoken
by
Christe
hym selfe
,
the
author
of
all
truth
,
Whiche
thynge
beeyng
well
consydered
and
waied
,
shal
be
a
iust
occasion
to
pacifie
and
agree
bothe
parties
,
as
well
them
that
hytherto
haue
contemned
or
lyghtly
estemed
it
,
as
also
theym
whiche
haue
hitherto
for
lacke
of
knowledge
or
otherwyse
,
vngodly
abused
it
.
CHRISTE
ordeyned
the
sacrament
to
moue
and
styrre
all
men
to
frendeshyp
,
Chap.
7.
loue
,
and
concorde
,
and
to
put
away
all
hatred
,
God
graunt
that
al
contention
set
aside
,
both
the
parties
may
come
to
this
holy
communion
with
suche
a
liuely
faith
in
Christe
,
and
such
an
vnfained
loue
to
all
Christes
membres
,
that
as
they
carnally
eate
with
their
mouth
this
sacramentall
bread
and
drink
the
wine
,
so
spiritually
they
maye
eate
and
drynke
the
very
fleshe
and
bloud
of
Christe
whiche
is
in
heauen
,
and
sitteth
on
the
right
hande
of
his
father
.
And
that
finally
by
his
meanes
,
they
may
enioy
with
him
the
glory
and
kyngdome
of
heauen
.
Amen
.
Altho
in
this
treatie
of
the
sacramente
of
the
body
and
bloude
of
our
sauiour
Christ
,
Chap.
8.
I
haue
already
sufficiently
declared
the
institution
and
meanynge
of
the
same
,
accordynge
to
the
very
wordes
of
the
gospell
and
of
saint
Paule
,
yet
it
shall
not
bee
in
vayne
somewhat
more
at
large
to
declare
the
same
,
accordyng
to
the
mynde
,
as
well
of
holy
scripture
,
as
of
olde
auncient
authors
,
and
that
so
sincerely
and
plainly
,
without
doubtes
,
ambiguitees
,
or
vayn
questions
,
that
the
very
symple
and
vnlerned
people
,
may
easily
vnderstande
the
same
,
and
be
edified
therby
.
And
this
by
Goddes
grace
is
myne
only
intent
and
desyre
,
that
the
flock
of
Christ
dispersed
in
this
realme
(
among
whom
I
am
appointed
a
speciall
pastour
)
may
no
longer
lacke
the
commoditee
and
fruite
,
which
springeth
of
this
heauenly
knowledge
.
For
the
more
clerely
it
is
vnderstande
,
the
more
swetenes
,
fruit
,
comfort
,
and
edification
it
bryngeth
,
to
the
godly
receauers
thereof
.
And
to
the
clere
vnderstandynge
of
this
sacramente
,
dyuers
thynges
muste
bee
consydered
.
Chap.
9.
FYRST
,
that
as
all
men
of
them selues
bee
synners
,
And
this
earnest
and
greate
desyre
,
is
called
in
scripture
,
The
hunger
and
thirst
of
the
soule
:
with
whyche
kynde
of
hunger
Dauid
was
taken
,
whan
he
sayde
:
my
soule
long
for
the
O
God
.
My
soule
hath
thyrsted
after
God
,
who
is
the
well
of
lyfe
.
My
soule
thyrsteth
for
the
,
my
fleshe
wysheth
for
thee
.
And
this
hunger
the
sely
poore
synfull
soule
is
dryuen
vnto
,
by
meanes
of
the
lawe
,
whiche
sheweth
vnto
her
the
horriblenes
of
synne
,
And
whan
she
seeth
nothyng
but
damnation
for
her
offences
,
And
who
soeuer
hath
this
godly
hunger
,
is
blessed
of
God
,
and
shal
haue
meate
and
drynke
ynough
,
as
Christ
hym self
said
:
Blessed
be
they
that
hunger
and
thirst
for
rightousnes
,
for
they
Shal
be
fylled
ful
.
And
on
thother
side
,
they
that
see
not
their
owne
synfull
and
damnable
estate
,
but
thynke
theim selues
holy
ynoughe
,
and
in
good
case
and
condicion
ynough
,
as
they
haue
no
spirituall
hunger
,
so
shall
they
not
bee
fed
of
God
with
any
spirituall
foode
.
But
this
hunger
and
thyrst
is
not
easily
perceyued
of
the
carnall
man
.
For
when
he
hereth
the
holy
ghoste
speake
of
meate
and
drynk
,
his
mynde
is
by
and
by
in
the
kytchen
and
buttery
,
and
he
thynketh
vpon
his
dyshes
and
pottes
,
his
mouthe
and
his
bealy
.
But
the
scripture
in
sundry
places
vseth
speciall
wordes
,
wherby
to
drawe
our
grosse
myndes
from
the
phantasyeng
of
our
teeth
and
belly
,
and
from
this
carnall
and
fleshely
imagination
.
For
the
Apostles
and
disciples
of
Christe
,
when
they
were
yet
carnall
,
knew
not
what
was
ment
by
this
kynde
of
hunger
and
meate
,
and
therfore
when
they
desired
hym
to
eate
,
I
haue
other
meate
to
eate
,
whiche
you
knowe
not
.
And
why
knewe
they
it
not
?
Forsothe
because
their
myndes
were
grosse
as
yet
,
and
had
not
receyued
the
fulnesse
of
the
spirite
.
And
therfore
our
sauiour
Christ
,
myndyng
to
drawe
them
from
this
grossenes
,
tolde
theim
of
an
other
kynd
of
meate
,
then
they
phantasied
(
as
it
were
)
rebukyng
them
,
for
that
they
perceiued
not
,
that
there
was
any
other
kynde
of
eating
and
drinkyng
,
besides
that
eatyng
and
drinkyng
,
whiche
is
with
the
mouth
and
the
throte
.
Likewyse
whan
he
sayd
to
the
woman
of
Samaria
:
Who
so
euer
shall
drynke
of
that
water
,
They
that
heard
hym
speake
those
wordes
,
might
well
perceyue
,
that
he
went
about
to
make
them
wel
acquaynted
with
an
other
kynd
of
drinkynge
,
than
is
the
drynkynge
with
the
mouth
and
throte
.
For
there
is
no
suche
kynd
of
drynke
,
that
with
ones
drynkyng
,
can
quenche
the
thirst
of
a
mans
body
for
euer
.
Wherfore
,
in
saiyng
:
He
shall
neuer
be
thirsty
agayn
.
he
dyd
drawe
theyr
myndes
from
drynkynge
with
the
mouth
,
vnto
an
other
kind
of
drinkyng
wherof
they
knew
not
,
and
vnto
an
other
kynd
of
thirsting
,
wherwith
as
yet
thei
wer
not
acquainted
.
Also
when
our
sauiour
Christe
saide
:
He
that
commeth
to
me
,
shal
nat
hunger
:
and
,
He
that
be
leueth
on
me
,
shall
neuer
bee
thyrstye
.
he
gaue
them
a
plaine
watche
worde
,
that
there
was
an
other
kynd
of
meat
and
drinke
,
then
that
,
wherwith
he
fedde
them
at
the
other
syde
of
the
water
:
and
an
other
kynde
of
hungryng
and
thyrstynge
,
then
was
the
hungrynge
and
thirstyng
of
the
body
.
By
these
wordes
therfore
he
droue
the
people
to
vnderstand
an
other
kynde
of
eatyng
and
drinkyng
,
of
hungring
and
thyrstyng
then
that
,
whiche
belongeth
onely
for
the
preseruation
of
temporal
lyfe
.
Nowe
then
as
the
thyng
that
comforteth
the
body
,
is
called
Meate
and
drynke
,
of
a
lyke
for
the
scripture
calleth
the
same
thynge
that
comforteth
the
soule
,
Meate
and
drynke
.
Wherfore
as
here
before
in
the
fyrste
note
is
declared
the
hungre
and
drought
of
the
soule
,
Cha.
10.
so
is
it
nowe
secondly
to
bee
noted
,
what
is
the
meate
,
The
meate
,
drynke
,
foode
and
refreshynge
of
the
soule
,
is
our
sauiour
Christe
,
as
he
sayd
him selfe
:
For
as
meate
and
drynke
do
comfort
the
hungry
body
,
so
doth
the
death
of
Christes
body
,
&
the
sheddyng
of
his
bloud
comforte
the
soule
,
when
she
is
after
her
sort
hungry
.
What
thyng
is
it
that
comforteth
&
norisheth
the
body
?
Forsooth
meate
and
drynke
.
By
what
meanes
than
shall
we
call
the
body
and
bloud
of
our
sauiour
Christe
(
whiche
doo
comforte
and
nouryshe
the
hungrye
soule
)
but
by
the
names
of
meate
and
drynke
?
And
this
similitude
caused
our
sauiour
to
say
:
For
there
is
no
kynde
of
meate
that
is
comfortable
to
the
soule
,
but
onely
the
death
of
Christes
blessed
body
:
nor
no
kynde
of
drynke
,
that
can
quenche
her
thyrst
,
but
only
the
bloudsheddyng
of
our
sauiour
Christe
,
whiche
was
shed
for
her
offences
.
For
as
there
is
a
carnall
generation
,
and
a
carnal
feedyng
&
nourishement
,
so
is
there
also
a
spiritual
generation
,
and
a
spiritual
feadyng
.
And
as
euery
man
by
carnal
generation
of
father
and
mother
,
is
carnally
begotten
and
born
vnto
this
mortall
lyfe
,
so
is
euery
good
christian
spiritually
borne
by
Christ
vnto
eternall
life
.
And
as
euery
man
is
carnally
fedde
and
nourished
in
his
body
by
meate
&
drynke
,
euen
so
is
euery
good
christian
man
spiritually
fedde
and
nourished
in
his
soule
by
the
fleshe
and
bloud
of
our
sauiour
Christ
.
And
as
the
body
liueth
by
meate
and
drynke
,
and
thereby
increaseth
and
groweth
from
a
yong
babe
vnto
a
perfect
man
,
(
whiche
thyng
experience
teacheth
vs
)
so
the
soule
lyueth
by
Christe
him selfe
,
by
pure
fayth
eatyng
his
fleshe
and
drynkyng
his
bloud
.
And
this
Christ
him selfe
teacheth
vs
in
the
sixt
of
Ihon
,
Uerely
verely
I
say
vnto
you
,
excepte
ye
eate
the
fleshe
of
the
sonne
of
man
,
and
drynke
his
bloud
,
you
haue
no
life
in
you
.
who
so
eateth
my
fleshe
and
drynketh
my
bloud
,
hath
eternal
life
,
and
I
wyl
raise
him
vp
at
the
last
day
:
For
my
fleshe
is
very
meate
,
and
my
bloud
is
very
drynke
.
He
that
eateth
my
fleshe
&
drynketh
my
bloud
dwelleth
in
me
,
and
I
in
him
.
As
the
liuyng
father
hath
sent
me
,
and
I
liue
by
the
father
,
euen
so
he
that
eateth
me
,
shal
liue
by
me
.
And
this
S.
Paule
confessed
of
him selfe
,
saiyng
:
That
I
haue
life
,
I
haue
it
by
fayth
in
the
sonne
of
God
.
And
nowe
it
is
not
I
that
liue
,
but
Christ
lyueth
in
me
.
The
third
thyng
to
be
noted
is
this
,
Chap
11.
that
although
our
sauiour
Christ
resembleth
his
fleshe
and
bloud
to
meat
&
drynke
,
Moreouer
,
meate
and
drinke
doth
fede
and
norishe
onely
our
bodies
,
but
Christ
is
the
true
and
perfect
norishement
,
both
of
body
and
soule
.
And
besides
that
,
bodily
food
preserueth
the
lyfe
but
for
a
tyme
,
but
Chrst
is
such
a
spirytual
and
perfect
foode
,
that
he
preserueth
both
body
&
soule
for
euer
.
I
am
resurrection
and
life
.
He
that
beleueth
in
me
,
although
he
dye
,
yet
shall
he
lyue
.
And
he
that
liueth
and
beleueth
in
me
,
shall
not
dye
for
euer
.
Cha.
12.
Fourthly
it
is
to
be
noted
,
that
the
true
knowlege
of
these
thynges
,
is
the
true
knowlege
of
Christ
,
And
although
our
carnall
generation
&
oure
carnall
nourishement
,
be
knowen
to
all
men
by
dayly
experience
,
and
by
oure
common
senses
,
yet
this
our
spirituall
generation
and
our
spirituall
nutrition
,
be
so
obscure
and
hyd
vnto
vs
,
that
we
can
not
attayn
to
the
true
and
perfecte
knowledge
and
feelyng
of
theym
,
but
onely
by
faith
,
whyche
muste
bee
grounded
vpon
Gods
moste
holy
worde
and
sacramentes
.
AND
for
this
consideration
our
Sauioure
Christe
hath
not
onely
sette
forth
these
thynges
moste
playnly
in
his
holy
woorde
,
that
we
maie
heare
them
with
our
eares
,
but
he
hath
also
ordeyned
one
visible
sacrament
of
spiritual
regeneration
in
water
,
and
an
other
visible
sacrament
of
spiritual
norishment
in
bread
and
wine
to
the
intente
,
that
as
muche
as
is
possible
for
man
,
we
may
se
Christ
with
our
eies
,
smell
him
at
our
nose
,
taste
hym
with
our
mouthes
,
grope
hym
with
our
handes
,
and
perceue
him
with
all
our
senses
.
For
as
the
word
of
god
preched
,
putteth
Christ
into
our
eares
,
so
likewyse
these
elements
of
water
,
bread
and
wine
,
ioyned
to
gods
word
,
do
after
a
sacramental
maner
,
put
Christ
in
to
our
eies
,
mouthes
,
handes
and
al
our
senses
.
And
for
this
cause
Christ
ordeyned
baptisme
in
water
,
that
as
surely
as
we
se
,
fele
and
touch
water
with
our
bodies
,
and
be
washed
with
water
,
so
assuredly
ought
we
to
beleue
,
whan
we
be
baptised
,
that
Christ
is
veryly
present
with
vs
,
and
that
by
hym
we
bee
newly
borne
agayn
spiritually
,
and
washed
from
our
synnes
,
and
grafted
in
the
stocke
of
Christes
own
body
,
and
be
apparailed
,
clothed
,
and
harnessed
with
hym
,
in
suche
wyse
,
that
as
the
dyuel
hath
no
power
agaynst
Christe
,
so
hath
he
none
against
vs
,
so
long
as
we
remayne
grafted
in
that
stocke
,
and
be
clothed
with
that
apparel
and
harnesed
with
that
armour
.
So
that
the
washyng
in
water
of
baptisme
,
is
as
it
wer
shewyng
of
Christ
before
our
eyes
,
and
a
sensible
touchyng
,
feelyng
and
gropyng
of
hym
,
to
the
confirmation
of
the
inwarde
faithe
,
whiche
we
haue
in
hym
.
And
in
lyke
maner
Christ
ordeined
the
sacrament
of
his
body
and
bloud
in
bread
and
wine
,
to
preach
vnto
vs
,
that
as
our
bodies
be
fedde
,
nourished
,
and
preserued
with
meate
and
drink
,
so
(
as
touchynge
our
spirituall
lyfe
towardes
God
)
we
be
fed
,
nourished
and
preserued
by
the
body
and
bloud
of
our
sauiour
Christ
,
and
also
that
he
is
such
a
preseruation
vnto
vs
,
that
nother
the
deuils
of
hell
,
nor
eternall
deth
,
nor
syn
,
can
be
able
to
preuaile
against
vs
,
so
long
as
by
true
and
constant
faith
,
we
be
fed
and
nouryshed
with
that
meate
and
drynke
.
And
for
this
cause
Christ
ordeyned
this
sacrament
in
bread
&
wine
(
whiche
we
eate
and
drynke
,
and
be
chiefe
nutrimentes
of
our
body
)
to
the
intent
,
that
as
surely
as
we
see
the
breade
and
wine
with
our
eies
,
smell
theim
with
our
noses
,
touche
theym
with
our
handes
,
and
tast
them
with
our
mouths
,
so
assuredly
ought
we
to
beleue
,
that
Christ
is
our
spirituall
lyfe
and
sustinance
of
our
soules
,
like
as
the
sayd
bread
and
wyne
is
the
foode
and
sustinaunce
of
our
bodies
.
And
no
lesse
ought
we
to
doubt
,
that
our
soules
bee
fedde
and
lyue
by
Christe
,
then
that
our
bodies
be
fed
and
lyue
by
meate
and
drinke
.
Thus
oure
sauiour
Christe
,
knowing
vs
to
be
in
this
world
(
as
it
were
)
but
babes
and
weakelynges
in
faith
,
hath
ordeined
sensible
signes
and
tokens
,
wherby
to
allure
and
drawe
vs
to
more
strengthe
and
more
constaunt
faith
in
hym
.
So
that
the
eatyng
and
drinkyng
of
this
sacramentall
breade
and
wyne
,
is
as
it
were
a
shewyng
of
Christ
before
our
eies
,
a
smellyng
of
hym
with
our
noses
,
a
feelyng
and
gropyng
of
hym
with
our
handes
,
and
an
eatyng
,
chawyng
,
digestyng
and
feedyng
vpon
hym
to
our
spirituall
strength
and
perfection
.
Fyftly
it
is
to
be
noted
,
that
although
there
be
many
kyndes
of
meates
and
drynkes
,
Chap.
13.
whych
feede
the
body
,
Sixtely
,
Chap.
14
it
is
to
bee
noted
,
that
as
the
breade
and
wyne
whiche
we
do
eate
,
We
bee
one
bread
and
one
body
,
as
many
as
bee
partakers
of
one
bread
and
one
cuppe
.
Dionysius
And
as
one
lofe
is
geuen
amonge
many
men
,
so
that
euery
one
is
partaker
of
the
same
lofe
:
and
lykewyse
one
cup
of
wyne
is
distributed
vnto
many
persons
,
wherof
euery
one
is
partaker
,
euen
so
our
sauiour
Christ
(
whose
fleshe
and
bloud
be
represented
by
the
mystical
bread
and
wine
in
the
lordes
supper
)
doeth
geue
hym selfe
vnto
all
his
true
membres
,
spiritually
to
fede
them
,
noryshe
them
,
and
to
geue
them
continuall
lyfe
by
hym
.
And
as
the
braunches
of
a
tree
,
or
membre
of
a
body
,
if
they
be
dead
or
cut
of
,
they
neyther
lyue
,
nor
receiue
any
nourishement
or
sustinaunce
of
the
body
or
tree
,
so
lykewyse
vngodly
&
wycked
people
,
(
which
be
cut
of
from
Christes
misticall
body
,
or
be
dead
membres
of
the
same
)
doo
not
spiritually
fede
vpon
Christs
body
&
bloud
,
nor
haue
any
lyfe
,
strength
or
sustentation
therby
.
Chap.
15
Seuenthly
it
is
to
be
noted
,
that
where
as
no
thynge
in
this
lyfe
is
more
acceptable
beefore
God
,
For
if
we
receaue
no
breade
nor
wyne
in
the
holy
communion
,
than
al
those
lessons
and
comfortes
be
gone
,
whiche
we
shulde
learne
and
receyue
by
eatyng
of
the
bread
,
and
drynkynge
of
the
wyne
.
And
that
phantasticall
imagination
,
giueth
an
occasion
vtterly
to
subuert
our
whole
faythe
in
Christe
.
For
yf
this
sacrament
bee
ordeyned
in
bread
and
wyne
(
whiche
be
foodes
for
the
body
)
to
signifi
and
declare
vnto
vs
our
spirituall
foode
by
Christ
,
then
yf
our
corporal
fedyng
vpon
the
bread
and
wine
be
but
phantasticall
(
so
that
there
is
no
bread
nor
wine
there
in
dede
to
fede
vpon
,
although
they
apere
there
to
be
)
than
it
doth
vs
to
vnderstande
,
that
our
spirituall
feedyng
in
Christe
is
also
phantasticall
,
and
that
in
dede
we
fede
not
of
him
.
Which
sophistrie
is
so
diuelyshe
and
wicked
,
and
so
much
iniurious
to
Christ
,
that
it
could
not
come
from
any
other
person
,
but
onely
from
the
diuell
hym selfe
,
and
from
his
speciall
minister
Antichriste
.
Chap.
16.
The
eyght
thyng
that
is
to
bee
noted
is
,
that
this
spirituall
meate
of
Christ
is
body
and
blud
,
is
not
receaued
in
the
mouthe
,
What
thynge
then
can
be
more
comfortable
to
vs
,
than
to
eate
thys
meate
and
drynke
thys
drynke
?
Wherby
Christ
certyfyeth
vs
,
that
we
bee
spirytually
and
trewely
fedde
and
nouryshed
by
hym
,
and
that
wee
dwell
in
hym
,
and
he
in
vs
.
Canne
this
bee
shewed
vnto
vs
more
playnly
,
He
that
eateth
me
,
shall
lyue
by
me
?
Wherfore
whosoeuer
doth
not
contemne
the
euerlasting
lyfe
,
how
can
he
but
highely
esteme
this
sacrament
:
How
can
he
but
imbrace
it
,
as
a
sure
pledge
of
his
saluacion
?
And
whan
hee
seeth
godly
people
deuoutly
receaue
the
same
,
howe
can
he
but
be
desyrous
oftentymes
to
receiue
it
with
them
?
Surely
no
man
that
wel
vnderstandeth
,
and
diligently
wayeth
these
things
can
bee
without
a
greate
desire
to
come
to
thys
holy
supper
.
All
men
desyre
to
haue
goddes
fauoure
,
and
when
they
knowe
the
contrary
,
that
they
be
in
his
indignacion
,
and
caste
out
of
his
fauoure
,
what
thinge
can
comforte
them
?
Nowe
be
theyr
myndes
vexed
?
What
trouble
is
in
their
consciences
?
All
goddes
creatures
seme
to
be
against
them
,
and
do
make
theym
afraide
,
as
thinges
being
ministers
of
goddes
wrath
and
indignacion
towards
them
.
And
rest
and
comfort
can
they
finde
none
,
neither
within
them
,
not
withoute
them
.
And
in
this
case
thei
do
hate
as
well
God
as
the
diuel
:
God
as
an
vnmerciful
and
extreme
iudge
,
and
the
dyuell
as
a
moste
malicious
and
cruell
tormentour
.
And
in
this
sorowful
heauines
,
holy
scripture
teacheth
theim
,
that
our
heauenly
father
can
by
no
meanes
be
pleased
with
theim
againe
,
but
by
the
sacrifice
and
deathe
of
his
only
begotten
sonne
,
whereby
God
hathe
made
a
perpetuall
amitee
and
peace
with
vs
,
doth
pardon
the
sinnes
of
them
that
beleue
in
him
,
maketh
theim
his
chyldren
,
&
giueth
them
to
his
first
begotten
son
Christe
,
to
be
incorporate
into
him
,
to
be
saued
by
him
,
and
to
be
made
heires
of
heuen
with
him
.
And
in
the
receauing
of
the
holy
supper
of
our
Lorde
,
wee
bee
putte
in
remembraunce
of
this
his
deathe
,
and
of
the
whole
mysterye
of
our
redemption
.
In
the
which
supper
is
made
mention
of
his
testamente
,
and
of
the
aforesayde
Communion
of
vs
with
Christe
,
and
of
the
remission
of
oure
sinnes
by
his
sacrifice
vppon
the
crosse
.
Wherefore
in
this
sacrament
(
yf
it
be
rightly
receaued
with
a
true
faithe
)
we
bee
assured
that
our
sinnes
bee
forgiuen
,
and
the
leage
of
peace
and
the
testament
of
God
is
confirmed
betwene
hym
and
vs
,
so
that
who
so
euer
by
a
true
faithe
doth
eate
Christes
flesh
,
and
drinke
his
bludde
,
hath
euerlastinge
lyfe
by
hym
.
Whiche
thynge
when
wee
feele
in
oure
hartes
,
at
the
receauynge
of
the
Lordes
supper
,
what
thing
can
be
more
ioyfull
,
more
plesaunte
or
more
comfortable
vnto
vs
?
All
this
to
bee
trewe
,
is
moste
certaine
by
the
woordes
of
Christe
hym selfe
,
whanne
hee
dydde
fyrst
institute
his
holy
supper
,
the
nyght
beefore
his
deathe
,
as
it
appeareth
as
well
by
the
woordes
of
the
Euangelistes
,
as
of
S.
Paule
.
This
doctrine
here
recited
,
maye
suffice
for
all
that
be
humble
and
godly
,
and
seek
nothing
that
is
superfluous
,
but
that
is
necessarye
and
profitable
.
And
therefore
vnto
suche
persones
may
bee
made
here
an
ende
of
this
booke
.
But
vnto
them
that
be
contencious
Papists
&
ydolaters
,
nothing
is
enough
.
And
yet
bicause
thei
shall
not
glory
in
their
subtile
inuencions
and
deceiuable
doctrine
,
(
as
though
no
man
were
able
to
answere
them
)
I
shall
desire
the
readers
of
pacience
,
to
suffre
me
a
litell
while
,
to
spend
some
time
in
vaine
,
to
confute
their
most
vaine
vanities
.
And
yet
the
time
shall
not
bee
altogither
spent
in
vaine
,
for
there
by
shall
more
clearly
appeare
the
lyghte
frome
the
darkenes
,
the
truth
from
false
sophisticall
subtelties
,
and
the
certaine
word
of
God
,
from
mens
dreames
and
phantasticall
inuentions
.
Chap.
17
BUt
these
things
can
not
manifestly
appear
to
the
reader
,
except
the
principall
pointes
be
first
set
out
,
Fyrst
the
Papists
say
that
in
the
supper
of
the
Lorde
,
after
the
words
of
consecracion
(
as
they
call
it
)
there
is
none
other
substaunce
remaynyng
,
but
the
substaunce
of
Christes
fleshe
and
blud
,
so
that
there
remaineth
neither
bread
to
be
eaten
,
nor
wyne
to
be
dronken
.
And
althoughe
there
be
the
colour
of
bread
&
wyne
,
the
sauour
,
the
smell
,
the
bygnes
,
the
fashion
,
and
all
other
(
as
they
call
them
)
accidentes
,
or
qualities
and
quantities
of
bread
and
wyne
,
yet
(
say
they
)
there
is
no
very
bread
nor
wyne
,
but
they
bee
turned
into
the
fleshe
&
bloud
of
Christ
.
And
this
conuersion
they
call
Transubstantion
,
that
is
to
say
,
turnyng
of
one
substance
into
another
substance
.
And
although
all
the
accidentes
,
bothe
of
the
bread
and
wyne
,
remayne
styl
,
yet
(
say
they
)
the
same
accidentes
,
be
in
no
maner
of
thyng
,
but
hang
alone
in
the
ayre
,
without
any
thyng
to
stay
them
vpon
.
For
in
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
(
say
they
)
these
accidentes
can
not
be
,
nor
yet
in
the
ayre
,
for
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
and
the
ayre
,
be
neither
of
that
bignes
,
fashion
,
smell
,
nor
colour
,
that
they
bread
and
wyne
be
.
Nor
in
the
bread
and
wyne
(
say
they
)
these
accidentes
can
not
be
,
for
the
substance
of
bread
and
wyne
(
as
they
affirme
)
be
cleane
gone
.
And
so
there
remaineth
whitnes
,
but
nothing
is
white
:
there
remayneth
colours
,
but
nothing
is
coloured
therwith
:
there
remaineth
roundnes
,
but
no
thyng
is
round
:
and
there
is
bygnes
,
and
yet
no
thyng
is
bygge
:
there
is
swetenes
,
without
any
swete
thyng
:
softnes
,
without
any
soft
thyng
:
breakyng
,
without
any
thyng
broken
:
diuision
,
without
any
thyng
deuided
:
and
so
other
qualities
&
quantities
,
witout
any
thyng
to
receyue
them
.
And
this
doctrin
they
teache
as
a
necessary
article
of
our
fayth
.
But
it
is
not
the
doctrine
of
Christe
,
but
the
subtill
Inuension
of
Antechrist
,
De
consecrati
.
Distin.
2.
Ego
Beringarius
.
whiche
Nicholaus
the
second
constrayned
him
to
make
,
whiche
was
this
.
That
of
the
sacramentes
of
the
Lordes
table
the
sayd
Beringarius
should
promise
to
holde
that
fayth
,
whiche
the
sayd
Pope
Nicholas
and
his
counsail
held
,
whiche
was
,
that
not
onely
the
sacramentes
of
bread
and
wyne
,
but
also
the
very
fleshe
and
bloud
of
oure
Lorde
Iesu
Christ
,
are
sensibly
handeled
of
the
priest
in
the
altare
,
broken
and
torne
with
the
teethe
of
the
faythfull
people
.
But
the
true
catholike
fayth
,
grounded
vpon
Gods
moste
infallible
woorde
,
teacheth
vs
,
that
our
sauiour
Christ
(
as
concernyng
his
mannes
nature
and
bodely
presence
)
is
gone
vp
vnto
heauen
,
&
sitteth
at
the
right
hand
of
his
father
,
and
there
shall
he
tarry
vntyl
the
worldes
ende
,
at
what
tyme
he
shal
come
agayn
,
to
iudge
both
the
quicke
and
the
dead
,
as
he
sayth
him selfe
in
many
scriptures
.
And
saint
Paule
writyng
to
the
Colossians
,
Seke
for
thinges
that
be
aboue
,
where
Christ
is
sittyng
at
the
right
hand
of
the
father
.
And
sainct
Paule
speakyng
of
the
very
sacrament
,
As
often
as
you
shall
eate
this
bread
,
and
drynke
this
cuppe
,
shewe
furth
the
Lordes
death
vntyll
he
come
.
Tyll
he
come
sayth
S.
Paule
,
signifiyng
,
that
he
is
not
there
corporally
present
.
For
what
speeche
were
this
or
who
vseth
of
him
that
is
already
present
,
to
say
,
Untyl
he
come
?
For
Untyl
I
come
,
signifyeth
that
he
is
not
yet
present
.
This
is
the
catholike
fayth
,
whiche
we
learne
from
our
youth
in
our
common
Crede
,
and
whiche
Christ
taught
,
the
Apostles
folowed
,
and
the
martyres
confirmed
with
theyr
bloud
.
And
although
Christ
in
his
humayne
nature
substantially
,
really
,
corporally
,
naturally
and
sensibly
,
be
present
with
his
father
in
heauen
,
yet
sacramentally
and
spiritually
he
is
here
present
in
water
bread
and
wyne
,
as
in
signes
and
sacramentes
,
but
he
is
in
deede
spiritually
in
the
faythfull
christian
people
,
whiche
accordyng
to
Christes
ordinaunce
be
baptised
,
or
receyue
the
holye
communion
,
or
vnfainedly
beleue
in
him
.
Thus
haue
you
hard
the
seconde
pryncipal
article
,
wherin
the
Papistes
vary
from
the
truthe
of
Goddes
worde
,
and
from
the
catholike
faith
.
Nowe
the
thyrde
thynge
,
wherin
they
varye
,
is
this
.
The
Papistes
saye
,
The
fourthe
thynge
,
wherein
the
Popyshe
preestes
dissente
frome
the
manifest
woorde
of
God
,
is
this
.
They
saie
,
that
they
offre
Christe
euery
day
for
remission
of
sinne
,
and
distribute
by
their
Masses
,
the
merites
of
Christes
passion
.
But
the
prophetes
,
apostels
and
euangelistes
doo
saye
,
that
Christe
him selfe
in
his
owne
person
made
a
sacrifice
for
our
sinnes
vppon
the
Crosse
,
by
whose
woundes
all
our
diseases
were
healed
,
and
our
sinnes
pardoned
,
and
so
dyd
neuer
no
preest
,
man
,
nor
creature
but
he
,
nor
he
dyd
the
same
neuer
more
than
ones
.
And
the
benefite
hereof
is
in
no
mannes
power
to
gyue
vnto
any
other
,
but
euery
man
muste
receaue
it
at
Christes
handes
him selfe
,
HERE
ENDETH
THE
fyrste
booke
.
THE
SECONDE
BOOKE
IS
AGAINST
THE
ERROVR
OF
Transubstantiation
.
Chap.
1.
THVS
HAVE
you
hearde
declared
fower
thynges
,
wherein
chiefly
the
papisticall
doctrine
varieth
from
the
true
worde
of
God
,
And
fyrst
,
Chap.
2.
that
breade
and
wine
remain
after
the
woordes
of
consecration
,
and
bee
eaten
and
drunken
in
the
Lordes
supper
,
Take
,
eate
,
this
is
my
body
.
Here
the
Papistes
triumph
of
these
words
,
whan
Christe
saide
:
This
is
my
body
.
whiche
they
call
the
woordes
of
Consecration
.
For
(
say
they
)
as
soone
as
these
woordes
be
fully
ended
,
there
is
no
breade
lefte
,
nor
none
other
substaunce
,
but
onlye
Christes
bodye
.
Whan
Christe
saide
(
this
,
)
the
breade
(
saye
they
)
remayned
.
And
whan
he
sayde
(
is
)
yet
the
breade
remained
.
Also
whan
hee
added
(
my
)
the
breade
remained
styll
.
And
whan
he
sayd
(
bo
-
)
yet
the
breade
was
ther
styll
.
But
when
hee
hadde
fynyshed
the
whole
sentence
,
Thys
is
my
body
.
than
(
saye
they
)
the
breade
was
gone
,
and
there
remained
no
substaunce
but
Christes
bodye
,
as
thoughe
the
breade
coulde
not
remaine
,
whan
it
is
made
a
sacramente
.
But
this
negatiue
,
that
there
is
no
breade
,
they
make
of
their
owne
braynes
,
by
theyr
Unwrytten
verities
.
Oh
good
lord
,
howe
wold
they
haue
bragged
if
Christ
had
sayd
:
This
is
no
bread
.
But
Christ
spake
not
that
negatiue
,
This
is
no
bread
,
but
said
affirmingly
,
This
is
my
body
.
not
denying
the
bread
,
but
affirming
that
his
body
was
eaten
,
(
meaning
spiritually
)
as
the
breade
was
eaten
corporally
.
And
that
this
was
the
meaning
of
Christ
,
appeareth
plainly
by
S
Paule
,
in
the
tenth
chap.
to
the
Corinth
.
Is
not
the
breade
whiche
wee
breake
,
the
communion
of
the
body
of
Christe
?
Who
vnderstode
the
mynde
of
Christ
better
than
S.
Paule
,
to
whom
Christe
shewed
his
moste
secrete
counsailes
?
And
saint
Paule
is
not
afraide
,
for
our
better
vnderstandinge
of
Christes
wordes
,
somewhat
to
alter
the
same
,
least
we
might
stande
stiffely
in
the
letters
and
syllables
,
and
erre
in
mistaking
of
Christes
wordes
.
For
where
as
our
sauiour
Christ
brake
the
bread
and
said
,
This
is
my
body
:
S.
Paule
saith
,
that
the
bread
which
we
breake
,
is
the
communion
of
Christes
body
.
Christ
sayd
,
his
body
:
and
saint
Paule
said
,
the
communion
of
his
body
:
meaning
neuertheles
both
one
thinge
,
that
thei
which
eate
the
breade
worthely
,
do
eate
spiritually
Christes
very
body
.
And
so
Christe
calleth
the
bread
his
body
(
as
the
olde
authors
report
)
bicause
it
representeth
his
body
,
and
signifieth
vnto
them
whiche
eate
that
bread
according
to
Christes
ordinance
,
that
they
do
spiritually
eate
his
bodye
,
and
be
spiritually
fed
and
nourished
by
him
,
and
yet
the
breade
remaineth
still
there
as
a
sacrament
to
signifie
the
same
.
But
of
these
words
of
Consecration
shal
be
spoken
hereafter
more
at
large
.
Therfore
to
returne
to
the
purpose
,
that
the
bread
remayneth
,
and
is
eaten
in
this
sacrament
,
appeareth
by
the
woordes
whiche
go
before
the
consecration
.
For
that
Christ
tooke
bread
,
and
brake
it
,
and
gaue
it
to
his
disciples
,
and
sayd
:
Take
,
eate
.
All
this
was
done
and
spoken
before
the
woordes
of
consecracion
.
Wherfore
they
must
nedes
be
vnderstand
of
the
very
bread
,
that
Christ
toke
bread
,
brake
bread
,
gaue
bread
to
his
disciples
,
commaundyng
them
to
take
bread
,
and
eate
bread
.
But
the
same
is
more
plaine
and
euident
of
the
wyne
,
that
it
remayneth
,
and
is
dronken
at
the
Lordes
supper
,
aswell
by
the
wordes
that
go
before
,
as
by
the
woordes
that
folowe
after
the
consecracion
.
For
before
the
wordes
of
consecracion
,
Christe
tooke
the
cuppe
of
wyne
,
and
gaue
it
vnto
his
disciples
,
Drynk
you
all
of
this
.
And
after
the
wordes
of
consecracion
foloweth
,
They
dranke
all
of
yt
.
Nowe
I
aske
all
the
Papistes
,
what
thyng
it
was
that
Christ
commaunded
his
disciples
to
drynke
,
whan
he
sayd
,
Drynke
you
all
of
this
?
The
bloud
of
Christ
was
not
yet
there
,
by
their
owne
confession
,
for
it
was
spoken
before
the
consecracion
:
Therfore
it
could
be
nothyng
els
but
wyne
that
he
commaunded
them
to
drynke
.
Then
I
aske
the
Papistes
ones
againe
,
whether
the
disciples
dranke
wyne
or
not
?
If
they
say
,
yea
,
then
let
them
recant
their
errour
,
that
there
was
no
wyne
remainyng
after
the
consecracion
.
If
they
say
nay
,
then
they
condempne
the
Apostles
of
disobedience
to
Christes
commaundement
,
whiche
dranke
not
wyne
as
he
commaunded
them
.
Or
rather
they
reproue
Christ
as
a
Iuggler
,
which
commaunded
his
Apostles
to
drynke
wyne
,
and
whan
they
came
to
the
drynkyng
therof
,
he
him selfe
had
conuayed
it
away
.
Moreouer
,
before
Christ
deliuered
the
cuppe
of
wyne
to
his
disciples
,
he
sayd
vnto
them
:
Deuide
this
among
you
.
Here
would
I
aske
the
Papistes
another
question
,
what
thyng
it
was
that
Christ
commaunded
his
disciples
to
deuide
among
them
?
I
am
sure
they
wyll
not
saye
,
it
was
the
cuppe
,
except
they
bee
disposed
to
make
menne
laugh
at
them
.
Nor
I
thynke
they
wyll
not
say
,
it
was
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
aswell
because
the
woordes
were
spoken
before
the
consecration
,
as
because
the
bloud
of
Christ
is
not
deuided
,
but
spiritually
geuen
whole
in
the
sacrament
.
Than
could
it
be
vnderstande
of
nothyng
elles
but
of
wyne
,
whiche
they
should
deuide
among
them
,
and
drynke
all
together
.
Also
when
the
Communion
was
ended
,
Christ
sayd
vnto
his
Apostles
.
Uerely
I
say
vnto
you
,
that
I
wyll
drynke
no
more
hencefurth
of
this
fruite
of
the
vyne
,
By
these
wordes
it
is
cleare
,
that
it
was
very
wyne
that
the
Apostles
dranke
at
that
godly
supper
.
For
the
bloud
of
Christ
is
not
the
fruite
of
the
vyne
,
nor
the
accidentes
of
wyne
,
nor
none
other
thing
is
the
fruit
of
the
vine
,
but
very
wyne
only
.
Howe
could
Christ
haue
expressed
more
plainly
,
that
bread
&
wyne
remayne
,
than
by
takyng
the
breade
in
his
handes
,
and
breakyng
it
him selfe
,
and
geuyng
it
vnto
his
disciples
,
comaundyng
them
to
eate
it
?
And
by
takyng
the
cuppe
of
wyne
in
his
handes
,
and
deliueryng
it
vnto
them
,
commaundyng
them
to
deuide
it
among
them
,
&
to
drynke
it
,
&
callyng
it
the
fruit
of
the
vyne
?
These
wordes
of
Christ
be
so
playn
,
that
if
an
Angel
of
heauen
would
tel
vs
the
contrary
,
he
ought
not
to
be
beleued
.
And
than
much
lesse
may
we
beleue
the
subtyl
liyng
of
the
Papistes
.
If
Christ
would
haue
had
vs
to
beleue
(
as
a
necessary
article
of
our
fayth
)
that
there
remayneth
neither
bread
nor
wyne
,
would
he
haue
spoken
after
this
sorte
,
vsyng
all
suche
termes
and
circumstaunces
as
should
make
vs
beleue
,
that
styl
there
remayneth
bread
&
wyne
?
What
maner
of
teacher
make
thei
of
Christ
,
that
say
,
he
ment
one
thyng
,
when
his
wordes
be
cleane
contrary
?
What
christian
heart
can
paciently
suffre
this
contumely
of
Christ
?
But
what
crafty
teachers
be
these
Papistes
,
who
deuise
phantasies
of
their
owne
heades
,
directly
contrary
to
Christes
teachyng
,
and
than
sette
the
same
abrode
to
christen
people
,
to
bee
moste
assuredly
beleued
as
Goddes
owne
moste
holy
worde
?
Sainct
Paule
did
not
so
,
but
folowed
herein
the
maner
of
Christes
speakyng
,
in
callyng
of
bread
,
bread
,
and
wyne
,
wyne
,
and
neuer
alteryng
Christes
woordes
herein
.
The
bread
whiche
wee
breake
(
sayth
he
)
is
it
not
the
communion
of
Christes
body
?
Nowe
I
aske
agayn
of
the
Papists
,
whether
he
spake
this
of
the
bread
consecrated
or
not
consecrated
?
Thei
can
not
say
that
he
spake
it
of
the
bread
vnconsecrated
,
for
that
is
not
the
communion
of
Christes
body
by
their
owne
doctrine
.
And
if
S.
Paule
spake
it
of
bread
consecrated
,
than
they
must
needes
confesse
,
that
after
consecracion
suche
bread
remayneth
,
as
is
broken
bread
,
whiche
can
bee
none
other
than
very
true
material
bread
.
And
straight
wayes
after
sainct
Paule
sayth
in
the
same
place
,
And
in
the
next
chapiter
,
speakyng
more
fully
of
the
same
matter
,
four
tymes
he
nameth
the
bread
and
the
cuppe
,
neuer
makyng
mention
of
any
transubstantiation
,
or
remainyng
of
accidentes
without
any
substaunce
,
whiche
thynges
he
would
haue
made
some
mencion
of
,
if
it
had
been
a
necessary
article
of
our
fayth
,
to
beleue
that
there
remayneth
no
bread
nor
wyne
.
Thus
it
is
euident
and
plaine
,
by
the
wordes
of
scripture
,
that
after
consecracion
remayneth
bread
and
wyne
,
and
that
the
Papisticall
doctrine
of
transubstantiation
,
is
directly
contrary
to
Gods
worde
.
Chap.
3.
The
Papistical
doctrin
is
against
reason
.
Let
vs
nowe
consider
also
,
howe
the
same
is
against
natural
reason
and
natural
operacion
,
which
although
thei
preuaile
not
against
Gods
woorde
,
yet
whan
they
bee
ioyned
with
Gods
worde
,
they
be
of
great
moment
to
confirme
any
truthe
.
Naturall
reason
abhorreth
vacuum
,
that
is
to
saie
,
that
there
shoulde
be
any
empty
place
,
wherin
no
substance
shoulde
be
.
But
yf
ther
remain
no
bread
nor
wine
,
the
place
where
they
wer
before
,
and
where
theyr
accidentes
be
,
is
fylled
with
no
substance
,
but
remaineth
vacuum
,
cleane
contrary
to
the
order
of
nature
.
We
se
also
that
the
wyne
,
though
it
be
consecrated
,
yet
wyll
it
tourne
to
vyneger
,
and
the
breadde
wyll
mowle
,
whyche
than
be
nothynge
elles
but
sowre
wyne
and
mowled
bread
,
which
could
not
waxe
sowre
nor
mowly
,
if
there
were
no
breade
nor
wyne
there
at
all
.
And
if
the
sacramentes
were
nowe
brent
(
as
in
the
olde
church
they
bourned
all
that
remained
vneaten
)
lette
the
Papistes
telle
what
is
brente
.
They
must
needes
saie
,
that
it
is
eyther
bread
,
or
the
body
of
Christe
.
But
breade
(
saye
they
)
is
none
there
.
Than
muste
they
needes
bourne
the
body
of
Christ
,
and
be
called
Christbourners
(
as
heretofore
they
haue
burned
many
of
his
membres
)
except
they
wil
say
,
that
accidentes
bourne
alone
without
any
substaunce
,
contrary
to
all
the
course
of
nature
.
The
sacramentall
breade
and
wyne
also
wyll
nourishe
,
whiche
nourishement
naturally
commeth
of
the
substance
of
the
meates
and
drynkes
,
and
not
of
the
accidentes
.
The
wyne
also
wyll
poyson
,
(
as
dyuers
byshops
of
Rome
haue
had
experiences
,
bothe
in
poysonyng
of
other
,
and
beyng
poysoned
them selues
)
whiche
poysonyng
they
can
not
ascribe
to
the
moste
holsome
bloud
of
our
sauior
Christ
,
but
onely
to
the
poysoned
wyne
.
And
most
of
all
,
it
is
against
the
nature
of
accidentes
,
to
be
in
nothing
.
For
the
definition
of
accidentes
,
is
to
be
in
some
substance
,
so
that
if
they
be
,
they
must
nedes
be
in
some
thyng
.
And
yf
they
be
in
nothynge
,
than
they
bee
not
.
And
a
thousand
thynges
mo
,
of
lyke
foolishnesse
doo
the
Papistes
affirme
by
their
Transubstantiation
,
contrary
to
all
nature
and
reason
.
As
that
two
bodies
bee
in
one
place
,
and
one
body
in
many
places
at
one
tyme
,
and
that
substances
be
gendred
of
accidentes
onely
,
and
accidentes
conuerted
into
substances
,
and
a
body
to
be
in
a
place
,
and
occupie
no
roume
,
and
generation
to
be
without
corruption
,
and
corruption
without
generation
,
with
many
suche
lyke
thynges
,
agaynst
all
order
and
principles
of
nature
and
reason
.
Chap.
4
The
Papistical
doctrine
is
also
against
al
our
outward
senses
,
called
our
fiue
wittes
.
For
our
eies
say
,
Our
faithe
teacheth
vs
to
beleeue
thynges
that
we
see
not
,
but
it
doth
not
byd
vs
,
that
wee
shall
not
beleue
that
we
see
dayly
with
our
eies
,
and
heare
with
our
eares
,
and
grope
with
our
handes
.
For
although
our
senses
can
not
reache
so
farre
as
our
faithe
doothe
,
yet
so
farre
as
the
compas
of
our
senses
doeth
vsually
reache
,
our
faith
is
not
contrary
to
the
same
,
but
rather
our
senses
doo
confirme
our
faith
.
Or
els
what
auailed
it
to
S.
Thomas
,
And
what
a
wyde
doore
is
here
opened
to
Ualentinianus
,
Marcion
,
and
other
heretikes
,
whiche
sayde
that
Christe
was
not
crucified
,
but
that
Symon
Cyreneus
was
crucifyed
for
him
,
although
to
the
syghte
of
the
people
,
it
seemed
that
Christe
was
crucified
?
Or
to
suche
heretikes
as
sayde
,
that
Christ
was
no
man
,
although
to
mens
sightes
he
appered
in
the
forme
of
man
and
semed
to
be
hungry
,
dry
,
weery
,
to
wepe
,
slepe
,
eate
,
drynke
,
yea
and
to
dye
lyke
as
other
men
doo
?
For
if
we
ones
admyt
this
doctrine
,
that
no
credite
is
to
be
geuen
to
our
senses
,
we
open
a
large
field
,
&
geue
a
great
occasion
vnto
an
innumerable
rablement
of
most
heinous
heresies
.
And
if
there
be
no
trust
to
be
geuen
to
our
senses
in
this
matter
of
the
sacramente
,
why
than
do
the
Papistes
so
stoutely
affirme
,
that
the
accidentes
remayn
after
the
consecration
?
whiche
can
not
be
iudged
but
by
the
senses
.
For
the
scripture
speaketh
no
woorde
of
the
accidentes
of
breade
and
wyne
,
but
of
the
breade
and
wyne
them selues
.
And
it
is
againste
the
nature
and
diffinition
of
accidentes
,
to
bee
alone
withoute
any
substance
.
Wherefore
if
we
may
not
truste
our
senses
in
this
matter
of
the
sacrament
,
than
if
the
substance
of
the
bread
and
wyne
be
gone
,
why
may
we
not
then
say
,
that
the
accidentes
begon
also
?
And
if
we
must
nedes
beleue
our
senses
,
as
concernyng
the
accidents
of
bread
&
wine
,
why
may
we
not
do
the
lyke
of
the
substance
,
&
that
rather
than
of
the
accidentes
?
Forasmuche
as
after
the
consecration
the
scripture
saith
in
no
place
,
that
there
is
no
substance
of
bread
nor
of
wyne
,
but
calleth
them
still
by
suche
names
as
signifie
the
substances
,
and
not
the
accidentes
?
And
fynally
,
if
our
senses
be
dayly
deceiued
in
this
matter
,
than
is
the
sensible
sacrament
nothyng
els
,
but
an
elusion
of
our
senses
.
And
so
we
make
muche
for
their
purpose
,
that
said
that
Christ
was
a
crafty
iuggler
,
that
made
thinges
to
appere
to
mens
sightes
,
that
in
dede
were
no
suche
thynges
,
but
formes
onely
,
figures
,
and
apparances
of
them
.
But
to
conclude
in
fewe
wordes
this
processe
of
our
senses
,
let
al
the
Papistes
lay
their
heades
togither
,
and
thei
shal
neuer
be
able
to
shew
one
article
of
our
faith
,
so
directely
contrary
to
our
senses
,
that
all
our
senses
by
dayly
experience
shall
affirme
a
thynge
to
be
,
and
yet
oure
fayth
shall
teache
vs
the
contrary
thervnto
.
Nowe
for
as
much
as
it
is
declared
,
Chap.
5.
how
this
Papisticall
opinion
of
Transubstantiation
is
against
the
woorde
of
God
,
Fyrst
Iustinus
a
great
learned
man
,
Iustinus
.
and
an
holy
martyr
,
the
oldest
author
that
this
day
is
knowen
to
write
any
treatie
vpon
the
sacramentes
,
and
wrote
not
muche
aboue
one
hundred
yeres
after
Christes
ascension
.
He
wryteth
in
his
seconde
apologie
,
that
the
bread
,
water
,
and
wine
in
this
sacrament
,
ar
not
to
be
taken
as
other
common
meates
and
drinkes
be
,
but
they
bee
meates
ordeyned
purposely
to
geue
thankes
to
god
,
and
therfore
be
called
Eucharistia
,
and
be
called
also
the
body
and
bloude
of
Christ
.
And
that
it
is
laufull
for
none
to
eate
or
drynke
of
them
,
but
that
professe
Christ
,
and
lyue
accordyng
to
the
same
.
And
yet
the
same
meate
and
drynke
(
saith
he
)
is
chaunged
into
our
fleshe
and
bloud
,
and
norisheth
our
bodies
.
By
which
saiyng
it
is
euident
,
that
Iustinus
thought
,
that
the
bread
and
wine
remained
still
for
els
it
could
not
haue
been
tourned
into
our
fleshe
and
bloud
,
to
nourishe
our
bodies
.
Irenaeus
contra
Valentinum
.
lib.
1.
cap.
4.
Next
hym
was
Ireneus
,
aboue
.
150.
yeres
after
Christ
,
who
(
as
it
is
supposed
)
could
not
be
deceiued
in
the
necessary
pointes
of
our
faithe
,
for
he
was
a
disciple
of
Polycarpus
,
which
was
disciple
to
saint
Iohn
the
Euangelist
.
This
Ireneus
foloweth
the
sense
of
Iustinus
wholly
in
this
matter
,
and
almoste
also
his
woordes
,
sayenge
,
that
the
bread
,
wherein
we
geue
thankes
vnto
God
,
although
it
be
of
the
yearth
,
yet
whan
the
name
of
God
is
called
vpon
it
,
it
is
not
than
common
bread
,
but
the
bread
of
thankes
geuyng
,
hauyng
two
thyngs
in
it
,
one
earthly
,
and
the
other
heuenly
.
What
ment
he
by
the
heauenly
thyng
,
but
the
sanctification
whyche
cometh
by
the
inuocation
of
the
name
of
God
?
And
what
by
the
earthly
thynge
?
but
the
very
bread
,
which
(
as
he
sayd
before
)
is
of
the
earth
?
and
which
also
(
he
saith
)
doeth
nourishe
our
bodies
,
as
other
bread
dothe
whiche
we
doo
vse
?
Origenes
in
Mat.
ca.
15.
Shortely
after
Ireneus
was
Origen
about
200.
yeares
after
Christes
ascension
.
Who
also
affirmeth
,
that
the
materiall
bread
remaineth
,
saiyng
,
that
the
mattier
of
the
breade
auayleth
nothyng
,
but
goeth
doune
into
the
bealy
,
and
is
auoided
dounewarde
,
but
the
woorde
of
God
spoken
vpon
the
breade
,
is
it
that
auaileth
.
Cyprian
.
ad
Cecilium
li.
2.
epistola
.
3.
After
Origen
came
Cyprian
the
holy
martyr
about
the
yeare
of
our
Lorde
250.
who
wryteth
against
theym
that
ministred
this
Sacrament
with
water
onely
,
and
without
wyne
.
For
as
muche
(
sayth
he
)
as
Christ
sayd
,
I
am
a
true
vyne
.
therefore
the
bloud
of
Christ
is
not
water
,
but
wyne
,
nor
it
can
not
bee
thought
that
his
bloud
(
wherby
wee
bee
redemed
and
haue
life
)
is
in
the
cuppe
,
whan
wyne
is
not
in
the
cuppe
,
whereby
the
bloud
of
Christ
is
shewed
.
What
woordes
could
Cyprian
haue
spoken
more
plainly
,
to
shewe
that
the
wyne
doth
remayne
,
than
to
say
thus
:
If
there
bee
no
wyne
,
there
is
no
bloud
of
Christ
?
And
yet
he
speaketh
shortly
after
,
as
plainely
in
the
same
Epistle
.
this
creature
of
the
vyne
,
vntyll
I
shall
drinke
with
you
newe
wyne
in
the
kyngdome
of
my
father
.
By
these
woordes
of
Christe
(
sayth
sainct
Cyprian
)
we
perceiue
,
that
the
cuppe
whiche
the
Lorde
offered
,
was
not
onely
water
,
but
also
wyne
.
And
that
it
was
wyne
,
that
Christ
called
his
bloud
,
whereby
it
is
cleare
,
that
Christes
bloud
is
not
offered
,
if
there
be
no
wyne
in
the
Chalise
.
And
after
it
foloweth
:
Howe
shal
we
drynke
with
Christ
newe
wyne
of
the
creature
of
the
vyne
,
if
in
the
sacrifice
of
God
the
father
and
of
Christ
we
do
not
offre
wyne
?
In
these
wordes
of
sainct
Cyprian
,
appereth
moste
manyfestly
,
that
in
this
sacrament
is
not
only
offered
very
wyne
,
that
is
made
of
grapes
,
that
come
of
the
vyne
,
but
also
that
we
drynke
the
same
.
And
yet
the
same
geueth
vs
to
vnderstand
,
that
if
we
drynke
that
wyne
worthely
,
we
drynke
also
spiritually
the
very
bloud
of
Christ
,
whiche
was
shed
for
our
synnes
.
Eusebius
Emissenus
.
Eusebius
Emissenus
,
a
man
of
syngular
fame
in
learnyng
,
about
CCC
.
yeres
after
Christes
ascention
,
did
in
fewe
wordes
set
out
this
matter
so
plainely
,
(
bothe
howe
the
bread
and
wyne
be
conuerted
into
the
body
&
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
yet
remayne
styll
in
their
nature
,
and
also
howe
besydes
the
outwarde
receiuyng
of
bread
and
wyne
,
Christ
is
inwardely
by
fayth
receyued
in
our
heartes
)
al
this
(
I
say
)
he
doth
so
plainly
set
out
,
that
more
playnnesse
can
not
be
reasonably
desyred
in
this
matter
.
For
he
sayth
,
that
the
conuersion
of
the
visible
creatures
of
bread
&
wyne
,
into
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
is
lyke
vnto
our
conuersion
in
baptisme
,
where
outwardly
nothyng
is
changed
,
but
remayneth
the
same
that
was
before
,
but
all
the
alteration
is
inwardely
and
spiritually
.
De
confesor.
Distinction
.
2.
If
thou
wylt
knowe
(
sayth
he
)
howe
it
ought
not
to
seme
to
the
a
newe
thyng
,
and
impossible
,
that
yearthly
and
corruptible
thynges
be
turned
into
the
substance
of
Christ
,
loke
vpon
thy selfe
,
which
art
made
newe
in
baptisme
,
whan
thou
wast
farre
from
life
,
and
banished
as
a
straunger
from
mercy
,
and
fro
the
way
of
saluation
,
and
inwardely
wast
dead
,
yet
sodeynly
thou
beganste
another
lyfe
in
Christ
,
and
wast
made
newe
,
by
holsome
mysteris
,
and
wast
turned
into
the
body
of
the
churche
,
not
by
seyng
,
but
by
beleuynge
,
and
of
the
childe
of
damnation
,
by
a
secrete
purenesse
,
thou
waste
made
the
chosen
sonne
of
God
.
Thou
visibly
dyddest
remayne
in
the
same
measure
,
that
thou
haddest
before
,
but
inuisibly
thou
wast
made
greater
,
without
any
increase
of
thy
body
.
Thou
wast
the
self
same
person
,
and
yet
by
increace
of
faythe
,
thou
wast
made
an
other
man
.
Outwardely
nothynge
was
added
,
but
all
the
chaunge
was
inwardly
.
And
so
was
man
made
the
son
of
Christ
,
and
Christe
fourmed
in
the
mynd
of
man
.
Therfore
as
thou
(
puttyng
away
thy
former
vilenesse
)
diddest
receaue
a
newe
dygnitee
,
not
feelyng
any
change
in
thy
body
,
and
as
the
curynge
of
thy
disease
,
the
puttyng
away
of
thyn
infection
,
the
wipyng
away
of
thy
fylthynesse
be
not
seene
with
thyne
eyes
,
but
are
beleued
in
thy
mynde
:
so
lykewyse
,
when
thou
doest
go
vp
to
the
reuerende
altare
,
to
feede
vpon
spirituall
meate
,
in
thy
faith
loke
vpon
the
bodye
and
bloude
of
hym
,
that
is
thy
God
,
honour
hym
,
touche
hym
with
thy
mynd
,
take
hym
in
the
hande
of
thy
hart
,
and
chiefely
drynk
hym
with
the
draught
of
thy
inward
man
.
Hytherto
haue
I
rehersed
the
saiynges
of
Eusebius
,
whiche
bee
so
playne
,
that
no
man
can
wyshe
more
playnely
to
bee
declared
,
that
this
mutation
of
the
bread
and
wyne
into
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christe
,
is
a
spirituall
mutation
,
and
that
outwardly
nothyng
is
changed
.
But
as
outwardly
we
eate
the
bread
,
and
drynke
the
wyne
with
our
mouthes
,
so
inwardly
by
faithe
,
wee
spiritually
eate
the
very
fleshe
,
and
drynke
the
very
bloud
of
Christe
.
Hilarius
.
Hilarius
also
in
fewe
wordes
saieth
the
same
.
There
is
a
figure
(
saieth
he
)
for
bread
and
wyne
be
outwardly
seene
.
And
there
is
also
a
truth
of
that
fygure
,
for
the
body
and
bloude
of
Christe
be
of
a
truthe
inwardly
beleued
.
And
this
Hilarius
was
within
lesse
than
.
350.
yeares
after
Christe
.
Epiphanius
contra
haere
ses
lib.
3.
to
.
2.
Et
in
Anacephaleosi
.
Chrysosto
.
in
Mat.
cap.
26.
hom.
83
And
Epiphanius
shortly
after
the
same
tyme
,
saieth
,
that
the
bread
is
meate
,
but
the
vertu
that
is
in
it
,
is
it
that
geueth
lyfe
.
But
if
there
were
no
bread
at
all
,
howe
coulde
it
be
meate
?
About
the
same
tyme
or
shortly
after
,
aboute
the
yeere
our
Lorde
.
400.
Saynte
Iohn
Chrysostome
wryteth
thus
,
agaynst
theim
that
vsed
onely
water
in
the
sacrament
.
Christe
(
sayth
he
)
myndyng
to
plucke
vp
that
heresye
by
the
rootes
,
vsed
wyne
,
as
well
before
his
resurrection
,
when
he
gaue
the
mysteries
,
as
after
at
his
table
without
mysteries
.
For
he
saith
,
of
the
fruit
of
the
vyne
,
whyche
surely
bryngeth
foorth
no
water
,
but
wyne
.
These
wordes
of
Chrysostome
declare
plainly
,
that
Christe
in
his
holy
table
,
bothe
dranke
wyne
,
and
gaue
wyne
to
drynke
,
whych
had
not
bene
true
,
if
no
wyne
had
remayned
after
the
Consecration
,
as
the
Papistes
fayne
.
And
yet
more
playnely
Saynct
Chrysostome
declareth
this
matter
in
an
other
place
,
sayeng
:
The
breade
beefore
it
bee
sanctified
,
the
nature
of
bread
doeth
styll
remayne
.
The
nature
of
bread
(
saith
he
)
doeth
styll
remayn
,
to
the
vtter
and
manyfest
confutation
of
the
Papistes
,
whiche
saye
,
that
the
accidentes
of
breadde
dooe
remayne
,
but
not
the
nature
and
substance
.
At
the
same
tyme
was
S.
Ambrose
,
Ambrosius
.
who
declareth
the
alteration
of
breade
and
wyne
into
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christe
,
not
to
be
suche
,
that
the
nature
&
substance
of
bread
&
wine
be
gone
,
but
that
through
grace
,
there
is
a
spirituall
mutation
by
the
mightye
power
of
God
,
so
that
he
that
worthily
eateth
of
that
bread
,
dothe
spiritually
eate
Christe
,
and
dwelleth
in
Christe
,
and
Christ
in
hym
.
For
(
sayeth
saynte
Ambrose
,
De
ijs
qui
mysterijs
iniciantur
Ca.
vlti
.
&
De
sacramentis
li.
4.
cap.
4.
speakynge
of
this
chaunge
of
bread
into
the
body
of
Christ
)
if
the
woorde
of
God
bee
of
that
force
that
it
can
make
thynges
of
noughte
,
and
those
thynges
to
be
,
whiche
neuer
were
before
,
much
more
it
can
make
thynges
that
were
before
,
still
to
be
,
and
also
to
be
chaunged
into
other
thynges
.
And
he
bryngeth
for
example
here
of
the
change
of
vs
in
baptisme
,
wherin
a
man
is
so
changed
(
as
is
before
declared
in
the
wordes
of
Eusebius
)
that
he
is
made
a
new
creature
,
and
yet
his
substance
remaineth
the
same
that
was
before
.
Augustinus
in
sermone
ad
infantes
And
saint
Augustin
about
the
same
time
wrote
thus
:
That
whiche
you
see
in
the
altare
,
is
the
bread
and
the
cup
,
which
also
your
eyes
do
shew
you
.
But
fayth
sheweth
further
,
that
bread
is
the
body
of
Christ
,
and
the
cuppe
his
bloude
.
Here
he
declareth
foure
thyngs
,
to
be
in
the
sacrament
.
Two
that
we
see
,
whiche
be
bread
and
wine
.
And
other
two
,
which
we
se
not
,
but
by
faithe
only
,
whiche
be
the
body
and
blud
of
Christ
.
In
lib.
sententiarun
.
Prosperi
.
And
the
same
thyng
he
declareth
also
as
plainly
in
an
other
place
,
saiyng
:
The
sacrifice
of
the
Church
consisteth
of
two
thynges
,
of
the
visible
kind
of
the
element
,
&
of
the
inuisible
flesh
&
blud
of
our
Lorde
Iesu
Christe
,
bothe
of
the
sacrament
,
and
of
the
thynge
signified
by
the
sacrament
.
Euen
as
the
person
of
Christe
consisteth
of
God
and
man
,
forasmuch
as
he
is
very
God
and
very
man
.
For
euery
thyng
conteyneth
in
it
,
the
very
nature
of
those
thynges
,
whereof
it
consysteth
.
Nowe
the
sacrifice
of
the
Churche
consysteth
of
two
thynges
,
of
the
sacrament
,
and
of
the
thyng
thereby
sygnified
,
that
is
to
saye
,
the
bodye
of
CHRISTE
.
Therfore
there
is
bothe
the
sacrament
,
and
the
thynge
of
the
sacrament
,
whyche
is
Christes
bodye
.
What
can
be
deuised
to
be
spoken
more
plainly
against
the
errour
of
the
Papistes
,
which
say
that
no
bread
nor
wyne
remaineth
in
the
sacrament
?
For
as
the
person
of
Christe
consisteth
of
two
natures
,
that
is
to
say
,
of
his
manhod
,
and
of
his
Godhead
,
(
And
therfore
bothe
those
natures
remayne
in
Christ
,
)
euen
so
(
sayth
saynt-Augustin
)
the
sacrament
consisteth
of
two
natueres
,
of
the
elementes
of
bread
and
wine
,
and
of
the
body
&
bloud
of
Christ
,
&
therfore
both
these
natures
must
nedes
remayne
in
the
sacrament
.
For
the
more
playne
vnderstandyng
herof
,
it
is
to
bee
noted
,
that
there
were
certayne
heretyques
,
as
Simon
,
Menander
,
Marcion
,
Ualentinus
,
Basilides
,
Cerdon
,
Manes
,
Eutiches
,
Manicheus
,
Apollinaris
,
and
dyuers
other
of
lyke
sortes
,
whyche
sayd
,
that
Christ
was
very
God
,
but
not
a
very
manne
,
althoughe
in
eatynge
,
drynkynge
,
sleapyng
,
and
all
other
operations
of
man
,
to
mens
iudgementes
he
appered
lyke
vnto
a
man
.
Other
there
were
,
as
Artemon
,
Theodorus
,
Sabellius
,
Paulus
Samasathenus
,
Marcellus
,
Photinus
,
Nestorius
,
and
many
other
of
the
same
sectes
,
whyche
sayd
,
that
he
was
a
very
naturall
man
,
but
not
very
God
,
although
in
geuyng
the
blynd
their
syghte
,
the
dumbe
theyr
speeche
,
the
deafe
their
hearynge
,
in
healyng
sodeynly
with
his
worde
al
diseases
,
in
raysyng
to
life
them
that
were
dead
,
and
in
al
other
workes
of
God
,
he
shewed
himselfe
as
he
had
been
God
.
Yet
other
there
were
which
seyng
the
scripture
so
playne
in
those
two
matters
,
confessed
that
he
was
both
God
&
man
,
but
not
both
at
one
tyme
.
For
before
his
incarnation
(
sayde
they
)
he
was
God
onely
,
and
not
man
,
and
after
his
incarnation
,
he
ceased
from
his
Godhead
,
&
became
a
man
onely
,
and
not
God
,
vntyl
his
resurrection
or
ascension
,
and
then
(
saye
they
)
he
left
his
manhod
,
and
was
only
God
agayn
,
as
he
was
before
his
incarnation
.
So
that
whan
he
was
man
,
he
was
not
God
,
and
whan
he
was
God
,
he
was
not
man
But
against
these
vain
heresies
,
the
Catholike
faith
,
by
the
expresse
word
of
God
,
holdeth
and
beleueth
,
that
Christ
after
his
incarnation
lefte
not
his
diuine
nature
,
but
remained
styll
God
,
as
he
was
before
,
beyng
togyther
at
one
tyme
,
(
as
he
is
styl
)
both
perfect
God
and
perfect
man
.
And
for
a
playne
declaracion
hereof
,
the
olde
auncient
authors
geue
two
examples
,
one
is
of
man
,
whiche
is
made
of
two
partes
,
of
a
soule
and
of
a
body
,
and
eche
of
these
two
partes
remayne
in
man
at
one
tyme
.
So
that
whan
the
soule
,
by
the
almyghty
power
of
God
,
is
put
in
to
the
body
,
neither
the
body
nor
soule
perisheth
thereby
,
but
therof
is
made
a
perfect
man
,
hauyng
a
perfect
soule
and
a
perfect
body
,
remaynyng
in
hym
bothe
at
one
tyme
.
The
other
example
,
whiche
the
olde
authors
brynge
in
for
this
purpose
,
is
of
the
holy
supper
of
our
Lord
,
whiche
consisteth
(
say
they
)
of
two
partes
,
of
the
sacrament
or
visible
element
of
bread
&
wyne
,
and
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
.
And
as
in
them
that
duely
receiue
the
sacrament
,
the
very
natures
of
bread
and
wyne
cease
not
to
be
there
,
but
remayne
there
styll
,
and
be
eaten
corporally
,
as
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
be
eaten
spiritually
:
so
likewyse
doth
the
diuine
nature
of
Christ
remayne
styl
with
his
humanitee
.
Let
nowe
the
Papistes
auaunt
them selues
of
their
Transubstantiation
,
that
there
remayneth
no
bread
nor
wyne
in
the
ministration
of
the
sacrament
,
if
they
wyll
defende
the
wicked
heresies
before
rehersed
,
that
Christ
is
not
God
and
man
both
together
.
But
to
proue
that
this
was
the
mynde
of
the
olde
authors
,
besyde
the
saiyng
of
sainct
Augustyne
here
recited
,
I
shall
also
reherse
diuers
other
.
Sainct
Ihon
Chrysostome
wryteth
against
the
pestilent
errour
of
Apollinaris
,
Whan
thou
speakest
of
God
,
thou
must
consyder
a
thyng
,
that
in
nature
is
syngle
,
wythout
composition
,
without
conuersion
,
that
is
inuisible
,
immortall
,
incircumscriptible
,
incomprehensible
,
wyth
suche
lyke
.
And
whan
thou
speakest
of
manne
,
thou
meanest
a
nature
that
is
weake
,
subiecte
to
hungar
,
thyrste
,
weepyng
,
feare
,
sweatynge
,
and
suche
lyke
passions
,
whiche
can
not
bee
in
the
diuine
nature
.
And
whan
thou
speakest
of
Christ
,
thou
ioynest
two
natures
together
in
one
person
,
who
is
bothe
passible
and
impassible
:
Passible
as
concerning
his
fleshe
,
and
impassible
in
his
deitee
.
And
after
he
concludeth
,
saiyng
:
Wherfore
Christe
is
bothe
God
and
man
.
God
by
his
impassible
nature
,
and
man
because
he
suffred
.
He
himeslfe
beyng
one
person
,
one
sonne
,
one
Lord
,
hath
the
dominion
and
power
of
two
natures
ioyned
together
,
whiche
be
not
of
one
substance
,
but
eche
of
theim
hath
his
properties
distincte
from
the
other
.
And
therefore
remayneth
there
two
natures
,
distincte
,
and
not
confounded
.
For
as
before
the
consecration
of
the
bread
,
we
call
it
bread
,
but
whan
Goddes
grace
hath
sanctified
it
by
the
priest
,
it
is
deliuered
from
the
name
of
bread
,
and
is
exalted
to
the
name
of
the
body
of
the
Lorde
,
although
the
nature
of
the
bread
remayne
stil
in
it
,
and
it
is
not
called
two
bodyes
,
but
one
body
of
Gods
sonne
:
so
likewyse
here
,
the
diuine
nature
resteth
in
the
body
of
Christ
,
and
these
two
make
one
sonne
,
and
one
person
.
These
wordes
of
sainct
Chrysostome
,
declare
and
that
not
in
obscure
termes
,
but
in
playne
wordes
,
that
after
the
consecracion
,
the
nature
of
bread
remayneth
styll
,
although
it
haue
an
hygher
name
,
and
bee
called
the
body
of
Christ
:
to
signifie
vnto
the
godly
eaters
of
that
bread
,
that
they
spiritually
eat
the
supernatural
bread
of
the
body
of
Christe
,
who
spiritually
is
there
present
,
and
dwelleth
in
them
,
and
they
in
him
,
although
corporally
he
sytteth
in
heauen
at
the
right
hand
of
his
father
.
Gelasius
contra
Eutichē
et
Nestorium
Herevnto
accordeth
also
Gelasius
,
writyng
gainst
Eutyches
and
Nestorius
,
of
whome
the
one
said
,
that
Christ
was
a
perfect
man
,
but
not
God
:
and
the
other
affirmed
clean
contrary
,
that
hee
was
very
God
,
but
not
man
.
But
againste
these
two
heinous
heresies
,
Gelasius
proueth
by
moste
manifest
scriptures
,
that
Christe
is
both
god
and
man
,
and
that
after
his
incarnacion
remained
in
hym
the
nature
of
his
godheade
,
so
that
hee
hathe
in
hym
twoo
natures
with
their
naturall
properties
,
and
yet
is
hee
but
one
Christe
.
And
for
the
more
euident
declaration
hereof
,
he
bringeth
two
examples
,
the
one
is
of
man
,
who
beeynge
but
one
,
yet
he
is
made
of
two
partes
,
and
hath
in
him
two
natures
,
remaininge
both
togyther
in
him
,
that
is
to
saye
,
the
bodye
and
the
soule
with
their
naturall
properties
.
The
other
example
is
of
the
sacrament
of
the
body
&
bloud
of
Christ
,
which
(
saith
he
)
is
a
godly
thing
,
and
yet
the
substaunce
or
nature
of
breade
and
wine
,
do
not
cease
to
be
there
styll
.
Note
well
these
wordes
againste
all
the
Papistes
of
our
time
,
that
Gelasius
(
which
was
byshop
of
Rome
more
than
a
thousand
years
passed
)
writeth
of
this
sacrament
,
that
the
breade
and
wyne
cease
not
to
be
there
styll
,
as
Christ
ceased
not
to
be
god
after
his
incarnation
,
but
remayned
styll
perfect
god
,
as
he
was
before
.
Theodoretus
also
affirmeth
the
same
,
Theodoretus
in
dialogis
.
both
in
his
first
and
in
his
seconde
dialoge
.
In
the
fyrst
he
saith
thus
.
He
that
called
his
naturall
body
,
wheate
and
breade
,
and
also
called
him selfe
a
vyne
,
the
selfe
same
called
bread
and
wyne
his
bodye
and
bloudde
,
and
yet
chaunged
not
their
natures
.
And
in
his
second
dialogue
he
saith
more
plainly
.
For
(
saith
he
)
as
the
breade
and
wine
after
the
consecration
lose
not
their
propre
nature
,
but
kepe
their
former
substance
,
forme
,
and
figure
,
whiche
they
had
before
,
euen
so
the
body
of
Christ
,
after
his
ascention
,
was
chaunged
into
the
godlye
substaunce
.
Nowe
lette
the
Papistes
choose
,
whyche
of
these
two
they
wyll
graunte
,
(
for
one
of
theim
they
muste
needes
graunte
)
either
that
the
nature
and
substaunce
of
breadde
and
wine
,
remayne
styll
in
the
sacrament
after
the
consecration
,
(
and
then
must
thei
recant
their
doctrine
of
Transubstantiation
)
or
els
that
they
bee
of
the
errour
of
Nestorius
and
other
,
which
didde
say
,
that
the
nature
of
the
Godhead
,
remained
not
in
Christ
after
his
incarnation
.
For
all
these
old
authors
agree
,
that
it
is
in
the
one
,
as
it
is
in
the
other
.
Chap.
6.
Nowe
forasmuche
as
it
is
proued
sufficientelye
(
as
well
by
the
holye
Scripture
,
as
by
naturall
operacion
,
CHRISTES
churche
,
)
that
the
substaunce
of
breadde
and
wyne
dooe
remayne
,
and
be
receaued
of
faithefull
people
in
the
blessed
sacramente
,
or
supper
the
LORD
:
It
is
a
thinge
woorthy
to
be
considered
and
well
waied
,
what
moued
the
schoole
authors
of
late
yeares
to
defende
the
contrarye
opinion
,
not
onely
so
farre
frome
all
experience
of
oure
senses
,
and
so
farre
frome
all
reasone
,
but
also
cleane
contrarye
to
the
olde
Churche
of
CHRIST
,
and
to
goddes
moste
holy
worde
.
Surelye
nothing
moued
them
thereto
so
much
,
as
did
the
vaine
faithe
whiche
they
hadde
in
the
churche
and
sea
of
Rome
.
For
Iohannes
Scotus
,
Scotus
super
4.
sent.
di
.
12
otherwyse
called
Dunce
,
(
the
subtylest
of
al
the
schole
authors
)
in
treatinge
of
this
mattier
of
transubstantiation
,
sheweth
playnlye
the
cause
thereof
.
For
(
saith
hee
)
the
woordes
of
the
Scripture
myghte
be
expounded
more
easylye
,
and
more
plainlye
,
withoute
Transubstantiation
,
but
the
churche
dydde
choose
this
sense
,
(
whiche
is
more
harde
)
beeynge
moued
thereto
(
as
it
seemeth
)
chieffely
,
bicause
that
of
the
sacramentes
men
ought
to
holde
,
as
the
holy
churche
of
Rome
holdeth
:
But
it
holdeth
,
that
breade
is
transubstantiate
or
turned
into
the
bodye
,
and
wine
into
the
bloode
,
as
it
is
shewed
De
summa
Trinitate
et
fide
catholica
.
Firmiter
credimus
.
And
Gabriel
also
(
who
of
all
other
wrote
most
largely
vpon
the
Canon
of
the
Masse
)
sayth
thus
.
Grabriel
.
It
is
to
bee
noted
,
that
although
it
be
taughte
in
the
scripture
,
that
the
body
of
Christ
is
truely
contayned
and
receiued
of
christen
people
,
vnder
the
kindes
of
breade
and
wine
,
yet
howe
the
body
of
Christ
is
there
,
whether
by
conuersion
of
any
thinge
into
it
,
or
without
conuersion
,
the
body
is
there
with
the
bread
,
both
the
substance
and
accidentes
of
bread
,
remainynge
there
styl
,
it
is
not
founde
expressed
in
the
Bible
.
Yet
forasmuche
as
of
the
sacramentes
,
menne
muste
hold
as
the
holy
churche
of
Rome
holdeth
as
it
is
written
De
hereticis
,
Ad
abolendam
.
And
that
churche
holdeth
,
and
hath
determined
,
that
the
bread
is
transubstantiated
into
the
bodye
of
Christe
,
and
the
wyne
into
his
blood
,
therefore
is
thys
opinion
receaued
of
al
them
that
be
catholike
,
that
the
substance
of
breade
remayneth
not
,
but
really
and
truelye
is
tourned
,
transubstatiated
and
chaunged
into
the
substaunce
of
the
body
of
Christe
.
Chap.
7.
Thus
you
haue
hard
the
cause
,
wherfore
this
opinion
of
transubstantiation
at
this
present
is
holden
and
defended
among
christen
people
,
that
is
to
saye
,
bicause
the
churche
of
Rome
hathe
so
determined
,
although
the
contrary
,
by
the
Papistes
owne
confession
,
appeare
to
be
more
easy
,
more
trewe
and
more
accordinge
to
the
Scripture
.
But
bicause
to
our
Englishe
Papistes
(
who
speak
more
grossely
herein
than
the
Pope
himselfe
,
affirming
that
the
natural
body
of
Christ
is
naturally
in
the
bread
and
wine
)
can
not
,
nor
dare
not
grounde
their
faith
,
concernyng
transubstantiation
,
vpon
the
churche
of
Rome
:
whiche
although
in
name
,
it
may
be
called
,
moste
holy
,
yet
indeed
it
is
the
moste
stynking
dongehyll
of
all
wickednes
that
is
vnder
heauen
,
and
the
very
synagoge
of
the
deuil
,
whiche
whosoeuer
foloweth
,
can
not
but
stumble
,
and
fall
into
a
pit
ful
of
errours
.
Because
(
I
say
)
the
Englishe
Papistes
dare
not
now
stablishe
their
fayth
vpon
that
foundacion
of
Rome
,
therfore
they
seeke
Fegge
leaues
,
that
is
to
say
,
vayn
reasons
,
gathered
of
their
owne
braynes
and
authorities
,
wrested
from
the
intent
and
mynde
of
the
authors
,
wherwith
to
couer
and
hide
their
shameful
errors
.
Wherfore
I
thought
it
good
,
somewhat
to
trauaile
herein
,
to
take
awaye
those
Fygge
leaues
,
that
their
shamefull
errors
may
plainly
to
euery
man
appeare
.
The
greatest
reason
and
of
most
importance
,
Chap.
8.
and
of
suche
strength
(
as
they
thynke
)
or
at
the
least
as
they
pretend
,
The
first
reason
of
the
Papistes
to
proue
their
transubstantiation
.
Math.
26
Mar.
14.
Luc.
22.
The
answere
.
that
all
the
worlde
can
not
answere
therto
,
is
this
:
Our
sauiour
Christ
,
takyng
the
bread
,
brake
it
,
and
gaue
it
to
his
disciples
,
saiyng
:
This
is
my
body
.
Nowe
(
say
they
)
assone
as
Christ
had
spoken
these
woordes
,
the
bread
was
straight
way
altered
and
chaunged
,
and
the
substaunce
thereof
was
conuerted
into
the
substaunce
of
his
precious
body
.
But
what
christian
eares
can
paciently
heare
this
doctryne
,
that
Christe
is
euery
day
made
a
newe
,
and
made
of
another
substaunce
,
than
he
was
made
of
in
his
mothers
wombe
?
For
where
as
at
his
incarnation
,
he
was
made
of
the
nature
and
substaunce
of
his
blessed
mother
,
nowe
(
by
these
Papistes
opinion
)
he
is
made
euery
day
of
the
nature
and
substance
of
bread
&
wyne
,
whiche
(
as
they
say
)
be
turned
into
the
substance
of
his
body
and
bloud
.
O
what
a
meruailous
Methamorphosis
,
and
abhominable
heresye
is
this
?
to
say
,
that
Christ
is
dayly
made
a
newe
,
&
of
a
newe
matter
?
wherof
it
foloweth
necessarily
,
that
they
make
vs
euery
day
a
newe
Christ
,
and
not
the
same
that
was
borne
of
the
virgyn
Mary
,
nor
that
was
crucifyed
vpon
the
crosse
,
as
it
shall
be
plainly
proued
by
these
argumentes
folowyng
.
Fyrst
thus
.
If
Christes
body
that
was
crucifyed
was
not
made
of
bread
,
but
the
body
that
was
eaten
in
the
supper
was
made
of
bread
(
as
the
Papistes
say
)
than
Christes
body
that
was
eaten
,
was
not
thesame
that
was
crucified
.
And
againe
:
If
Christes
body
that
was
crucified
,
was
not
made
of
bread
,
and
Christes
body
that
was
crucified
was
thesame
that
was
eaten
at
his
last
supper
,
than
Christes
body
that
was
eaten
was
not
made
of
bread
.
And
moreouer
:
If
Christes
body
that
was
eaten
at
the
last
supper
was
the
same
that
was
crucifyed
,
and
Christes
body
that
was
eaten
at
the
supper
was
made
of
bread
(
as
the
Papistes
fayne
,
)
than
Christes
body
that
was
crucifyed
,
was
made
of
bread
.
And
in
lyke
maner
it
foloweth
:
If
the
body
of
Christ
in
the
sacrament
,
bee
made
of
the
substance
of
bread
and
wyne
,
and
thesame
body
was
conceiued
in
the
virgyns
wombe
,
than
the
body
of
Christ
in
the
virgyns
wombe
,
was
made
of
bread
and
wyne
.
Or
els
turne
the
argument
thus
.
The
body
of
Christ
in
the
virgyns
wombe
was
not
made
of
bread
&
wyne
,
but
this
body
of
Christ
in
the
sacrament
is
made
of
bread
and
wyne
,
than
this
body
of
Christ
is
not
the
same
that
was
conceiued
in
the
virgyns
wombe
.
Another
argument
.
Christ
that
was
borne
in
the
virgyns
wombe
,
as
concernyng
his
body
,
was
made
of
none
other
substance
,
but
of
the
substance
of
his
blessed
mother
,
but
Christ
in
the
sacrament
is
made
of
another
substance
,
than
he
is
another
Christ
.
And
so
the
Antichrist
of
Rome
,
the
chiefe
author
of
all
Idolatry
,
would
bryng
fayfthul
christen
people
,
from
the
true
worshippyng
of
Christ
,
that
was
made
and
borne
of
the
blessed
virgyn
Mary
,
through
the
operacion
of
the
holy
ghost
,
and
suffered
for
vs
vpon
the
crosse
,
to
worship
another
Christ
made
of
bread
&
wyne
,
through
the
consecracion
of
a
Popishe
priest
.
And
thus
the
Popishe
priestes
make
them selues
the
makers
of
God
.
For
(
say
they
)
the
priest
by
the
woordes
of
consecracion
maketh
that
thyng
whiche
is
eaten
and
dronken
in
the
Lordes
supper
,
and
that
(
say
they
)
is
Christ
him selfe
both
God
and
man
,
and
so
they
take
vpon
them
to
make
both
God
and
man
.
But
let
all
true
worshippers
worship
one
god
,
one
Christ
,
ones
corporally
made
,
of
one
only
corporall
substance
,
that
is
to
say
,
of
the
blessed
virgyn
Mary
,
that
ones
dyed
,
and
rose
ones
agayne
,
ones
ascended
into
heauen
,
and
there
sitteth
and
shall
sit
at
the
right
had
of
his
father
euermore
,
although
spiritually
he
be
eueryday
amongest
vs
,
&
whosoeuer
come
together
in
his
name
,
he
is
in
the
myddes
among
them
.
And
he
is
the
spiritual
pasture
and
foode
of
our
soules
,
as
meate
and
drynke
is
of
our
bodies
,
whiche
he
signifieth
vnto
vs
by
the
institution
of
his
most
holy
supper
in
bread
and
wyne
,
declaryng
that
as
the
bread
and
wyne
corporally
comforte
and
feede
our
bodyes
,
so
doth
he
with
his
fleshe
and
bloud
spiritually
comfort
and
feede
our
soules
.
As
in
our
spiritual
regeneration
there
can
be
no
sacrament
of
baptisme
,
if
there
be
no
water
.
For
as
Baptisme
is
no
perfect
sacrament
of
spiritual
regeneration
,
without
there
be
aswell
the
element
of
water
,
as
the
holy
ghoste
,
spiritually
regenerating
the
person
that
is
baptised
(
which
is
signified
by
the
saide
water
)
euen
so
the
souper
of
our
Lorde
can
bee
no
perfecte
sacramente
of
spirituall
foode
,
except
there
be
as
well
bread
and
wine
,
as
the
body
and
bloode
of
our
sauiour
Christ
,
spiritually
feeding
vs
,
which
by
the
said
breade
and
wine
is
signified
.
And
howe
so
euer
the
body
and
bloode
of
our
sauiour
Christ
be
ther
present
,
thei
may
as
wel
be
present
ther
with
the
substance
of
bread
&
wyne
,
as
with
the
accidentes
of
the
same
,
as
the
schole
authors
do
confesse
them selues
,
and
it
shall
bee
well
proued
yf
the
aduersaryes
will
denye
it
.
Thus
you
se
the
strongest
argumente
of
the
Papistes
answered
vnto
,
and
the
chiefe
foundacion
whervpon
they
buylde
their
errour
of
transubstantiation
,
vtterlye
subuerted
and
ouerthrowen
.
An other
reason
haue
they
of
lyke
strengthe
.
Chap.
9.
If
the
breade
shoulde
remaine
(
saye
they
)
than
shulde
folowe
many
absurdities
,
Thou
mayste
consydre
,
CHRIST
.
But
rather
of
the
erroure
of
the
Papistes
theym selues
(
as
one
erroure
draweth
an
other
after
it
)
shoulde
folowe
the
greate
absurditie
,
whiche
they
speake
vppon
,
that
is
to
saye
,
that
Christe
shoulde
bee
Impanate
and
Inuinate
.
For
yf
Christe
doo
vse
the
breade
in
suche
wise
,
that
he
doeth
not
adnihilate
and
make
nothing
of
it
(
as
the
Papistes
say
)
but
maketh
of
it
hys
owne
bodye
,
than
is
the
bread
ioyned
to
his
body
,
in
a
greater
vnitee
,
than
is
his
humanitee
to
his
Godhead
.
For
his
Godhead
is
adioyned
vnto
his
humanitee
in
vnitye
of
person
,
and
not
of
nature
.
But
our
sauiour
Christ
(
by
their
sayinge
)
adioyneth
breade
vnto
his
body
in
vnitee
bothe
of
nature
and
person
.
So
that
the
breade
and
the
body
of
Christe
be
but
one
thinge
,
bothe
in
nature
and
person
.
And
so
is
there
a
more
entier
vnion
betwene
Christe
and
breade
,
than
betweene
hys
godheade
and
manhead
,
or
betwene
his
sowle
and
his
bodye
.
And
thus
these
argumentes
of
the
Papistes
,
retourne
(
lyke
riueted
nayles
)
vppon
their
owne
heades
.
Yet
a
thyrde
reason
they
haue
,
Chap.
10.
whyche
they
gather
out
of
the
syxte
of
Iohn
,
CHRIST
sayeth
:
I
am
lyuely
breade
,
which
came
from
heauen
.
If
anye
manne
eate
of
thys
breade
,
he
shall
lyue
for
euer
.
And
the
breadde
whiche
I
wyll
giue
,
is
my
fleshe
,
whiche
I
wyll
gyue
for
the
lyfe
of
the
worlde
.
Than
reason
they
after
this
fashion
.
If
the
breade
whyche
Chryste
gaue
,
bee
his
fleshe
,
that
it
canne
not
also
bee
materiall
breade
,
and
so
it
muste
needes
folowe
,
that
the
materiall
breade
is
gone
,
and
that
none
other
substaunce
remaineth
,
but
the
fleshe
of
CHRIST
onlye
.
To
this
is
soone
made
answere
:
(
manny
tymes
repetynge
,
and
of
spirituall
eating
by
faith
,
after
whiche
sorte
,
hee
was
at
the
same
presente
tyme
,
eaten
of
as
manye
,
as
beleued
on
him
,
although
the
sacrament
was
not
at
that
tyme
made
and
instituted
.
Your
fathers
did
eate
Manna
in
the
deserte
,
and
died
,
but
he
that
eateth
this
bread
shall
lyue
for
euer
.
Therefore
this
place
of
S.
Iohn
,
canne
in
no
wyse
be
vnderstand
of
the
sacramentall
breade
,
which
neyther
came
from
heauen
,
neither
giueth
life
to
al
that
eat
it
.
Nor
of
such
bread
CHRIST
coulde
haue
than
presentlye
saide
,
This
is
my
fleshe
,
excepte
they
wyll
saye
that
Christe
dydde
than
consecrate
,
so
many
yeares
before
the
instititution
of
his
holy
supper
.
Chap.
11.
Nowe
that
I
haue
made
a
full
direct
&
plain
answere
to
the
vaine
reasons
and
cauillacions
of
the
Papistes
,
Cyprianus
De
coena
domini
.
The
fyrst
is
a
place
of
Cyprian
,
in
his
sermon
of
the
Lordes
supper
.
where
he
saith
,
as
is
alleged
in
the
Detection
of
the
diuels
sophistrye
.
This
breade
which
our
lorde
gaue
to
his
disciples
,
chaunged
in
nature
,
but
not
in
outward
forme
,
is
by
the
omnipotencye
of
goddes
woorde
,
made
fleshe
.
Chaunged
in
nature
.
Ergo
(
say
they
)
the
nature
of
the
bread
is
chaunged
.
Here
is
one
chiefe
point
of
the
diuels
sophistry
vsed
,
whoe
in
allegacion
of
scripture
vseth
euer
,
either
to
adde
thereto
,
or
to
take
away
from
it
,
or
to
alter
the
sense
therof
,
And
so
haue
they
in
this
author
,
lefte
out
those
woordes
whiche
would
open
plainly
all
the
whole
matter
.
For
next
the
wordes
,
which
be
here
before
of
them
recited
,
do
folowe
these
wordes
.
As
in
the
person
of
Christ
,
the
humanitee
was
seen
,
and
the
diuinitee
was
hyd
,
euen
so
dyd
the
diuinitee
,
ineffably
putte
it selfe
into
the
visible
sacrament
.
Whiche
wordes
of
Cyprian
do
manyfestly
shewe
,
that
the
sacrament
,
doth
styll
remayne
with
the
diuinitee
:
and
that
sacramentally
the
diuinitee
is
poured
into
the
bread
and
wyne
,
the
same
bread
&
wyne
styll
remainyng
:
like
as
thesame
diuinitee
by
vnitee
of
person
was
in
the
humanitee
of
Christ
,
the
same
humanitee
stil
remainyng
with
the
diuinite
.
And
yet
the
bread
is
chaunged
,
not
in
shape
,
nor
substance
,
but
in
nature
(
as
Cyprian
truely
sayth
)
not
meanyng
that
the
naturall
substance
of
bread
is
cleane
gone
,
but
that
by
Gods
word
,
there
is
added
therto
another
higher
propertie
,
nature
and
condition
,
farre
passyng
the
nature
and
condicion
of
common
bread
,
that
is
to
saye
,
that
the
bread
doth
shewe
vnto
vs
,
(
as
the
same
Cyprian
sayth
)
that
wee
bee
partakers
of
the
spirite
of
God
,
and
moste
purely
ioyned
vnto
Christ
,
and
spiritually
feade
with
his
fleshe
and
bloud
,
so
that
nowe
the
sayd
misticall
bread
is
both
a
corporall
foode
for
the
body
,
and
a
spiritual
foode
for
the
soule
.
And
likewise
is
the
nature
of
the
water
chaunged
in
baptisme
forasmuche
as
besyde
his
common
nature
(
whiche
is
to
washe
&
make
cleane
the
body
)
it
declareth
vnto
vs
,
that
our
soules
he
also
washed
&
made
cleane
by
the
holy
ghost
.
And
thus
is
answered
the
chiefe
authoritee
of
the
doctours
,
whiche
the
Papistes
take
for
the
principal
defence
of
their
error
.
But
for
further
declaracion
of
sainct
Cyprians
mynde
herein
,
reade
the
place
of
him
before
recited
fol.
24.
Chap.
12
Chrysostomus
.
Another
authoritee
they
haue
of
sainct
Iohn
Chrysostome
,
whiche
thei
boast
also
to
be
inuincible
.
Chrysostome
(
say
they
)
writeth
thus
in
a
certaine
homely
De
Eucharistia
.
Doest
thou
see
bread
?
Doest
thou
see
wyne
?
Do
they
auoyde
beneth
,
as
other
meates
do
?
God
forbyd
,
thynke
not
so
.
For
as
waxe
(
if
it
be
put
into
the
fyre
)
it
is
made
lyke
the
fyer
,
no
substance
remayneth
,
nothyng
is
lefte
:
so
here
also
thynke
thou
,
that
the
mysteries
be
consumed
by
the
substance
of
the
body
.
At
these
wordes
of
Chrysostome
the
Papistes
do
triumph
,
as
though
they
had
won
the
fielde
.
Lo
(
say
they
)
doeth
not
Chrysostomus
the
great
clarke
say
most
plainly
,
that
we
se
neither
bread
nor
wyne
?
but
that
(
as
waxe
in
the
fyer
)
they
be
consumed
to
nothyng
,
so
that
no
substance
remayneth
?
But
if
they
had
rehersed
no
more
,
Wherfore
(
sayth
he
)
whan
ye
comme
to
these
mysteries
,
do
not
thynke
,
that
you
receiue
by
a
man
,
the
body
of
God
,
but
that
with
tongues
,
you
receiue
fyer
by
the
Angels
Seraphyn
.
And
straight
after
it
foloweth
thus
.
Thynke
that
the
bloud
of
saluacion
floweth
out
of
the
pure
and
godly
syde
of
Christ
,
and
so
commyng
to
it
,
receiue
it
with
pure
lippes
.
Wherfore
brother
,
I
pray
you
&
beseche
you
,
let
vs
not
be
from
the
churche
,
nor
let
vs
not
be
occupyed
there
with
vaine
communication
,
but
let
vs
stand
fearefull
&
tremblyng
,
castyng
doune
our
eyes
,
liftyng
vp
our
myndes
,
mournyng
priuely
with
out
speache
,
and
reioysyng
in
our
heartes
.
These
wordes
of
Chrysostome
do
folowe
immediatly
,
after
the
other
woordes
,
whiche
the
Papistes
before
rehersed
.
Therfore
if
the
Papistes
wil
gather
of
the
wordes
by
them
recited
,
that
there
is
neither
bread
nor
wyne
in
the
sacrament
,
I
may
aswell
gather
of
the
woordes
that
folowe
,
that
there
is
neither
priest
nor
Christes
body
.
For
as
in
the
former
sentence
,
Chrysostome
sayth
,
that
we
may
not
thinke
,
that
we
see
bread
&
wyne
:
so
in
the
second
sentence
he
sayth
,
that
we
may
not
thynke
,
that
wee
receyue
the
body
of
Christ
of
the
priestes
handes
.
Wherfore
if
vpon
the
second
sentence
(
as
the
Papistes
them
selues
wyll
say
)
it
can
not
be
truely
gathered
,
that
in
the
holy
Communion
there
is
not
the
body
of
Christ
ministered
by
the
priest
:
then
must
they
confesse
also
,
that
it
can
not
bee
well
and
truely
gathered
vpon
the
fyrst
sentence
,
that
there
is
no
bread
nor
wyne
.
But
there
be
al
these
thynges
together
in
the
holy
Communion
,
Christe
himselfe
spiritually
eaten
and
drunken
,
and
norishyng
the
right
beleuers
,
the
bread
&
wyne
as
a
sacrament
declaryng
the
same
,
and
the
priest
as
a
minister
therof
.
Wherfore
S.
Ihon
Chrysostome
ment
not
absolutely
,
to
denye
that
there
is
bread
&
wyne
,
or
to
denye
vtterly
the
priest
and
the
body
of
Christ
to
be
there
,
but
he
vseth
a
speache
,
whiche
is
no
pure
Negatiue
,
Whiche
fashion
of
speeche
,
is
commonly
vsed
,
not
onely
in
the
scripture
,
and
among
all
good
authors
,
but
also
in
all
maner
of
languages
.
For
when
two
thynges
bee
compared
together
,
in
the
extollyng
of
the
more
excellent
,
or
abasyng
of
the
more
vyle
,
is
many
tymes
vsed
a
Negatiue
by
comparishon
,
whiche
neuerthelesse
is
no
pure
Negatiue
,
but
onely
in
the
respecte
of
the
more
excellent
,
or
the
more
base
.
As
by
example
.
When
the
people
reiectyng
the
prophete
Samuel
,
They
haue
not
reiected
thee
,
but
me
.
Not
meanyng
by
this
negatiue
absolutely
,
that
they
had
not
reiected
Samuel
(
in
whose
place
they
desired
to
haue
a
kyng
)
but
by
that
one
negatiue
by
comparison
he
vnderstode
two
affirmatiues
,
that
is
to
saye
,
that
they
had
reiected
Samuell
,
and
not
hym
alone
,
but
also
that
they
had
chiefely
reiected
God
.
And
whan
the
prophet
Dauid
said
in
the
person
"
of
Christe
,
This
maner
of
speeche
was
familiar
and
vsuall
to
S.
Paule
,
It
is
not
I
that
doe
it
,
but
it
is
the
synne
that
dwelleth
in
me
.
In
all
these
sentences
,
and
many
other
lyke
,
although
they
bee
negatiues
,
neuerthelesse
S.
Paule
mente
not
,
clerely
to
denye
,
that
he
dyd
that
euyl
wherof
he
spake
,
or
vtterly
to
say
,
that
he
was
not
sent
to
baptise
(
who
in
dede
did
baptise
at
certayn
tymes
,
The
same
maner
of
speeche
vsed
also
S.
Peter
in
his
fyrste
epistle
,
That
the
apparayle
of
women
,
shoulde
not
be
outwardly
with
broyded
heare
,
and
settynge
on
of
golde
,
nor
in
puttynge
on
of
gorgious
apparayle
,
but
that
the
inwarde
man
of
the
harte
,
shoulde
be
with
out
corruption
.
In
whyche
maner
of
speche
,
he
intended
not
vtterly
to
forbid
al
browderyng
of
hear
,
al
gold
and
costly
apparell
to
al
women
,
(
For
euery
one
muste
bee
apparailed
accordyng
to
their
condition
,
state
and
degree
)
but
he
ment
hereby
clerely
to
condempne
all
pryde
and
excesse
in
apparayle
,
and
to
moue
all
women
that
they
should
study
to
deck
their
soules
inwardly
with
al
vertues
,
&
not
to
be
curious
,
outwardly
to
deck
and
adorne
their
bodies
with
sumptuous
apparell
.
And
our
sauiour
Christe
hymselfe
was
full
of
"
suche
maner
of
speeches
.
Whan
you
be
brought
before
kynges
and
princes
,
thynke
not
what
and
howe
you
shal
answer
.
Not
willyng
vs
by
this
negatiue
,
that
we
shuld
negligently
and
vnaduisedly
answere
,
we
care
not
what
,
but
that
wee
shoulde
depende
of
our
heauenly
father
,
trustynge
that
by
his
holy
spirite
,
he
wyll
sufficientely
instructe
vs
of
answere
,
rather
than
to
truste
of
any
aunswere
to
bee
deuised
by
oure
owne
wytte
and
study
.
It
is
not
you
that
speake
,
but
it
is
the
spirite
of
God
that
speaketh
within
you
.
For
the
spirite
of
god
is
he
that
principally
putteth
godly
wordes
into
our
mouthes
,
and
yet
neuer
the
lesse
we
do
speake
accordyng
to
his
mouyng
.
And
to
be
short
,
in
al
these
sentences
folowing
that
is
to
saie
:
In
all
these
negatiues
,
oure
sauiour
Christe
spake
not
precisely
&
vtterly
to
deny
al
the
forsayd
things
,
but
in
comparison
of
them
to
prefer
other
thinges
,
as
to
preferre
our
father
and
lord
in
heuen
,
aboue
any
worldly
father
,
lord
or
master
in
earth
,
and
his
feare
aboue
the
feare
of
any
creature
,
and
his
word
and
gospell
aboue
al
worldly
peace
.
Also
to
preferre
spirituall
and
inward
honoryng
of
God
in
pure
hart
&
mynd
,
aboue
locall
,
corporal
&
outward
honor
,
and
that
Christe
preferred
his
fathers
glorye
aboue
his
owne
.
Now
forasmuch
as
I
haue
declared
at
length
,
the
nature
and
kynd
of
these
negatiue
speches
,
(
whyche
bee
no
pure
negatiues
,
but
by
comparison
)
it
is
easy
hereby
,
to
make
answere
to
S.
Iohn
Chrysostome
,
who
vsed
this
phrase
of
speche
moste
of
any
author
.
For
his
meanynge
in
his
foresayde
homily
,
was
not
that
in
the
celebration
of
the
Lords
supper
is
neyther
bread
nor
wyne
,
neither
priest
,
nor
the
body
of
Christe
(
which
the
Papistes
themselues
must
nedes
confesse
)
but
his
entent
was
,
to
draw
our
myndes
vpwardes
to
heauen
,
that
we
shuld
not
consider
so
muche
the
bread
,
wine
,
priest
,
and
body
of
Christ
we
shuld
consyder
his
diuinitee
and
holy
spirite
gyuen
vnto
vs
to
our
eternall
saluation
.
And
therfore
in
the
same
place
he
vseth
so
many
tymes
these
words
,
Thinke
,
and
thinke
not
.
willyng
vs
by
those
wordes
,
that
we
shulde
not
fixe
our
thoughtes
&
myndes
vpon
the
bread
,
wine
,
priest
,
nor
Christes
body
:
but
to
lyft
vp
our
hartes
higher
vnto
his
spirite
and
diuinite
,
without
the
whiche
his
body
auaileth
nothynge
,
as
he
saith
hym selfe
:
And
as
the
same
Chrysostom
in
many
places
moueth
vs
,
not
to
consider
the
water
in
baptisme
,
but
rather
to
haue
respect
to
the
holy
ghost
,
receued
in
baptisme
,
and
represented
by
the
water
:
euen
so
doth
he
in
this
homily
of
the
holy
communion
,
moue
vs
to
lift
vp
our
mynds
from
al
visible
&
corporal
things
,
to
things
inuisible
&
spiritual
.
In
so
muche
that
although
Christe
was
but
ones
crucified
,
yet
would
Chrysostome
haue
vs
to
thynke
,
that
we
see
hym
dayly
whypped
and
scourged
before
our
eies
,
and
his
body
hangyng
vpon
the
Crosse
,
and
the
speare
thruste
into
his
side
,
and
the
most
holy
bloud
to
flowe
out
of
his
syde
into
our
mouthes
.
After
whiche
maner
S.
Paule
wrote
to
the
Galathians
,
Hytherto
I
haue
rehersed
sainct
Ihon
Chrysostomes
woordes
,
whiche
do
shewe
howe
our
mindes
should
be
occupied
at
this
holy
table
of
our
Lorde
,
that
is
to
say
,
withdrawen
from
the
consideracion
of
sensible
thynges
,
vnto
the
contemplacion
of
moste
heauenly
and
godly
thynges
.
And
thus
is
answered
this
place
of
Chrysostom
,
which
the
Papists
toke
for
an
insoluble
,
and
a
place
that
no
man
was
able
to
answere
.
But
for
a
further
declaracion
of
Chrysostomes
mynde
in
this
matter
,
reade
the
place
of
him
before
rehersed
fol.
26.
and
28.
Chap.
13.
Yet
there
is
another
place
of
sainct
Ambrose
,
whiche
the
Papistes
thynke
maketh
muche
for
their
purpose
,
De
ijs
qui
initiantur
mysterijs
.
Let
vs
proue
that
there
is
not
that
thyng
whiche
natur
formed
,
but
whiche
benediction
did
consecrate
,
and
that
benediction
is
of
more
strength
than
nature
For
by
the
blessyng
,
nature
it selfe
is
also
chaunged
.
Moyses
helde
a
rodde
,
Nowe
yf
the
blessynge
of
a
man
be
of
suche
valewe
,
that
it
may
chaunge
nature
,
what
dooe
wee
saye
of
the
consecration
of
God
?
wherein
is
the
operation
of
the
woordes
of
our
sauiour
Christe
?
For
this
sacrament
whiche
thou
receauest
is
doon
by
the
woord
of
Christe
.
Than
if
the
worde
of
Helias
was
of
suche
power
,
that
it
coulde
brynge
fyer
downe
frome
heauen
,
shall
not
the
woorde
of
Christe
be
of
that
power
,
to
chaunge
the
kyndes
of
the
elementes
?
Of
the
makynge
of
the
whole
worlde
,
The
worde
than
of
Christe
,
that
coulde
of
no
thynges
,
make
thynges
that
were
not
,
can
it
not
change
those
thynges
that
be
,
into
that
thynge
,
whiche
before
they
were
not
?
For
it
is
no
lesse
mattier
,
to
geue
to
thynges
newe
natures
,
than
to
alter
natures
.
Thus
farre
haue
I
rehersed
the
woordes
of
Saynt
Ambrose
,
yf
the
sayd
boke
bee
his
(
whiche
they
that
bee
of
greatest
learnyng
and
iudgement
doo
not
thynke
)
by
which
woordes
the
Papistes
would
proue
,
that
in
the
supper
of
the
Lorde
after
the
woordes
of
Consecration
(
as
they
bee
commonly
called
)
there
remaineth
neither
bread
nor
wyne
,
bycause
that
S.
Ambrose
saieth
in
this
place
,
that
the
nature
of
the
bread
and
wyne
is
chaunged
.
And
therfore
in
the
most
part
of
the
examples
,
whiche
S.
Ambrose
allegeth
for
the
wonderful
alteration
of
natures
,
the
substaunces
dyd
styll
remayne
,
after
the
nature
and
proprieties
were
chaunged
.
As
whan
the
water
of
Iordane
(
contrary
to
his
nature
)
stoode
styll
lyke
a
wall
,
or
flowed
against
the
streame
towardes
the
head
&
spryng
,
yet
the
substaunce
of
the
water
remayned
the
same
that
it
was
before
.
Lykewyse
the
stone
,
that
aboue
his
nature
and
kynde
flowed
water
,
was
the
selfe
same
stone
that
it
was
before
.
And
the
fludde
of
Marath
,
that
chaunged
his
nature
of
bytternesse
,
chaunged
for
all
that
no
part
of
his
substance
.
No
more
did
that
yron
,
whiche
contrary
to
his
nature
,
swam
vpon
the
water
,
lose
thereby
any
parte
of
the
substaunce
thereof
.
Therfore
as
in
these
alteracions
of
natures
,
the
substaunces
neuerthelesse
remayned
the
same
,
that
they
were
before
the
alteracions
:
euen
so
doeth
the
substaunce
of
bread
and
wyne
remayne
in
the
Lordes
supper
,
and
be
naturally
receiued
and
digested
into
the
body
,
not
withstandyng
the
sacramental
mutacion
of
the
same
into
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
.
Which
sacramentall
mutation
declareth
the
supernaturall
spirituall
and
inexplicable
eatynge
and
drynkynge
,
feedyng
and
digestyng
of
the
same
body
and
bloudde
of
Christe
,
in
all
theim
,
that
godly
and
accordyng
to
theyr
duetie
,
do
receiue
the
sayd
sacramentall
bread
and
wyne
.
And
that
Saynt
Ambrose
thus
ment
,
that
the
substance
of
breade
and
wyne
remayne
styll
after
the
consecration
,
it
is
moste
clere
by
three
other
examples
of
the
same
mater
,
folowynge
in
the
same
chapiter
.
One
is
of
theym
that
bee
regenerated
,
in
whome
after
theyr
regeneration
dooeth
styll
remayne
theyr
former
naturall
substaunce
.
An
other
is
of
the
Incarnation
of
our
Sauiour
Christe
,
in
the
whyche
peryshed
no
substaunce
,
but
remayned
as
well
the
substaunce
of
his
godhead
,
as
the
substance
whiche
he
tooke
of
the
blessed
vyrgin
Mary
.
The
third
exaumple
is
of
the
water
in
baptisme
,
where
the
water
styll
remayneth
water
,
although
the
holy
ghost
come
vpon
the
water
,
or
rather
vpon
him
that
is
baptised
therein
.
Lis.
4.
De
sacramentis
cap.
4.
And
although
the
same
sainct
Ambrose
,
in
an
other
booke
entitled
De
sacramentis
,
doeth
saye
,
that
the
bread
is
bread
before
the
wordes
of
consecration
,
but
when
the
consecration
is
doone
,
of
bread
is
made
the
body
of
Christe
:
Yet
in
the
same
booke
,
&
in
the
same
chapiter
,
he
telleth
in
what
maner
and
forme
the
same
is
done
,
by
the
woordes
of
Christ
:
not
by
takyng
away
the
substance
of
the
bread
,
but
addyng
to
the
bread
,
the
grace
of
Christs
body
,
&
so
calling
it
the
body
of
Christ
And
hereof
he
bryngeth
foure
examples
.
The
first
of
the
regeneration
of
a
man
:
the
second
is
of
the
standyng
of
the
water
of
the
red
sea
:
the
third
is
of
the
bytter
water
of
Marath
:
and
the
fourthe
is
of
the
yron
that
swamme
aboue
the
water
.
In
euery
of
the
whyche
exaumples
,
the
former
substance
remayned
stylle
,
not
withstandyng
alteration
of
the
natures
.
And
he
concludeth
the
whole
matter
in
these
fewe
woordes
.
If
there
be
so
muche
strength
in
the
woordes
of
the
Lorde
Iesu
,
that
thynges
had
theyr
begynnynge
,
whiche
neuer
were
before
,
howe
muche
more
be
they
able
to
worke
,
that
those
thynges
,
that
were
before
,
should
remayn
,
&
also
be
changed
into
other
thynges
?
Which
wordes
do
shew
manyfestly
,
that
not
withstandyng
this
wonderfull
sacramental
and
spiritual
changyng
of
the
bread
into
the
body
of
Christ
,
yet
the
substance
of
the
bread
remayneth
the
same
,
that
it
was
before
.
Thus
is
a
sufficient
answere
made
vnto
thre
principall
authoritees
,
whiche
the
Papistes
vse
to
allege
,
to
stablysh
their
errour
of
transubstantiation
.
The
first
of
Cyprian
,
the
second
of
S.
Iohn
Chrysost.
and
the
thirde
of
S.
Ambrose
.
Other
authoritees
and
reasons
som
of
them
do
brynge
for
the
same
purpose
,
but
forasmuche
as
they
be
of
small
moment
and
weight
,
and
easy
to
be
answered
vnto
,
I
wil
passe
them
ouer
at
this
tyme
,
and
not
trouble
the
reader
with
them
,
but
leaue
them
to
be
wayed
by
his
discretion
.
Chap.
14
And
nowe
I
will
reherse
dyuers
difficultees
,
absurditees
and
inconueniences
,
FYRST
,
if
the
Papistes
be
demanded
,
what
thyng
it
is
,
that
is
broken
,
what
is
eaten
,
what
is
dronken
,
and
what
is
chawed
with
the
teeth
,
lyppes
,
and
mouth
in
this
sacrament
,
they
haue
nothyng
to
answere
,
but
the
accidences
.
For
(
as
they
say
)
bread
and
wyne
bee
not
the
visible
element
in
this
sacrament
,
but
onely
their
accidentes
.
And
so
they
be
forced
to
saye
,
that
accidentes
be
broken
,
eaten
,
dronken
,
chawen
,
and
swalowed
without
any
substance
at
all
:
whyche
is
not
onely
agaynst
all
reason
,
but
also
agaynste
the
doctrine
of
all
auncient
authors
.
Secondly
,
these
Transubstantiatours
do
say
(
contrary
to
al
learnyng
)
that
the
accidentes
of
bread
and
wine
do
hang
alone
in
the
ayre
without
any
substance
,
wherin
they
may
bee
staied
.
And
what
can
be
sayd
more
foolyshely
?
Thirdly
,
that
the
substance
of
Christes
body
is
there
really
,
corporally
and
naturally
present
without
any
accidentes
of
the
same
.
And
so
the
Papistes
make
accidentes
to
be
without
substances
,
and
substances
to
bee
without
accidentes
.
Fourthely
,
they
say
,
that
the
place
where
the
bread
and
wyne
bee
,
hath
no
substaunce
there
to
fyll
that
place
,
and
so
must
they
nedes
graunte
vacuum
,
whiche
nature
vtterly
abhorreth
.
Fiftly
,
thei
ar
not
ashamed
to
say
,
that
substance
is
made
of
accidentes
,
when
the
breade
mouleth
,
or
is
turned
into
worms
,
or
whan
the
wyne
sowreth
.
Sixtly
,
that
substance
is
norished
without
substance
,
by
accidentes
onely
,
if
it
chance
any
catte
,
mouse
,
dogge
,
or
any
other
thyng
,
to
eate
the
sacramentall
bread
,
or
drink
the
sacramental
wine
These
inconueniences
and
absurditees
do
folowe
of
the
fond
Papistical
transubstantintion
,
with
a
numbre
of
other
errors
as
euyll
or
worse
than
these
,
whervnto
they
bee
neuer
able
to
answere
,
as
many
of
them
haue
confessed
themselfs
.
And
it
is
a
wonder
to
see
,
how
in
many
of
the
forsaid
thynges
,
they
vary
among
them selues
.
Where
as
the
other
doctrine
of
the
scripture
,
and
of
the
old
catholike
churche
(
but
not
of
the
lately
corrupted
Romyshe
church
)
is
playn
and
easy
,
as
well
to
be
vnderstanded
,
as
to
answere
to
all
the
foresayd
questions
,
without
any
absurditee
or
inconuenience
folowyng
therof
:
so
that
euery
answere
shall
agree
with
Goddes
worde
,
with
the
olde
Churche
,
and
also
with
all
reason
and
true
Philosophie
.
For
as
touchyng
the
fyrst
poynt
,
what
is
broken
,
what
is
eaten
,
what
dronken
,
and
what
chawed
in
this
sacrament
,
it
is
easy
to
answere
,
The
bread
and
wyne
,
as
S.
Paule
saith
:
The
bread
whiche
we
breake
.
And
as
concernyng
the
second
&
third
pointes
;
neither
is
the
substance
of
bread
&
wine
without
their
proper
accidentes
,
nor
their
accidentes
hang
alone
in
the
ayre
without
any
substaunce
,
but
accordyng
to
all
learnyng
,
the
substance
of
the
bread
and
wyne
reserue
their
owne
accidentes
,
and
the
accidentes
do
rest
in
their
owne
substances
.
And
also
as
concernyng
the
fourth
poynt
,
there
is
no
place
lefte
voyde
after
Consecracion
(
as
the
Papistes
dreame
)
but
bread
and
wyne
fulfyll
their
places
,
as
they
did
before
.
And
as
touchyng
the
fift
point
(
whereof
the
wormes
or
moulyng
is
engendred
,
and
whereof
the
vyneger
commeth
)
the
answere
is
easye
to
make
(
accordyng
to
all
learnyng
and
experience
)
that
they
come
,
(
accordyng
to
the
course
of
nature
)
of
the
substaunce
of
the
bread
and
wyne
to
long
kept
,
and
not
of
the
accidentes
alone
,
as
the
Papistes
do
fondly
phantasy
.
And
likewise
the
substances
of
bread
&
wyne
,
do
feede
and
norishe
the
body
of
them
,
that
eate
the
same
,
and
not
the
only
accidentes
.
In
these
answeres
is
no
absurditie
nor
inconuenience
,
nothyng
spoken
,
either
contrarye
to
holy
scripture
,
or
to
natural
reason
,
Philosophy
or
experience
,
or
against
any
olde
auncient
author
,
or
the
primatiue
or
catholike
churche
,
but
onely
against
the
malignant
and
Papisticall
church
of
Rome
.
Where
as
on
the
other
syde
,
that
cursed
synagoge
of
Antichrist
,
hath
defined
and
determined
in
this
matter
,
many
thynges
contrary
to
Christes
wordes
,
contrary
to
the
olde
catholike
church
,
and
the
holy
martyrs
and
doctoures
of
the
same
,
and
contrary
to
all
naturall
reason
,
learnynge
and
phylosophy
.
And
the
final
end
of
all
this
Antichrists
doctrine
is
none
other
,
but
by
subtelty
and
crafte
,
to
bringe
christian
people
from
the
true
honouringe
of
Christ
,
vnto
the
greatest
ydolatry
,
that
euer
was
in
this
worlde
deuised
:
as
by
goddes
grace
shal
be
plainly
sette
forth
hereafter
.
Thus
endeth
the
seconde
booke
.
THE
THIRDE
BOOKE
TEACHETH
THE
MANNER
HOWE
Christe
is
present
in
his
supper
.
NOW
THIS
MATTER
OF
Chap.
1.
transubstantiation
being
(
as
I
trust
)
sufficiently
resolued
,
For
a
plaine
explication
wherof
,
it
is
not
vnknowen
to
all
true
faithfull
christian
people
,
that
oure
sauiour
CHRIST
(
beeinge
perfecte
God
,
and
in
all
thinges
equall
and
coeternall
wyth
his
father
)
for
our
sakes
beecame
also
a
perfect
manne
,
takynge
fleshe
and
bloode
of
his
blessed
mother
and
virgine
Marye
,
and
(
sauing
synne
)
beinge
in
all
thinges
lyke
vnto
vs
,
adioyninge
vnto
hys
diuynitie
a
moste
perfecte
soule
and
a
moste
perfecte
bodye
:
hys
sowle
beinge
indued
with
lyfe
,
sence
,
wyll
,
reason
,
wysdome
,
memory
,
and
all
other
thinges
required
to
the
perfect
soule
of
man
,
and
hys
body
being
made
of
very
fleshe
and
bones
,
not
onlye
hauinge
all
membres
of
a
perfecte
mannes
bodye
in
due
ordre
and
proportion
,
but
also
beinge
subiect
to
hunger
,
thyrste
,
laboure
,
sweate
,
werines
,
colde
,
heate
,
and
all
other
lyke
infirmyties
and
passions
of
man
,
and
vnto
death
also
,
and
that
the
moste
vile
and
painefull
vppon
the
crosse
.
And
after
his
death
he
rose
againe
,
with
the
selfe
same
visible
and
palpable
bodye
,
and
appeared
therwith
,
and
shewed
the
same
vnto
hys
Apostels
,
and
specially
to
Thomas
,
makinge
him
to
put
his
handes
into
his
syde
,
and
to
feele
hys
woundes
.
This
is
the
trewe
catholicke
faythe
,
whyche
the
scrripture
teacheth
,
&
the
vniuersal
churche
of
Christe
hathe
euer
beleued
,
frome
the
begynnynge
vntyll
within
these
fower
or
fyue
hundreth
yeares
last
passed
,
that
the
Byshoppe
of
Rome
,
with
the
assistaunce
of
his
Papists
,
hath
sette
vp
a
newe
faithe
and
beliefe
of
theyr
owne
deuising
,
that
the
same
body
,
really
,
corporally
,
naturally
,
and
sensiblye
,
is
in
this
worlde
styll
,
and
that
in
an
hundreth
thousand
places
at
one
tyme
,
beynge
inclosed
in
euerye
pyxe
and
bread
consecrated
.
And
althoughe
we
do
affirme
(
accordinge
to
Gods
word
)
that
Christ
is
in
all
persones
,
Chap.
2.
that
truelye
beleue
in
him
,
in
suche
sorte
,
that
with
his
flesh
and
bloode
he
dothe
spiritually
norishe
theim
,
and
feede
theim
,
and
giueth
theim
euerlasting
lyfe
,
and
doth
assure
them
therof
,
aswell
by
the
promise
of
his
word
,
as
by
the
sacramentall
bread
and
wine
in
his
holy
supper
,
which
he
did
institute
for
the
same
purpose
,
yet
we
do
not
a
little
varye
frome
the
hainous
erroures
of
the
Papistes
.
For
they
teache
,
They
saye
,
that
when
anye
manne
eateth
the
breadde
and
drynketh
the
cuppe
,
CHRIST
goeth
into
his
mouth
or
stomake
with
the
breade
and
wyne
,
and
no
further
:
But
wee
saye
,
that
CHRIST
is
in
the
whole
man
bothe
in
the
body
and
soule
of
him
,
that
worthely
eateth
the
bread
and
drinketh
the
cuppe
,
and
not
in
hys
mouthe
or
stomacke
onely
.
They
saye
,
that
CHRIST
is
receiued
in
the
mouth
,
and
entreth
in
wyth
the
bread
and
wyne
Wee
saye
that
hee
is
receaued
in
the
harte
,
and
entreth
in
by
faithe
.
They
saye
,
that
Christe
is
reallye
in
the
sacramentall
breade
beeynge
reserued
an
whole
yeare
,
or
so
longe
as
the
fourme
of
breade
remaineth
,
but
after
the
receiuynge
thereof
,
hee
flyeth
vp
(
say
they
)
frome
the
receiuer
,
vnto
heauen
,
as
soone
as
the
breade
is
chawed
in
the
mouth
,
or
chaunged
in
the
stomacke
:
But
wee
say
,
that
Christ
remayneth
in
the
man
that
worthely
receiueth
it
,
so
longe
as
the
manne
remayneth
a
membre
of
Christe
.
They
say
,
that
in
the
sacrament
,
the
corporall
membres
of
Christe
be
not
distaunt
in
place
,
one
from
another
,
but
that
wheresoeuer
the
head
is
,
there
be
the
feete
,
and
wheresoeuer
the
armes
be
,
there
be
the
legges
,
so
that
in
euery
parte
of
the
bread
&
wyne
,
is
altogither
,
whole
head
,
whole
feete
,
whole
fleshe
,
whole
bloud
,
whole
hearte
,
whole
lunges
,
whole
brest
,
whole
backe
,
and
altogither
whole
,
confused
,
and
mixte
withoute
distinction
or
diuersitie
.
O
what
a
foolishe
and
an
abhominable
inuencion
is
this
,
to
make
of
the
moste
pure
and
perfect
body
of
Christe
,
suche
a
confuse
and
monstruous
body
?
And
yet
canne
the
Papistes
imagine
nothinge
so
foolishe
,
but
all
Christian
people
must
receyue
the
same
,
as
an
oracle
of
God
,
and
as
a
moste
certayne
article
of
their
fayth
,
without
whisperyng
to
the
contrary
.
Furthermore
the
Papistes
say
,
that
a
dogge
or
a
Catte
eate
the
body
of
Christe
,
if
they
by
chaunce
do
eate
the
sacramental
bread
:
We
say
that
no
yearthly
creature
can
eate
the
body
of
Christ
,
nor
drynke
his
bloud
,
but
onely
man
.
They
say
,
that
euery
man
good
and
euil
eateth
the
body
of
Christe
:
We
say
,
that
bothe
do
eate
the
sacramental
bread
and
drynke
the
wyne
,
but
none
do
eate
the
very
body
of
Christ
and
drynke
his
bloud
,
but
only
they
that
be
liuely
membres
of
his
body
.
They
say
,
that
good
menne
eate
the
body
of
Christ
,
and
drynke
his
bloud
,
only
at
that
tyme
whan
they
receiue
the
sacrament
:
We
say
,
that
they
eate
,
drinke
,
and
feede
of
Christ
continually
,
so
long
as
they
be
membres
of
his
body
.
They
say
,
that
the
body
of
Christe
that
is
in
the
sacrament
,
hath
his
owne
proper
fourme
and
quantitee
:
We
say
,
that
Christ
is
there
sacramentally
and
spiritually
,
without
fourme
or
quantitee
.
They
say
,
that
the
fathers
&
prophetes
of
the
olde
testament
,
did
not
eate
the
body
nor
drunke
the
bloud
of
Christ
:
We
say
,
that
they
dyd
eate
his
body
&
drunke
his
bloud
,
although
he
was
not
yet
borne
nor
incarnated
.
They
say
,
that
the
body
of
Christ
is
euery
day
many
tymes
made
,
as
often
as
there
be
Masses
sayd
,
&
that
than
,
and
there
,
he
is
made
of
bread
and
wyne
:
We
say
,
that
Christes
body
was
neuer
but
ones
made
,
and
than
not
of
the
nature
and
substance
of
bread
and
wyne
,
but
of
the
substance
of
his
blessed
mother
.
Thei
say
,
that
the
Masse
is
a
sacrifice
satisfactory
for
sinne
,
by
the
deuocion
of
the
priest
that
offereth
,
&
not
by
the
thyng
that
is
offered
:
But
we
say
,
that
their
saiyng
is
a
most
haynous
lye
&
detestable
error
,
against
the
glory
of
Christ
.
For
the
satisfaction
for
our
synnes
,
is
not
the
deuocion
nor
offeryng
of
the
priest
,
but
the
only
hoost
and
satisfaction
for
all
the
sinnes
of
the
world
,
is
the
death
of
Christ
,
&
the
oblacion
of
his
body
vpon
the
crosse
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
oblacion
that
Christ
him selfe
offered
ones
vpon
the
crosse
,
and
neuer
but
ones
,
nor
neuer
none
but
he
.
And
therfore
that
oblation
whiche
the
priestes
make
dayly
in
their
papistical
Masses
,
can
not
be
a
satisfaction
for
other
mens
synnes
by
the
priestes
deuocion
,
but
it
is
a
mere
elusion
and
subtyll
craft
of
the
deuil
,
wherby
Antichrist
hath
many
yeres
blynded
and
deceiued
the
worlde
.
They
say
,
that
Christe
is
corporally
in
many
places
at
one
tyme
,
affirmyng
that
his
body
is
corporally
and
really
present
,
in
as
many
places
as
there
be
hoostes
consecrated
:
We
say
,
that
as
the
sonne
corporally
is
euer
in
heauen
,
and
no
where
els
,
and
yet
by
his
operation
and
vertue
,
the
Sonne
is
here
in
yearth
(
by
whose
influence
and
vertue
,
all
thynges
in
the
worlde
be
corporally
regenerated
,
encreased
and
growe
to
their
perfecte
state
.
)
so
lykewise
oure
sauiour
Christe
bodely
and
corporally
is
in
heauen
,
sittyng
at
the
right
hande
of
his
father
,
although
spiritually
he
hath
promised
to
be
present
with
vs
vpon
yearth
vnto
the
worldes
ende
.
And
whansoeuer
two
or
thre
be
gathered
together
in
his
name
,
he
is
there
in
the
myddes
among
them
,
by
whose
supernal
grace
all
godly
menne
bee
first
by
him
spiritually
regenerated
,
and
after
encreace
and
growe
to
their
spiritual
perfection
in
God
,
spiritually
by
fayth
eatyng
his
fleshe
and
drinkyng
his
bloud
,
although
the
same
corporally
bee
in
heauen
,
farre
distant
from
our
sight
.
Nowe
to
returne
to
the
principal
matter
,
Chap.
3.
lest
it
might
bee
thought
a
newe
deuise
of
vs
,
that
Christe
as
concernyng
his
body
&
his
humayne
nature
,
is
in
heauen
,
and
not
in
yearth
:
therfore
by
Gods
grace
,
it
shal
be
euidently
proued
,
that
this
is
no
newe
deuised
matter
,
but
that
it
was
euer
the
olde
fayth
of
the
catholike
churche
,
vntyll
the
Papistes
inuented
a
newe
fayth
,
that
Christ
really
,
corporally
,
naturally
,
and
sensibly
is
here
styll
with
vs
in
yearth
,
shut
vp
in
a
boxe
or
within
the
compasse
of
bread
and
wyne
.
This
nedeth
no
better
nor
stronger
profe
,
he
ascended
into
heauen
,
and
sitteth
at
the
right
hand
of
his
almightie
father
,
and
from
thence
shal
come
to
iudge
the
quicke
and
dead
.
This
hath
been
euer
the
catholyke
fayth
of
christian
people
,
that
Christ
,
as
concernyng
his
body
and
his
manhood
is
in
heauen
,
and
shall
there
continue
vntyll
he
come
doune
at
the
last
iudgement
.
And
forasmuche
as
the
Crede
maketh
so
expresse
mencion
of
the
article
of
his
ascencion
,
and
departyng
hence
from
vs
,
if
it
had
been
an
other
article
of
oure
fayth
,
that
his
body
taryeth
also
here
with
vs
in
yearth
,
surely
in
this
place
of
the
Crede
was
so
vrgent
an
occasion
geuen
to
make
some
mention
therof
,
that
doutlesse
it
would
not
haue
been
passed
ouer
in
our
Crede
with
silence
.
For
yf
Christe
as
concernyng
his
humanitee
,
be
both
here
&
gone
hence
,
and
both
those
two
be
articles
of
our
fayth
,
whan
mencion
was
made
of
the
one
in
the
Crede
,
it
was
necessary
to
make
mencion
of
the
other
,
least
by
professyng
the
one
,
we
should
be
dissuaded
from
beleuyng
the
other
,
beyng
so
contrarye
the
one
to
the
other
.
Chap.
4.
To
this
article
of
oure
Crede
accordeth
holy
scripture
,
I
leaue
the
worlde
,
and
go
to
my
father
.
And
also
he
saide
[
†
](A19571-e7880-b)
†
Mat.
26.
You
shall
euer
haue
poore
folkes
with
you
,
but
you
shall
not
euer
haue
me
with
you
.
And
he
gaue
warninge
of
this
errour
beefore
hande
,
saying
,
and
saye
,
Here
is
Christe
,
and
there
is
Christe
,
but
beleue
theim
not
,
was
taken
vp
into
heauen
,
and
sytteth
at
the
ryghte
hande
of
his
father
.
in
heauen
,
where
Christe
(
sayth
he
)
sitteth
at
the
ryght
hand
of
God
hys
father
.
sitteth
in
heauen
at
the
ryght
hand
of
the
throne
of
Gods
maiesty
.
sitteth
continuallye
at
the
right
hande
of
God
,
vntyll
his
enemyes
be
put
vnder
his
feete
as
a
foote
stoole
.
And
herevnto
consent
all
the
olde
doctoures
of
the
churche
.
Fyrste
Origen
vpon
Mathew
reasoneth
this
matter
,
Chap.
5.
howe
Christe
maye
be
called
a
stranger
,
Origen
.
in
Mat.
tracta
.
33.
And
thus
he
reasoneth
.
If
he
be
here
among
vs
stil
,
how
can
he
be
gone
hence
as
a
stranger
departed
into
an
other
contrey
?
Wherevnto
he
answereth
,
that
Christe
is
both
god
and
man
,
hauinge
in
him
two
natures
.
And
as
a
manne
he
is
not
with
vs
vnto
the
worldes
ende
,
nor
is
present
wyth
all
hys
faythfull
that
bee
gathered
togyther
in
his
name
,
but
his
diuyne
power
and
spirite
is
euer
with
vs
.
Paule
(
saith
he
)
was
absent
from
the
Corinthes
in
his
body
,
when
he
was
present
wyth
them
in
his
spirite
.
So
is
CHRIST
(
sayth
he
)
gone
hense
and
absent
in
his
humanitee
,
whiche
in
his
diuine
nature
is
euery
where
.
And
in
this
saying
(
saith
Origene
)
we
diuide
not
his
humanitee
,
(
for
S.
Iohn
writeth
,
that
no
spirite
that
diuideth
Iesus
can
be
of
God
)
but
we
reserue
to
both
his
natures
their
owne
properties
.
In
these
wordes
Origene
hath
plainly
declared
his
mind
,
that
Christes
body
is
not
both
present
here
with
vs
,
&
also
gone
hence
&
estranged
from
vs
.
For
that
were
to
make
two
natures
of
one
body
,
&
to
diuide
the
bodye
of
Iesus
,
for
as
much
as
one
nature
can
not
at
one
tyme
be
both
with
vs
,
and
absent
from
vs
.
And
therfore
saith
Origen
,
that
the
presence
must
be
vnderstand
of
his
diuinitie
,
and
the
absence
of
hys
humanitee
.
August
.
ad
Dardanum
epist.
57.
And
according
herevnto
S.
Augustin
writeth
thus
in
a
pistle
ad
Dardan
.
Doubt
not
but
Iesus
Christe
as
concernynge
the
nature
of
his
manhode
,
is
now
there
,
from
whence
he
shal
come
.
And
remember
well
and
beleue
the
profession
of
a
christian
man
that
he
rose
from
death
,
ascended
into
heauen
,
sitteth
at
the
righte
hande
of
his
father
,
and
from
that
place
,
and
none
other
,
shall
he
come
to
iudg
the
quick
and
the
dead
.
And
he
shal
come
(
as
the
angels
said
)
as
he
was
sene
go
into
heauen
,
that
is
to
say
,
in
the
same
forme
&
substaunce
,
vnto
the
which
he
gaue
immortalitee
,
but
changed
not
nature
.
After
this
forme
(
saith
he
,
meaning
his
mans
nature
,
)
we
may
not
thinke
that
he
is
euery
where
.
For
we
must
beware
,
that
we
do
not
so
stablyshe
hys
dyuinitee
,
that
wee
take
awaye
the
veritee
of
his
body
.
These
bee
S.
Augustines
plaine
wordes
.
And
by
and
by
after
he
addeth
these
woordes
.
The
Lorde
Iesus
as
god
,
is
euery
where
,
and
as
manne
is
in
heauen
.
And
fynally
he
concludeth
this
mattier
in
these
fewe
woordes
.
Doubt
not
but
our
lorde
Iesus
Christe
is
euerye
where
as
God
,
and
as
a
dwellar
he
is
in
man
that
is
the
temple
of
God
,
and
he
is
in
a
certayne
place
in
heauen
,
bicause
of
the
measure
of
a
very
bodye
.
And
againe
S.
Augustine
writeth
vpon
the
In
Ioan.
tracta
39.
gospell
of
S.
Iohn
.
Our
Sauiour
Iesus
Christ
(
saith
S.
Augustine
)
is
aboue
,
but
yet
his
truth
is
here
.
His
body
wherein
hee
arose
is
in
one
place
,
but
his
truthe
is
spred
euerye
where
.
And
in
an
other
place
of
the
same
boke
S
Augustine
expoundyng
these
woordes
of
Christe
(
You
shaleuer
haue
poore
menne
with
you
,
Tract
.
50.
but
me
you
shall
not
euer
haue
)
saithe
:
that
Christ
spake
these
woordes
of
the
presence
of
his
bodye
.
For
(
saith
he
)
as
concernyng
his
diuine
maiestie
,
as
concerninge
his
prouidence
,
as
concerninge
his
infallible
and
inuisible
grace
,
these
woordes
bee
fulfilled
whiche
hee
spake
:
I
am
with
you
vnto
the
worlds
end
.
But
as
concerning
the
flesh
which
he
toke
in
his
incarnation
,
as
concerninge
that
which
was
born
of
the
virgin
:
as
concerning
that
which
was
apprehended
by
the
Iewes
,
and
crucified
vppon
a
tree
,
and
taken
doune
frome
the
Crosse
,
lapped
in
linnen
clothes
,
and
buried
and
rose
againe
,
and
appered
after
his
resurrection
,
as
concernyng
that
fleshe
,
he
said
:
You
shall
not
euer
haue
me
wyth
you
.
Wherfore
seeyng
that
as
concernyng
his
fleshe
,
he
was
conuersaunt
with
his
disciples
fortye
daies
,
and
they
accompanyeng
,
seyng
and
folowyng
him
,
he
wente
vp
into
heauen
,
bothe
hee
is
not
here
,
(
for
hee
sytteth
at
the
ryght
hande
of
his
father
)
and
yet
hee
is
here
,
for
hee
departed
not
hense
,
as
concernynge
the
presence
of
hys
diuine
Maiestie
.
As
concernynge
the
presence
of
his
maiestie
,
wee
haue
Christe
euer
with
vs
,
but
as
concernyng
the
presence
of
hys
fleshe
,
he
said
truely
to
his
disciples
:
Ye
shall
not
euer
haue
me
with
you
.
For
as
concernynge
the
presence
of
hys
fleshe
,
the
churche
had
Christ
but
a
fewe
dayes
,
yet
nowe
it
holdeth
hym
faste
by
faythe
,
though
it
see
him
not
with
eyes
,
All
these
be
S.
Augustines
woordes
.
We
muste
beleue
and
confesse
,
that
the
sonne
of
god
(
as
concerning
his
diuinite
)
is
inuisible
,
without
a
body
,
immortal
,
and
incircumscriptible
,
but
as
concernyng
his
humanitee
,
we
ought
to
beleue
and
confesse
,
that
he
is
visible
,
hath
a
body
,
and
is
contayned
in
a
certayne
place
,
and
hath
truely
al
the
membres
of
a
man
.
Of
these
wordes
of
S.
Augustyne
,
it
is
most
cleare
,
that
the
profession
of
the
catholike
fayth
is
,
that
Christ
(
as
concernyng
his
bodely
substance
and
nature
of
man
)
is
in
heauen
,
and
not
present
here
with
vs
in
yearth
.
For
the
nature
and
property
of
a
very
body
,
is
to
be
in
one
place
,
and
to
occupie
one
place
,
and
not
to
be
euery
where
,
or
in
many
places
at
one
tyme
.
And
though
the
body
of
Christ
,
after
his
resurrection
and
ascencion
,
was
made
immortal
,
yet
the
nature
therof
was
not
chaunged
,
for
than
(
as
saint
Augustyn
sayth
)
it
were
no
very
body
.
And
further
sainct
Augustyne
sheweth
,
bothe
the
maner
&
fourme
,
howe
Christ
is
here
present
with
vs
in
yearth
,
&
howe
he
is
absent
,
saiyng
,
that
he
is
present
by
his
diuine
nature
and
Maiestie
,
by
this
prouidence
,
and
by
his
grace
,
but
by
his
humaine
nature
and
very
body
,
he
is
absent
from
this
worlde
,
and
present
in
heauen
.
Cyrillus
likewyse
vpon
the
Gospel
of
sainct
Ihon
agreeth
fully
with
S.
Augustyne
,
Cyrillus
in
Ihon.
lib.
6.
ca.
14.
saiyng
Although
Christ
toke
away
from
hence
the
presence
of
his
body
,
yet
in
the
Maiestie
of
his
Godhead
he
is
euer
here
,
as
he
promised
to
his
disciples
at
his
departyng
,
saiyng
:
I
am
with
you
euer
vnto
the
worldes
ende
.
And
in
another
place
of
the
same
boke
,
Libro
.
9.
cap.
21.
sainct
Cyril
sayth
thus
.
Christian
people
must
beleue
,
that
although
Christ
be
absent
from
vs
,
as
concernyng
his
body
,
yet
by
his
power
he
gouerneth
vs
and
all
thynges
,
and
is
present
with
all
them
that
loue
him
.
Therfore
he
sayd
,
Truly
truly
,
I
say
vnto
you
,
whersoeuer
there
be
two
or
thre
gathered
together
in
my
name
,
there
am
I
in
the
myddes
of
them
.
For
like
as
when
he
was
conuersant
here
in
yearth
as
a
man
,
yet
than
he
fylled
heauen
,
&
did
not
leaue
the
company
of
Angels
:
euen
so
beyng
nowe
in
heauen
with
his
fleshe
,
yet
he
fylleth
the
yerth
,
&
is
in
them
that
loue
him
.
And
it
is
to
be
marked
,
that
although
Christ
should
go
away
onely
as
concernyng
his
fleshe
,
(
for
he
is
euer
present
in
the
power
of
his
diuinite
)
yet
for
a
lytle
tyme
he
sayd
he
would
bee
with
his
disciples
:
These
be
the
wordes
of
sainct
Cyril
.
Ambrosius
in
Lucam
.
li.
10.
ca.
24
Sainct
Ambrose
also
sayth
,
that
we
must
not
seeke
Christ
vpon
yearth
,
nor
in
yearth
,
but
in
heauen
,
where
he
sytteth
at
the
right
hand
of
his
father
.
Gregorius
in
Ho.
paschatis
.
And
likewyse
sainct
Gregorye
wryteth
thus
.
Christe
(
sayth
he
)
is
not
here
by
the
presence
of
his
fleshe
,
and
yet
he
is
absent
no
where
by
the
presence
of
his
Maiestie
.
What
subtiltee
thynkest
thou
(
good
reader
)
can
the
Papistes
nowe
imagyne
,
to
defend
their
pernitious
errour
,
that
Christe
in
his
humayne
nature
is
bodely
here
in
yearth
,
in
the
consecrated
bread
and
wyne
:
seyng
that
all
the
olde
Churche
of
Christ
beleued
the
contrary
,
and
all
the
olde
authors
wrote
the
contrary
?
For
they
all
affirmed
&
beleued
,
that
Christe
,
beyng
but
one
parson
,
hath
neuerthelesse
in
him
twoo
natures
or
substaunces
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
nature
of
his
Godhead
,
and
the
nature
of
his
manhood
.
They
say
furthermore
,
that
Christe
is
both
goone
hence
from
vs
vnto
heauen
,
and
is
also
here
with
vs
in
yearth
,
but
not
in
his
humayne
nature
,
(
as
the
Papistes
would
haue
vs
to
beleue
)
but
the
olde
authors
saye
,
that
he
is
in
heauen
,
as
concernyng
his
manhoode
,
and
neuerlesse
both
here
and
there
,
and
euery
where
,
as
concernyng
his
Godhead
.
For
although
his
diuinitee
bee
suche
,
that
it
is
infinite
,
without
measure
,
compasse
or
place
,
so
that
as
concernyng
that
nature
,
he
is
circumscribed
with
no
place
,
but
is
euery
where
,
and
fylleth
all
the
worlde
:
yet
as
concernyng
his
humayne
nature
,
he
hath
measure
,
compasse
and
place
,
so
that
whan
he
was
here
vpon
yearth
,
he
was
not
at
the
same
tyme
in
heauen
:
and
nowe
that
he
is
ascended
into
heauen
,
as
concernyng
that
nature
,
he
hath
nowe
forsaken
the
yearth
,
and
is
onely
in
heauen
.
For
one
nature
that
is
circumscribed
,
Chap.
6.
compassed
and
measured
,
Sainct
Augustyne
speakyng
,
Ad
Dardanum
.
that
a
body
must
nedes
be
in
some
place
,
saith
:
that
if
it
be
not
within
the
compasse
of
a
place
,
it
is
no
where
.
And
if
it
be
no
where
,
than
is
it
not
.
Cyrillus
de
Trin.
lib.
2.
And
S.
Cyril
consideryng
the
proper
nature
of
a
very
body
,
sayd
:
that
if
the
nature
of
the
Godhead
were
a
body
,
it
must
needes
bee
in
a
place
,
and
haue
quantitee
,
greatnes
,
and
circumscription
.
If
than
the
nature
of
the
Godhead
muste
nedes
bee
circumscribed
,
if
it
were
a
body
,
muche
more
must
the
nature
of
Christes
manhoode
bee
circumscribed
and
contayned
within
the
compasse
of
a
certayne
place
.
Didymus
de
spiritu
sancto
.
lib.
1
cap.
1.
Didymus
also
in
his
booke
De
spiritu
sancto
,
(
whiche
sainct
Hierome
did
translate
)
proueth
,
that
the
holy
ghost
is
very
God
,
because
he
is
in
many
places
at
one
tyme
,
whiche
no
creature
can
be
.
For
(
sayth
he
)
all
creatures
visible
and
inuisible
be
circumscribed
and
inuironed
either
within
one
place
(
as
corporal
and
inuisible
thynges
be
)
or
within
the
proprietee
of
their
owne
substance
,
(
as
Angels
&
inuisible
creatures
bee
)
so
that
no
Angel
(
sayth
he
)
can
bee
at
one
tyme
in
two
places
.
And
forasmuche
as
the
holy
ghost
is
in
many
men
at
one
tyme
,
therefore
(
sayth
he
)
the
holy
ghost
must
nedes
be
God
.
Basilius
de
spiritu
sancto
.
ca.
22.
The
same
affirmeth
also
sainct
Basyle
,
That
the
Angel
whiche
was
with
Cornelius
,
was
not
at
the
same
tyme
with
Philippe
,
nor
the
Angell
whiche
spake
to
zachary
in
the
altare
,
was
not
the
same
tyme
in
his
proper
place
in
heauen
.
But
the
holy
ghost
was
at
one
tyme
in
Abacuk
,
and
in
Danyel
in
Babylon
,
and
with
Hieremy
in
prison
,
and
with
Ezechiell
in
Chober
,
wherby
he
proueth
,
that
the
holy
ghost
is
God
.
Wherfore
the
Papistes
(
whiche
saie
,
that
the
body
of
Christe
is
in
an
infinite
numbre
of
places
at
one
tyme
)
doo
make
his
body
to
bee
God
,
and
so
confounde
the
two
natures
of
Christ
,
attributyng
to
his
humaine
nature
,
that
thynge
whiche
belongeth
onely
to
his
diuinitee
,
whiche
is
a
moste
heynous
and
detestable
heresy
.
Agaynst
whome
writeth
Fulgentius
in
this
wyse
,
speakyng
of
the
distinction
and
diuersitee
of
the
two
natures
in
CHRISTE
.
One
and
the
selfe
same
Christe
(
saythe
he
)
of
mankynd
was
made
a
man
,
compassed
in
a
place
,
who
of
his
father
is
God
,
without
measure
or
place
.
One
and
the
selfe
same
person
,
as
concernyng
his
mans
substaunce
,
was
not
in
heauen
,
whan
he
was
in
yearth
,
and
forsooke
the
yearthe
,
when
he
ascended
into
heauen
:
but
as
concernynge
his
godly
substaunce
(
whiche
is
aboue
all
measure
)
he
neither
lefte
heauen
,
when
he
cam
from
heauen
,
nor
he
left
not
the
yearthe
,
whan
he
ascended
into
heauen
,
whiche
may
be
knowen
by
the
moste
certayn
worde
of
Christ
hym self
,
who
to
shewe
the
placyng
of
his
humanitee
,
sayd
to
his
disciples
:
I
ascende
vp
to
my
father
and
youre
father
,
to
my
God
and
your
God
.
Also
when
he
had
sayd
of
Lazarus
,
that
he
was
dead
,
he
added
,
saiyng
:
I
am
glad
for
your
sakes
,
that
you
maye
beleeue
.
For
I
was
not
there
:
but
to
shewe
the
vnmeasurable
compasse
of
his
diuinitee
,
he
sayd
to
his
disciples
:
Beholde
,
I
am
with
you
alwaies
vnto
the
worldes
ende
.
Nowe
how
dyd
he
go
vp
into
heauen
,
but
because
he
is
a
verye
man
conteined
within
a
place
?
Or
howe
is
he
present
with
faythfull
people
,
but
because
he
is
very
God
,
beynge
without
measure
?
Of
these
wordes
of
Fulgentius
it
is
declared
most
certainly
,
that
Christe
is
not
here
with
vs
in
earth
,
but
by
his
godhead
,
&
that
his
humanitee
is
in
heauen
onely
,
and
absent
from
vs
.
Yet
the
same
is
more
plainly
shewed
(
yf
more
playnely
can
bee
spoken
)
by
Uigilius
a
byshop
and
an
holy
martyr
.
CHRISTE
,
holdynge
opinion
,
that
he
was
onely
God
,
and
not
manne
.
Whose
erroure
Uigilius
confutynge
,
proueth
that
CHRISTE
hadde
in
hym
two
natures
ioyned
togyther
in
one
persone
,
the
nature
of
his
Godhead
,
and
the
nature
of
his
manhode
.
Thus
he
writeth
.
It
is
expedient
for
you
that
I
go
,
for
yf
I
go
not
,
the
comforter
shal
not
come
to
you
.
And
yet
surely
the
eternal
word
of
God
,
the
vertue
of
God
,
the
wysedome
of
God
,
was
euer
with
his
father
,
and
in
his
father
,
yea
euen
at
the
same
tyme
,
whan
he
was
with
vs
,
and
in
vs
:
For
whan
he
dyd
mercyfully
dwelle
in
this
worlde
,
he
left
not
his
habitation
in
heauen
,
for
he
is
euery
where
whole
with
his
father
,
equall
in
diuinitee
,
whome
no
place
can
conteyne
,
for
the
Sonne
fylleth
all
thynges
,
and
there
is
no
place
that
lacketh
the
presence
of
his
diuinitee
.
From
whence
than
and
whither
dyd
he
say
,
that
he
wolde
go
?
Or
howe
dyd
he
say
,
that
he
went
to
his
father
,
from
whome
doubtelesse
he
neuer
departed
?
But
that
to
go
to
his
father
,
and
frome
vs
,
was
to
take
from
this
worlde
that
nature
,
whiche
he
receaued
of
vs
.
Thou
seest
therfore
that
it
was
the
propretee
of
that
nature
to
bee
taken
away
and
go
from
vs
,
which
in
the
ende
of
the
worlde
shall
bee
rendered
agayne
to
vs
,
as
the
angels
wytnessed
,
concernyng
his
humanitee
went
from
vs
,
as
concernynge
his
diuinitee
,
he
sayde
vnto
vs
:
Thus
farre
haue
I
rehersed
the
woordes
of
Uigilius
.
and
by
and
by
he
concludeth
thus
.
He
is
with
vs
,
and
not
with
vs
,
For
those
whome
he
lefte
,
and
went
from
them
,
as
concernyng
his
humanitee
,
those
he
lefte
not
,
nor
forsoke
them
not
,
as
touchyng
his
diuinitee
.
For
as
touchyng
the
form
of
a
seruant
(
which
he
toke
away
from
vs
into
heuen
)
he
is
absent
from
vs
,
but
by
the
fourme
of
God
,
(
whyche
goeth
not
from
vs
)
he
is
present
with
vs
in
earth
:
and
neuerthelesse
both
present
and
absent
,
he
is
all
one
Christe
.
Hytherto
you
haue
herd
Uigilius
speke
,
that
Christ
as
concernynge
his
bodily
presence
,
and
the
nature
of
his
manhode
,
is
gone
from
vs
,
taken
from
vs
,
is
gone
vp
into
heuen
,
is
not
with
vs
,
hath
left
vs
,
hath
forsaken
vs
.
But
as
concernyng
the
other
nature
of
his
deitee
,
he
is
styl
with
vs
,
so
that
he
is
bothe
with
vs
,
and
not
with
vs
:
with
vs
in
the
nature
of
his
deitee
,
and
not
with
vs
in
the
nature
of
his
humanitee
.
Contra
Eutychē
lib.
4
And
yet
more
clerely
doth
the
same
Uigilius
declare
the
same
thyng
in
an
other
place
,
sayenge
:
If
the
worde
and
the
fleshe
were
bothe
of
one
nature
,
seyng
that
the
word
is
euery
where
,
why
is
not
the
fleshe
than
euery
where
?
For
whan
yt
was
in
earthe
,
than
verily
it
was
not
in
heauen
:
and
nowe
whan
it
is
in
heauen
,
it
is
not
surely
in
yearth
.
And
it
is
so
sure
,
that
it
is
not
in
earth
,
that
as
concernyng
it
,
we
looke
for
hym
to
come
from
heauen
,
whom
as
concernyng
his
eternall
woorde
,
we
beleue
to
bee
with
vs
in
earthe
:
Therfore
by
your
doctrine
(
saith
Uigilius
vnto
Eutyches
,
who
defended
,
that
the
diuinitee
and
humanite
in
Christe
was
but
one
nature
)
either
the
word
is
conteyned
in
a
place
with
his
fleshe
,
or
els
the
fleshe
is
euery
where
with
the
worde
.
For
one
nature
can
not
receaue
in
it selfe
two
diuers
and
contrary
thinges
.
But
these
two
thinges
be
dyuers
and
farre
vnlyke
,
that
is
to
say
,
to
be
conteyned
in
a
place
,
and
to
be
euery
where
.
Therfore
in
as
muche
as
the
word
is
euery
where
,
and
the
fleshe
is
not
euery
where
,
it
appeareth
playnly
,
that
one
Christ
hym self
hath
in
hym
two
natures
,
&
that
by
his
diuine
nature
,
he
is
euery
where
,
and
by
his
humain
nature
,
he
is
conteined
in
a
place
,
that
he
is
created
,
&
hath
no
beginnyng
,
that
he
is
subiect
to
death
,
&
can
not
die
.
Wherof
one
he
hath
by
the
nature
of
his
worde
(
wherby
he
is
God
)
&
the
other
he
hath
by
the
nature
of
his
fleshe
,
wher
by
the
same
God
is
man
also
.
Therfore
one
son
of
God
,
the
self
same
was
made
the
sonne
of
man
,
and
he
hath
a
begynnynge
by
the
nature
of
his
fleshe
,
and
no
begynnynge
by
the
nature
of
his
Godheade
.
He
is
created
by
the
nature
of
his
fleshe
,
and
not
created
by
the
nature
of
his
Godhead
.
He
is
comprehended
in
a
place
,
by
the
nature
of
his
fleshe
,
and
not
comprehended
in
a
place
by
the
nature
of
his
Godhead
.
He
is
inferiour
to
angels
in
the
nature
of
his
fleshe
,
and
is
equall
to
his
father
in
the
nature
of
his
Godhead
.
He
dyed
by
the
nature
of
his
fleshe
,
and
died
not
by
the
nature
of
his
Godhead
.
This
is
the
faithe
and
catholyke
confession
,
whyche
the
Apostles
taught
,
the
martyrs
dyd
corroborate
,
and
faithfull
people
kepe
vnto
this
daie
.
All
these
be
the
saiynges
of
Uigilius
,
who
(
accordyng
to
al
the
other
authors
before
rehersed
,
and
to
the
faith
and
catholike
confession
of
the
apostles
,
martyrs
,
and
all
faithfull
people
vnto
his
tyme
)
saith
,
that
as
concernyng
Christes
humanitee
,
whan
he
was
here
on
erthe
,
he
was
not
in
heauen
:
and
nowe
whan
he
is
in
heauen
,
he
he
is
not
in
earthe
.
For
one
nature
can
not
bee
both
conteyned
in
a
place
in
heauen
,
and
be
also
here
in
earthe
at
one
tyme
.
And
for
asmuche
as
Christe
is
here
with
vs
in
earth
,
and
also
is
conteined
in
a
place
in
heauen
,
he
proueth
thereby
,
that
Christ
hath
two
natures
in
hym
,
the
nature
of
a
man
(
wherby
he
is
gon
from
vs
,
and
ascended
into
heauen
)
and
the
nature
of
his
godhed
,
wherby
he
is
here
with
vs
in
erth
.
So
that
it
is
not
one
nature
that
is
here
with
vs
,
&
that
is
gone
from
vs
:
that
is
ascended
into
heauen
,
and
ther
conteined
,
&
that
is
permanent
here
with
vs
in
erth
Wherfore
the
Papistes
(
whiche
nowe
of
late
yeares
haue
made
a
newe
faythe
)
that
Christes
naturall
bodye
is
really
and
naturally
present
bothe
with
vs
here
in
earthe
,
and
sytteth
at
the
ryght
hande
of
his
father
in
heauen
,
do
erre
in
two
very
horrible
heresies
.
The
one
,
that
thei
confound
his
two
natures
,
his
godhead
,
&
his
manhod
,
attributynge
vnto
his
humanitee
,
that
thyng
,
which
appertaineth
only
to
his
diuinitee
,
that
is
to
say
,
to
be
in
heuen
and
erth
,
and
in
many
places
at
one
tyme
.
The
other
is
,
that
they
deuide
and
separate
his
humain
nature
,
or
his
body
,
makyng
of
one
body
of
Christ
.
ii
.
bodyes
,
and
ii
.
natures
,
one
whiche
is
in
heauen
,
visible
and
palpable
,
hauing
al
membres
and
proportions
of
a
most
perfect
natural
man
,
&
an
other
which
they
say
is
in
erth
here
with
vs
,
in
euery
bread
and
wyne
that
is
consecrated
,
hauing
no
distinction
,
forme
nor
proporcion
of
membres
.
whiche
contrarieties
&
diuersities
(
as
this
holy
martyr
Uigilius
saith
)
can
not
be
together
in
one
nature
.
But
now
seyng
that
it
is
so
euident
a
matter
,
Chap.
7.
bothe
by
the
expresse
wordes
of
scripture
,
&
also
by
all
th
olde
authors
of
the
same
,
Christ
toke
bread
(
say
they
)
blessed
,
and
brake
it
,
and
gaue
it
to
his
disciples
,
saiyng
:
This
is
my
body
.
These
woordes
they
euer
styll
repeate
and
beate
vpon
,
that
Christe
sayd
,
This
is
my
body
.
And
this
saiyng
they
make
their
shote
anker
,
to
proue
therby
,
aswell
the
real
and
nataral
presence
of
Christes
body
in
the
sacrament
,
as
their
imagined
Transubstantiation
.
For
these
woordes
of
Christ
(
say
they
)
be
most
playne
and
most
true
.
Than
forasmuch
as
he
sayd
,
This
is
my
body
.
it
must
nedes
be
true
,
that
that
thyng
whiche
the
priest
holdeth
in
his
handes
,
is
Christes
body
.
And
if
it
be
Christes
body
,
than
can
it
not
be
bread
,
whereof
they
gather
by
their
reasonyng
,
that
there
is
Christes
body
really
present
,
and
no
bread
.
Truth
it
is
in
deede
,
that
the
woordes
bee
as
playne
as
may
be
spoken
:
And
althoughe
the
true
sense
and
vnderstandyng
of
these
wordes
,
Chap.
8.
be
sufficiently
declared
before
,
Fyrst
Ireneus
,
Irenaeus
contra
Valent.
lib.
4.
ca.
32
writyng
agaynst
the
Ualentinians
in
his
fourthe
boke
saithe
,
that
Christe
confessed
bread
,
whiche
is
a
creature
,
to
be
his
body
,
and
the
cup
to
be
his
bloud
.
And
in
the
same
boke
he
writeth
thus
also
.
Cap.
34.
The
bread
wherein
the
thankes
be
geuen
,
is
the
body
of
the
Lorde
.
And
yet
agayne
in
the
same
booke
he
saithe
,
Cap.
57.
that
Christe
takyng
bread
,
of
the
same
sorte
that
our
bread
is
of
,
confessed
that
it
was
his
body
:
And
that
that
thing
whiche
was
tempered
in
the
chalice
,
was
his
bloudde
.
And
in
the
fift
boke
he
writeth
further
,
Lib.
5.
that
of
the
chalice
,
(
which
is
his
bloude
)
a
man
is
norished
and
doeth
growe
by
the
bread
,
which
is
his
body
.
These
wordes
of
Ireneus
be
most
plaine
,
that
Christe
takynge
very
materiall
breade
,
a
creature
of
God
,
and
of
suche
sort
as
other
breade
is
,
whiche
wedd
vse
,
called
that
his
body
,
when
he
sayde
,
This
is
my
bodye
.
And
the
wyne
also
whiche
doothe
feede
and
noryshe
vs
,
he
called
his
bloudde
.
Tertulian
likewise
in
his
booke
written
agaynst
the
Iewes
,
Christe
called
bread
his
body
.
And
in
his
booke
against
Martion
he
oftentymes
repeteth
the
selfe
same
wordes
.
Cyprianus
ad
Magnū
2
.
1.
epi.
6.
And
S.
Cyprian
in
the
firste
boke
of
his
epistles
,
saith
the
same
thyng
,
that
Christ
called
such
breade
,
as
is
made
of
manny
cornes
ioyned
togither
,
his
body
:
and
suche
wyne
he
named
his
bloudde
,
as
is
pressed
out
of
many
grapes
,
and
made
into
wyne
.
Lib.
2.
Epist.
3.
And
in
his
second
boke
he
saith
these
wordes
:
water
is
not
the
bloud
of
Christe
,
but
wyne
.
And
agayn
in
the
same
Epistle
he
sayeth
,
that
it
was
wyne
whiche
Christe
called
his
bloude
.
and
that
if
wyne
bee
not
in
the
chalice
,
than
we
drynke
not
of
the
fruit
of
the
vyne
.
And
in
the
same
epistle
he
sayth
,
that
meale
alone
,
or
water
alone
,
is
not
the
body
of
Christe
,
excepte
they
be
both
ioyned
togither
to
make
thereof
bread
.
Epiphanius
also
saith
,
Epiphan.
in
Ancorato
.
that
Christ
speakyng
of
a
lofe
,
whiche
is
round
in
fashion
,
and
can
not
see
,
here
,
nor
feele
,
sayde
of
it
,
This
is
my
body
.
And
Saynt
Hierome
,
Ad
Hedibiam
,
saieth
these
wordes
.
Let
vs
mark
,
that
the
bread
which
the
Lord
brake
,
and
gaue
to
his
disciples
,
was
the
body
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
as
he
sayd
vnto
them
:
Take
and
eate
,
this
is
my
body
.
And
S.
Augustine
also
saith
,
Augusti
.
de
trinita
li.
3.
cap.
4.
that
althoughe
we
may
sette
foorthe
Christe
by
mouthe
,
by
wrytynge
,
and
by
the
sacramente
of
his
bodye
and
bloud
,
yet
wee
call
neyther
our
tounge
nor
wordes
,
nor
ynke
,
letters
,
nor
paper
,
the
body
and
bloudde
of
Christe
,
but
that
wee
calle
the
bodye
and
bloudde
of
Christe
,
whiche
is
taken
of
the
fruite
of
the
yearth
,
and
consecrated
by
mysticall
prayer
.
And
also
he
sayth
,
De
verbis
a
p●stoli
,
sermo
.
2.
Cyrillus
in
Ioannem
li.
4.
ca.
14.
Theodoretus
dialogo
.
1.
Iesus
called
meate
,
his
body
,
and
drynke
his
bloudde
.
More
ouer
Cyrill
vpon
Sayncte
Iohn
saith
,
that
Christe
gaue
to
his
disciples
peces
of
bread
,
saiyng
:
Take
,
eate
,
this
is
my
bodye
.
Likewise
Theodoretus
saith
,
Whan
Christe
gaue
the
holy
mysteries
,
he
called
bread
his
body
,
and
the
cuppe
myxt
with
wyne
and
water
,
he
called
his
bloude
.
By
all
these
forsaid
authors
,
and
places
,
with
manny
mo
,
it
is
playnely
proued
,
that
whan
our
Sauiour
Christe
gaue
breadde
vnto
his
Disciples
:
sayinge
:
Take
,
and
eate
,
this
is
my
body
,
And
lykewise
when
he
gaue
them
the
cuppe
,
sayinge
:
Diuide
this
amonge
you
,
and
drynke
you
all
of
this
,
for
this
is
my
bludde
:
he
called
than
the
very
materiall
bread
his
bodye
,
and
the
very
wyne
his
bloudde
.
That
bread
(
I
say
)
that
is
one
of
the
creatures
here
in
earth
amonge
vs
,
and
that
groweth
out
of
the
earth
,
and
is
made
of
many
graynes
of
corne
,
beaten
into
flower
,
and
mixed
with
water
,
and
so
baken
&
made
into
bread
,
of
such
sort
as
other
our
bred
is
,
that
hath
neither
sence
nor
reason
,
&
finally
that
fedeth
and
nourisheth
our
bodies
,
suche
bread
Christe
called
his
bodye
,
whan
he
sayd
,
This
is
my
body
.
And
such
wine
as
is
made
of
grapes
pressed
togyther
,
and
ther
of
is
made
drynke
,
whiche
norisheth
the
body
,
suche
wyne
he
called
his
bloud
.
This
is
the
true
doctrine
,
confirmed
as
well
by
holy
scripture
,
as
by
all
auncient
authors
of
Christes
churche
,
bothe
Grekes
and
Latines
,
that
is
to
say
,
that
when
our
Sauiour
Christe
gaue
bread
and
wyne
to
his
disciples
,
and
spake
these
woordes
,
This
is
my
bodye
,
This
is
my
bloude
.
it
was
very
bread
and
wyne
whiche
he
called
his
body
and
bloud
.
Now
let
the
Papistes
shewe
some
authoritee
for
their
opinion
,
eyther
of
scripture
,
or
of
some
auncient
author
.
And
let
theim
not
constrayne
all
men
to
folowe
their
fonde
deuises
,
onely
bycause
they
sai
,
It
is
so
,
without
any
other
ground
or
authoritee
,
but
their
owne
bare
wordes
.
For
in
suche
wyse
credite
is
to
bee
geuen
to
Goddes
worde
onely
,
and
not
to
the
worde
of
any
man
.
As
many
of
theym
as
I
haue
redde
(
the
byshop
of
Wynchester
only
excepted
)
doo
say
,
that
Christe
called
not
the
bread
his
body
,
nor
wyne
his
bloud
,
whan
he
said
,
This
is
my
body
,
This
is
my
bloude
,
and
yet
in
expounding
these
wordēs
,
thei
vary
among
them selfes
:
which
is
a
token
that
thei
be
vncertain
of
their
owne
doctrine
.
For
some
of
them
saye
,
that
by
this
pronoune
demonstratiue
(
this
)
Christ
vnderstode
not
the
bread
nor
wyne
,
but
his
body
and
bloud
.
And
other
som
say
,
that
by
the
pronoune
(
this
)
he
ment
nether
the
bread
nor
wyne
,
nor
his
body
nor
bloud
,
but
that
he
ment
a
particular
thyng
vncertayne
,
whiche
they
cal
Indiuiduum
vagum
,
or
Indiuiduum
in
genere
,
I
trow
some
Mathematicall
quiditee
,
they
can
not
tell
what
.
But
let
all
these
Papistes
together
shew
any
one
authoritee
,
either
of
scripture
,
or
of
auncient
author
,
either
Greke
or
Latin
,
that
saith
as
thei
say
,
that
Christ
called
not
breade
and
wyne
his
body
and
bloud
,
but
Indiuiduum
vagum
,
and
for
my
part
I
shall
geue
theim
place
,
and
confesse
that
they
say
trewe
.
And
if
they
can
shewe
nothynge
for
theym
of
antiquitee
,
but
onely
their
owne
bare
wordes
,
than
it
is
reason
that
thei
geue
place
to
the
truthe
,
confirmed
by
so
many
authoritees
,
both
of
scripture
and
of
auncient
writers
,
which
is
,
that
Christ
called
very
material
bread
his
body
,
and
very
wyne
made
of
grapes
,
his
bloud
.
Chap.
9.
Nowe
this
beyng
fully
proued
,
it
must
nedes
folow
consequently
,
that
this
maner
of
speking
is
a
figuratiue
speeche
.
Likewise
in
playne
speche
it
is
not
true
,
that
we
eate
Christes
body
,
and
drynke
his
bloude
.
For
eatynge
and
drynkynge
in
their
proper
and
vsuall
signification
,
is
with
the
tong
,
teeth
,
and
lyppes
,
to
swalow
,
diuide
and
chawe
in
peeces
:
whiche
thyng
to
do
to
the
fleshe
and
bloudde
of
Christ
,
is
horrible
to
be
heard
of
any
christian
.
Fyrst
when
our
sauiour
Christ
in
the
sixte
of
Iohn
sayd
,
When
Christ
had
spoken
these
woordes
,
with
many
mo
of
the
eatyng
of
his
fleshe
and
drinkyng
of
his
bloud
,
both
the
Iewes
&
mani
also
of
his
disciples
wer
offended
with
his
wordes
,
and
sayd
:
This
is
an
hard
saiyng
.
For
howe
can
he
geue
vs
his
fleshe
to
be
eaten
?
Christ
perceiuing
their
murmuring
heartes
(
because
they
knewe
none
other
eatyng
of
his
fleshe
,
but
by
chawyng
and
swalowyng
)
to
declare
that
they
should
not
eate
his
body
after
that
sorte
,
nor
that
he
ment
of
any
suche
carnall
eatyng
,
he
sayd
thus
vnto
theim
.
What
if
you
see
the
sonne
of
man
ascende
vp
where
he
was
before
?
It
is
the
spirite
that
geueth
life
,
the
fleshe
auayleth
nothyng
.
The
wordes
whiche
I
spake
vnto
you
,
be
spirit
and
life
.
These
wordes
our
sauior
Christ
spake
,
to
lift
vp
their
myndes
from
yearth
to
heauen
,
&
from
carnal
to
spiritual
eatyng
,
that
thei
should
not
phantasy
,
that
they
should
with
their
trethe
eate
him
presently
here
in
yearth
,
for
his
flesh
so
eaten
(
sayth
he
)
should
nothyng
profite
them
.
And
yet
so
thei
should
not
eate
him
,
for
he
would
take
his
body
away
from
them
,
and
ascend
with
it
into
heuen
.
And
there
by
fayth
,
&
not
with
teeth
,
they
should
spiritually
eate
him
sittyng
at
the
right
hand
of
his
father
.
And
therfore
(
sayth
he
)
The
wordes
whiche
I
do
speake
,
be
spirite
and
life
.
that
is
to
say
,
are
not
to
be
vnderstand
,
that
we
shall
eate
Christ
with
our
teethe
grossely
and
carnally
,
but
that
we
shall
spiritually
&
gostly
with
our
fayth
eate
him
,
beyng
carnally
absent
from
vs
in
heauen
.
And
in
suche
wyse
,
as
Abraham
and
other
holy
fathers
did
eate
him
,
many
yeres
before
he
was
incarnated
and
borne
.
that
they
did
eate
the
same
spiritual
meate
that
wee
do
,
and
dranke
the
same
spirituall
drynke
,
that
is
to
saye
,
Christe
.
For
they
spiritually
by
their
fayth
were
fed
and
norished
with
Christes
body
and
bloud
,
and
had
eternal
life
by
him
,
before
he
was
borne
,
as
we
haue
nowe
,
that
come
after
his
ascencion
.
Thus
haue
you
hearde
,
the
declaracion
of
Christe
him selfe
and
of
sainct
Paule
,
that
the
eatyng
and
drinkyng
of
Christes
fleshe
&
bloud
,
Origen
.
in
Leuit.
ho.
7
And
Origene
declaryng
the
sayd
eatyng
of
Christes
flesh
and
drinkyng
of
his
bloud
,
not
to
be
vnderstand
as
the
wordes
do
sound
,
but
figuratiuely
,
wryteth
thus
vpon
these
woordes
of
Christ
:
Except
you
eate
my
fleshe
and
drinke
my
bludde
,
you
shall
not
haue
lyfe
in
you
.
Considre
(
saith
Origen
)
that
these
thinges
written
in
gods
bokes
,
are
figures
,
and
therefore
examine
and
vnderstande
them
as
spirituall
,
and
not
as
carnall
men
.
For
if
you
vnderstand
them
as
carnall
menne
,
they
hurte
you
and
feede
you
not
.
For
euen
in
the
gospels
is
there
founde
letter
that
kylleth
.
And
not
only
in
the
olde
testamente
,
but
also
in
the
newe
is
there
found
lettre
,
that
slayeth
him
,
that
doth
not
spiritually
vnderstande
that
whiche
is
spoken
.
For
if
thou
folowe
the
lettre
or
woordes
of
this
that
Christe
saide
:
Excepte
you
eate
my
fleshe
and
drinke
my
bludde
.
this
lettre
kylleth
.
Who
canne
more
plainlye
expresse
in
any
wordes
,
that
the
eatinge
and
drinkinge
of
Christes
fleshe
and
blood
,
are
not
to
be
taken
in
common
significacion
,
as
the
wordes
pretend
and
sound
,
than
Origene
doth
in
this
place
?
And
S.
Iohn
Chrysostom
affirmeth
the
same
saying
,
Chrisostom
.
in
Ioannem
Hom.
26.
that
if
any
man
vnderstand
the
woordes
of
Christ
carnally
,
he
shall
surely
profite
nothyng
therby
.
For
what
meane
these
woordes
,
The
fleshe
auaileth
nothinge
?
He
ment
not
of
his
fleshe
(
god
forbid
)
but
he
ment
of
them
that
fleshely
and
carnally
vnderstode
those
thynges
that
Christe
spake
.
But
what
is
carnall
vnderstanding
?
To
vnderstand
the
woordes
simply
as
they
be
spoken
,
and
nothinge
els
.
For
we
ought
not
so
to
vnderstande
the
thinges
which
we
se
,
but
all
misteries
must
be
considered
with
inwarde
eies
,
and
that
is
spirituallye
to
vnderstande
theim
.
In
these
wordes
S.
Iohn
Chrysostome
sheweth
plainli
that
the
words
of
Christ
,
concerning
the
eating
of
his
flesh
,
and
drinking
of
his
blud
,
are
not
to
be
vnderstande
simply
,
as
they
be
spoken
,
but
spiritually
and
figuratiuely
.
Augustinus
de
doctrina
christ
lib
3.
And
yet
most
plainly
of
all
other
,
S.
Augustine
doth
declare
this
mater
in
his
boke
De
doctrina
christiana
,
in
which
boke
he
instructeth
christian
people
,
how
they
should
vnderstande
those
places
of
scripture
,
which
seem
hard
and
obscure
.
Seldom
(
saith
he
)
is
ani
difficulty
in
proper
wordes
,
but
either
the
circumstance
of
the
place
,
or
the
conferring
of
diuers
translations
,
or
els
the
original
tonge
wherin
it
was
written
,
wyl
make
the
sence
plaine
.
But
in
woorde
that
be
altered
from
their
propre
signification
,
there
is
great
diligence
and
heed
to
be
taken
.
And
specially
we
must
beware
,
that
we
take
not
literally
any
thing
that
is
spoken
figuratiuely
.
Nor
contrary
wise
we
must
not
take
for
a
figure
any
thing
,
that
is
spoken
properly
Therfore
muste
be
declared
(
saith
S.
Augustine
)
the
manner
how
to
discerne
a
propre
speache
from
a
figuratiue
.
wherin
(
saith
he
)
must
be
obserued
this
rule
,
that
if
the
thing
which
is
spoken
,
be
to
the
furtherance
of
charite
,
than
it
is
a
propre
speache
,
&
no
figure
.
So
that
if
it
be
a
commaundement
,
that
forbiddeth
any
euel
or
wicked
act
,
or
commaundeth
any
good
or
beneficiall
thing
,
than
it
is
no
figure
.
But
if
it
commaund
any
yll
or
wicked
thinge
or
forbid
any
thing
that
is
good
and
beneficiall
,
than
is
it
a
figuratiue
speache
.
Nowe
this
saying
of
Christ
(
Excepte
you
eate
the
fleshe
of
the
sonne
of
manne
and
drinke
his
bloode
,
commaundynge
vs
to
be
partakers
of
Christes
passion
,
keeping
in
our
mindes
to
our
great
comfort
and
profite
,
that
his
flesh
was
crucified
and
wounded
for
vs
.
De
catech
rudib
.
ca.
Contra
aduers
.
legis
&
Prophet
cap.
9.
This
is
briefly
the
sentence
of
S.
Augustine
in
his
booke
De
doctrina
christiana
.
And
the
lyke
he
writeth
in
his
booke
De
catechisandis
rudibus
,
and
in
his
booke
Contra
aduersarium
legis
&
prophetarum
,
and
in
diuers
other
places
,
which
for
tediousnes
I
passe
ouer
.
For
if
I
shuld
reherse
al
the
authorities
of
S.
Augustin
and
other
,
which
make
mention
of
this
matter
,
it
woulde
weary
the
reader
to
muche
.
Wherefore
to
all
them
that
by
any
reasonable
meanes
wyll
bee
satysfyed
,
these
thinges
before
rehearsed
are
suffyciente
,
to
proue
that
the
eatynge
of
Christes
fleshe
and
drinkynge
of
hys
blood
ys
not
to
be
vnderstand
symplye
and
plainely
(
as
the
woordes
do
properly
sygnyfye
)
that
we
do
eat
and
drink
hym
with
our
mouths
,
but
it
is
a
figuratiue
speach
spiritually
to
be
vnderstand
,
that
we
must
depely
print
and
frutefully
beleue
in
our
hartes
,
that
hys
flesh
was
crucifyed
,
and
his
blud
shed
for
our
redemption
.
And
this
our
beliefe
in
him
,
is
to
eate
hys
fleshe
and
to
drynk
hys
blud
,
although
they
be
not
present
here
with
vs
,
but
be
ascended
into
heauen
.
As
once
forefathers
before
Christs
time
,
did
likewise
eat
hys
fleshe
and
drunke
his
bludde
,
which
was
so
farre
from
them
,
that
he
was
not
yet
then
borne
.
Chap.
11.
The
same
authors
did
say
also
,
that
when
Christ
called
the
breade
his
body
,
and
the
wine
his
blud
,
it
was
no
propre
speache
that
he
than
vsed
,
Christ
did
not
reproue
bread
wherby
he
did
represent
hys
very
body
.
And
in
the
same
booke
he
saith
,
that
Iesus
taking
bread
,
&
distributing
it
amonges
his
disciples
,
made
it
his
body
,
saying
,
This
is
my
body
.
that
is
to
saye
,
(
saith
Tertulian
)
a
figure
of
my
body
.
And
therefore
saithe
Tertuliane
,
that
Christe
called
breade
his
body
.
and
wyne
his
bloode
,
bycause
that
in
the
olde
Testament
breade
and
wyne
were
figures
of
his
body
and
bloode
.
Cyprianus
libr.
2
,
Epist.
3
And
sainct
Cyprian
the
holy
martyr
saythe
of
this
matter
,
that
Christes
bloode
is
snewed
in
the
wyne
,
and
the
people
in
the
water
,
that
is
mixte
with
the
wyne
:
so
that
the
mixture
of
the
water
to
the
wyne
,
signifieth
the
spirituall
commixtion
and
ioynynge
of
vs
vnto
Christe
.
By
which
similitude
Cyprian
ment
not
,
that
the
bloud
of
Christ
is
vyne
,
or
the
people
water
,
but
as
the
water
doth
signifie
&
represent
the
people
,
so
doth
the
wyne
signify
and
represent
Christes
bloud
:
and
the
vnityng
of
the
water
and
wyne
together
,
signifyeth
the
vnityng
of
christen
people
vnto
Christ
him selfe
.
And
thesame
sainct
Cyprian
in
another
place
writyng
hereof
sayth
,
De
vnctiōe
Chrismatis
that
Christ
in
his
last
supper
,
gaue
to
his
Apostles
with
his
own
handes
bread
and
wyne
,
whiche
he
called
his
fleshe
and
bloud
,
but
in
the
crosse
he
gaue
his
very
body
,
to
be
wounded
with
the
handes
of
the
souldiours
,
that
the
Apostles
might
declare
to
the
worlde
,
howe
and
in
what
maner
,
bread
and
wyne
may
be
the
flesh
and
bloud
of
Christ
.
And
the
maner
,
he
straight
wayes
declareth
thus
,
That
those
thinges
whiche
do
signifye
,
&
those
thinges
whiche
be
signifyed
by
them
,
may
be
both
called
by
one
name
.
Here
it
is
certayne
by
sainct
Cyprians
mynd
,
wherfore
&
in
what
wise
bread
is
called
Christes
flesh
,
and
wyne
his
bloud
,
that
is
to
say
,
because
that
euery
thyng
that
representeth
&
signifyeth
another
thyng
,
may
be
called
by
the
name
of
the
thyng
whiche
it
signifyeth
.
And
therfore
sainct
Ihon
Chrysostome
sayth
,
Chrysosto
.
in
Psal.
22.
that
Christ
ordayned
the
table
of
his
holy
supper
for
this
purpose
,
that
in
that
sacrament
he
should
dayly
shewe
vnto
vs
bread
and
wyne
,
for
a
similitude
of
his
body
and
bloud
.
Sainct
Hierome
likewyse
sayth
vpon
the
gospel
of
Mathew
,
Hieronym
in
Math.
26.
that
Christ
tooke
bread
,
whiche
comforteth
mans
heart
,
that
he
might
represent
therby
his
very
body
and
bloud
.
Ambros.
de
hijs
qui
mysterijs
initiantur
.
cap.
vlt.
Also
S.
Ambrose
(
if
the
booke
bee
his
that
is
intiteled
De
hijs
que
misterijs
initiantur
)
sayth
,
that
before
the
consecration
another
kynde
is
named
,
but
after
the
consecracion
the
body
of
Christ
is
signified
.
Christ
sayd
his
bloud
,
before
the
consecracion
it
is
called
another
thyng
,
but
after
the
consecracion
is
signified
the
bloud
of
Christ
.
De
sacramentis
li.
6.
ca.
4
And
in
his
boke
De
sacramentis
(
if
that
be
also
his
)
he
writeth
thus
.
Thou
doest
receiue
the
sacrament
for
a
similitude
of
the
fleshe
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
but
thou
doest
obtain
the
grace
&
vertue
of
his
true
nature
.
And
receiuyng
the
bread
,
in
that
foode
thou
arte
partaker
of
his
godly
substance
.
And
in
the
same
boke
he
sayth
.
Lib.
4.
cap.
4.
As
thou
hast
in
baptisme
receiued
the
similitude
of
deth
,
so
like
wise
doest
thou
in
this
sacrament
drinke
the
similitude
of
Christes
precious
bloud
.
And
againe
he
sayth
in
the
sayd
boke
.
Lib.
4.
cap.
5.
The
priest
sayth
:
Make
vnto
vs
this
oblacion
to
be
acceptable
,
whiche
is
the
figure
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
our
lord
Iesu
Christ
.
And
vpon
the
Epistle
of
sainct
Paule
to
the
Corinthians
,
that
in
eatyng
and
drinkyng
the
bread
and
wyne
,
we
do
signifie
the
flesh
and
bloud
,
whiche
were
offered
for
vs
.
And
the
old
testament
(
he
sayth
)
was
instituted
in
bloud
,
because
that
bloud
was
a
wytnes
of
Gods
benefite
,
in
significacion
and
figure
wherof
,
wee
take
the
mistical
cuppe
of
his
bloud
,
to
the
tuition
of
our
body
and
soule
.
Of
these
places
of
sainct
Chrysostome
,
sainct
Hierom
and
sainct
Ambrose
,
it
is
cleare
,
that
in
the
sacramentall
bread
and
wyne
,
is
not
really
and
corporally
the
very
natural
substance
of
the
flesh
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
but
that
the
bread
and
wyne
be
similitudes
,
And
yet
S.
Augustyne
sheweth
this
matter
more
clearely
and
fully
,
August
.
ad
Bonifatium
Episto
.
23.
than
any
of
the
rest
,
specially
in
an
Epistle
which
he
wrote
ad
Bonifatium
,
where
he
sayth
,
that
a
day
or
two
before
good
fryday
,
we
vse
in
common
speeche
to
say
thus
,
To
morowe
or
this
day
.ii.
dayes
,
Christ
suffered
his
passion
.
where
in
very
dede
he
neuer
suffered
his
passion
but
ones
,
and
that
was
many
yeres
passed
.
Lykewise
vpon
Easter
day
we
say
,
This
day
Christ
rose
from
death
.
where
in
very
deede
it
is
many
hundred
yeres
sithens
he
rose
from
death
Why
than
do
not
menne
reproue
vs
as
lyers
,
when
we
speake
in
this
sort
?
But
because
we
cal
these
dayes
so
,
by
a
similitude
of
those
dayes
,
wherein
these
thynges
were
done
in
deede
.
And
so
it
is
called
that
day
,
whiche
is
not
that
day
in
dede
,
but
by
the
course
of
the
yere
is
a
like
day
.
And
suche
thinges
be
sayd
to
bee
done
that
day
,
for
the
solemne
celebracion
of
the
sacrament
,
which
thinges
in
dede
were
not
done
that
day
,
but
long
before
.
Was
Christ
offereed
any
more
but
ones
?
And
he
offered
him selfe
,
&
yet
in
a
sacrament
or
representacion
,
not
onely
euery
solemne
feast
of
Easter
,
but
euery
day
he
is
offered
to
the
people
,
so
that
he
doth
not
lye
,
that
saith
,
he
is
euery
day
offered
.
For
if
sacramentes
had
not
some
similitude
or
likenes
of
those
thynges
,
whereof
they
be
sacramentes
,
they
could
in
no
wyse
bee
sacramentes
.
And
for
their
similitude
and
lykenes
,
commonly
they
haue
the
name
of
the
thynges
,
whereof
they
bee
sacramentes
.
Therfore
as
after
a
certayne
maner
of
speeche
,
the
sacrament
of
Christes
body
,
is
Christes
body
:
the
sacrament
of
Christes
bloud
,
is
Christes
bloud
:
so
lykewise
the
sacrament
of
fayth
,
is
fayth
.
And
to
beleue
is
nothyng
els
,
but
to
haue
fayth
:
And
therfore
when
we
answere
for
yong
children
in
their
baptisme
,
that
thei
beleue
,
whiche
haue
not
yet
the
mynd
to
beleue
,
we
answere
that
they
haue
fayth
,
because
they
haue
the
sacrament
of
fayth
.
And
we
say
also
that
they
turne
vnto
God
,
because
of
the
sacrament
of
the
conuersion
vnto
God
,
for
that
answer
partaineth
to
the
celebracion
of
the
sacrament
.
And
likewyse
speaketh
the
Apostle
of
Baptisme
,
saiyng
:
that
by
Baptisme
wee
bee
buryed
with
him
into
death
:
he
sayth
not
,
that
wee
signifie
burial
,
but
he
sayth
plainly
,
that
we
be
buried
.
So
that
the
sacrament
of
so
great
a
thing
,
is
not
called
but
by
the
name
of
the
thyng
it selfe
.
Hytherto
I
haue
rehersed
the
answere
of
S.
Augustine
vnto
Boniface
a
learned
Byshoppe
,
who
asked
of
him
,
howe
the
parentes
&
frendes
coulde
answere
for
a
yong
babe
in
baptisme
,
and
saye
in
his
person
,
that
he
beleueth
and
conuerteth
vnto
God
,
when
the
childe
can
neither
doo
nor
thinke
any
suche
thinge
.
Whervnto
the
answere
of
S.
Augustine
is
this
that
for
as
muche
as
baptisme
is
the
sacramente
of
the
profession
of
our
faith
,
and
of
our
conuersion
vnto
God
,
it
becometh
vs
so
to
answere
for
yong
children
comming
thervnto
,
as
to
that
sacrament
appertaineth
,
although
the
children
in
deede
haue
no
knowledge
of
suche
thinges
.
And
yet
in
our
said
answeres
we
ought
not
to
be
reprehended
as
vain
men
or
liers
,
forasmuche
as
in
common
speche
we
vse
daily
to
cal
sacraments
and
figures
by
the
names
of
the
things
that
be
signified
by
them
,
although
thei
be
not
the
same
thing
in
dede
.
As
euery
Good
fryday
(
as
often
as
it
returneth
from
yere
to
yere
)
we
cal
it
the
dai
of
Christes
passion
:
and
euery
Easter
daye
,
we
call
the
day
of
his
resurrection
:
and
euery
day
in
the
yeare
,
we
saye
that
Christe
is
offered
:
and
the
sacrament
of
his
body
,
we
call
it
his
body
:
and
the
sacrament
of
his
blud
,
we
cal
it
his
blud
:
and
our
baptism
S.
Paul
calleth
our
burial
with
Christ
And
yet
in
very
deede
Christe
neuer
suffered
but
ones
,
neuer
arose
but
ones
,
neuer
was
offered
but
ones
,
nor
in
very
dede
in
baptisme
we
be
not
buried
,
nor
the
sacrament
of
Christs
body
is
not
his
bodye
,
nor
the
sacrament
of
his
bloud
is
not
his
bloud
.
But
so
they
be
called
,
bycause
they
be
figures
,
sacraments
,
and
representacions
of
the
thinges
theym selfe
whiche
they
signifye
,
and
whereof
they
beare
the
name
.
Thus
doth
S.
Augustine
most
plainly
open
this
matter
in
his
epistle
to
Bonifacius
.
Of
this
maner
of
speache
(
wherein
a
signe
is
called
by
the
name
of
the
thing
,
Super
Leui.
quest.
57.
which
it
signifieth
)
speaketh
S.
Augustine
also
right
largly
in
his
questions
super
Leuiticum
,
&
contra
Adamantium
,
declaring
how
bloud
in
scripture
is
called
the
soule
.
A
thing
which
signifieth
(
saith
he
)
is
wont
to
be
called
by
the
name
of
the
thing
whiche
it
signifieth
,
as
it
is
written
in
the
scripture
,
the
stone
was
Christe
,
and
not
that
it
signified
Christ
,
but
euen
as
it
had
bin
he
in
deed
,
which
neuertheles
was
not
Christ
by
substance
,
but
by
significacion
.
Euen
so
(
saith
S.
August
.
)
bicause
the
bloud
signifieth
&
representeth
the
soul
,
therfore
in
a
sacramente
or
significacion
it
is
called
the
sowle
.
Leui.
17
And
Contra
Adamantium
he
writeth
much
like
,
saying
:
In
such
wise
is
blud
the
soule
,
as
the
stone
was
Christ
,
&
yet
th
apostle
saith
nor
,
that
the
stone
signified
Christ
,
but
saith
it
was
Christ
.
And
this
sentence
,
Bloud
is
the
soule
.
may
be
vnderstand
to
be
spoken
in
a
signe
or
figure
,
for
Christ
did
not
stick
to
say
,
This
is
my
body
.
when
he
gaue
the
signe
of
his
body
.
Here
S.
Augustine
rehersing
diuers
sentences
,
which
were
spoken
figuratiuely
,
that
is
to
saye
,
whan
one
thinge
was
called
by
the
name
of
an
other
,
and
yet
was
not
the
other
in
substance
but
in
significacion
,
as
that
bludde
is
the
soule
:
vii
.
kyne
be
vii
.
yeares
:
vii
.
eares
be
vii
.
yeares
:
the
stone
was
Christe
.
Amonge
suche
maner
of
speeches
,
he
reherseth
those
words
which
Christ
spake
at
his
laste
supper
,
And
therfore
S.
Augustine
saith
Contra
Maximinum
,
Contra
Maximinum
.
li.
3
cap.
22.
that
in
sacraments
we
must
not
considre
what
they
be
,
but
what
they
signifye
.
For
thet
be
signes
of
things
,
beyng
one
thyng
and
signyfiyng
an
other
.
Whych
he
doth
shew
specyally
of
thys
sacrament
saying
:
In
lib.
sententiarum
Prosperi
de
consecrat.
distin.
4.
hoc
est
.
The
heauenly
bread
which
is
Christes
flesh
,
by
some
manner
of
speache
is
called
Christes
body
,
when
in
very
deede
it
is
the
sacrament
of
his
body
.
And
that
offering
of
the
flesh
whiche
is
doone
by
the
priestes
handes
,
is
called
Christes
passion
,
deathe
and
crucifiyng
,
not
in
very
deede
,
but
in
a
mystycall
signyfycacion
.
And
to
this
purpose
it
ys
both
pleasaunt
,
Theodoret
,
in
dialogis
.
comfortable
and
profytable
to
reade
Theodoretus
,
in
hys
Dyaloges
,
wher
he
dysputeth
&
sheweth
at
length
,
how
the
names
of
thyngs
be
changed
in
scrypture
,
and
yet
thynges
remayne
styll
.
And
for
exaumple
,
he
proueth
,
that
the
fleshe
of
Chryst
ys
in
the
scrypture
sometyme
called
a
vaylor
couerynge
,
sometyme
a
clothe
,
sometyme
a
vestiment
,
and
sometime
a
stole
:
&
the
blud
of
the
grape
,
is
called
Christes
blood
,
and
the
names
of
breade
and
wine
,
and
of
his
fleshe
and
bloode
Christe
doth
so
chaunge
,
that
sometyme
he
calleth
his
body
,
corne
or
bread
,
and
sometime
contrarye
he
calleth
breade
,
his
body
.
And
likewise
his
bludde
sometime
he
calleth
wyne
,
and
sometyme
contrary
he
calleth
wyne
his
bludde
.
For
the
more
plaine
vnderstandinge
whereof
,
it
shall
not
be
amysse
to
recite
his
owne
saiyngs
in
his
foresaid
dialogs
,
touching
this
matter
of
the
holy
sacrament
of
Christes
fleshe
and
bloud
.
The
speakers
in
these
dialoges
bee
Orthodoxus
the
ryghte
beleuer
,
and
Eranistes
his
companion
,
but
not
vnderstanding
the
right
faith
.
Doest
thou
not
knowe
that
God
calleth
breade
his
fleshe
?
Eranistes
.
I
knowe
that
.
Orth.
And
in
an
other
place
he
calleth
his
bodye
corne
?
Eran.
I
know
that
also
,
for
I
haue
heard
him
saye
:
Orth.
Whan
he
gaue
the
mysteries
or
sacramentes
,
he
called
bread
his
body
,
Mat.
26.
Mat.
14
Luc.
22
and
that
which
was
myxt
in
the
cuppe
,
he
called
bloude
.
Eran.
‛
So
he
called
them
.
Orth.
But
that
also
which
was
his
natural
bodye
,
maye
well
be
called
his
body
,
and
his
verye
bludde
also
maye
be
called
his
bludde
.
Eran.
‛
It
is
playne
.
Orth.
But
oure
sauiour
without
doubt
chaunged
the
names
,
and
gaue
to
the
body
the
name
of
the
signe
or
tooken
,
and
to
the
tooken
he
gaue
the
name
of
the
body
.
Ihon.
15.
And
so
when
he
called
himselfe
a
vyne
,
he
called
blud
that
,
whiche
was
the
token
of
blud
.
Era.
Suerly
thou
hast
spoken
the
truth
,
But
I
would
knowe
the
cause
wherfore
the
names
were
chaunged
.
Orthod.
The
cause
is
manyfest
to
theim
that
bee
experte
in
true
religion
.
For
he
would
that
they
whiche
bee
partakers
of
the
godly
sacramentes
,
should
not
sette
their
myndes
vppon
the
nature
of
the
thynges
,
whiche
they
see
,
but
by
the
chaungyng
of
the
names
,
should
beleue
the
thynged
whiche
be
wrought
in
them
by
grace
.
Ihon.
12.
For
he
that
called
that
which
is
his
natural
body
corne
and
bread
,
and
also
called
him selfe
a
vyne
,
Ihon.
15.
Mat.
26.
he
dyd
honour
the
visible
tokens
and
signes
,
with
the
names
of
his
body
and
bloud
,
not
chaungyng
the
nature
,
but
addyng
grace
to
nature
.
Eran.
Sacramentes
bee
spoken
of
sacramentally
,
and
also
by
theim
bee
manyfestly
declared
thynges
whiche
all
men
knowe
not
.
Ortho.
Seyng
than
that
it
is
certaine
,
that
the
Patriarche
called
the
Lordes
body
,
this
holy
meate
to
be
a
tooken
and
figure
,
of
Christes
diuinitee
?
or
of
his
body
and
bloud
?
Era.
It
is
cleare
,
that
it
is
the
fygure
of
those
thynges
,
wherof
it
beareth
the
name
.
Orth.
‛
Meanest
thou
of
his
body
and
bloud
?
Era.
‛
Euen
so
I
meane
.
Orth.
Thou
haste
spoken
as
one
that
loueth
the
trueth
,
for
the
Lorde
when
he
tooke
the
token
or
signe
,
he
sayd
not
,
This
is
my
diuinitee
,
but
This
is
my
body
,
and
This
is
my
bloud
.
And
in
another
place
,
Era.
The
thynges
be
true
,
for
they
be
Gods
wordes
.
All
this
wryteth
Theodoretus
in
his
fyrst
Dialogue
.
Orth.
Corrupcion
,
health
,
sickenes
,
&
death
,
be
accidentes
,
for
they
go
and
come
.
Era.
‛
It
is
meete
they
be
so
called
.
Orth.
Mens
bodyes
after
their
resurrection
bee
deliuered
from
corrupcion
,
death
,
and
mortalitee
,
and
yet
they
lose
not
their
propre
nature
.
Era.
‛
Trueth
it
is
.
Orth.
The
body
of
Christ
therfore
did
ryse
quit
cleane
from
all
corruption
and
death
,
and
is
impassible
,
immortall
,
glorifyed
with
the
glorye
of
God
,
and
is
honoured
of
the
powers
of
heauen
,
and
yet
it
is
a
body
,
and
hath
the
same
bygnes
that
it
had
before
.
Era.
Thy
saiynges
seme
true
,
and
accordyng
to
reason
,
but
after
he
was
ascended
vp
into
heauen
,
I
thynke
thou
wylt
not
say
,
that
his
body
was
turned
into
the
nature
of
the
Godhead
.
Orth.
I
would
not
say
for
the
persuacion
of
mans
reason
:
nor
I
am
not
so
arrogant
and
presumptuous
,
to
affirme
any
thyng
whiche
scripture
passeth
ouer
in
silence
,
but
I
haue
heard
S.
Paule
crye
,
that
God
hath
ordayned
a
day
,
But
they
saw
a
nature
of
a
certaine
bygnes
,
not
a
nature
whiche
had
no
bygnes
.
I
heard
furthermore
the
Lord
say
,
For
that
nature
that
hath
no
bignes
,
can
not
be
seen
.
Moreouer
to
sytte
in
the
throne
of
glory
,
and
to
sette
the
Lambes
vppon
his
right
hande
,
and
the
goates
vpon
his
left
hand
,
signifyeth
a
thyng
that
hath
quantitee
and
bygnes
.
Hytherto
haue
I
rehersed
Theodoretus
wordes
.
And
shortly
after
Eranistes
sayth
.
Era.
Wee
must
turne
euery
stone
(
as
the
prouerbe
sayth
)
to
seeke
out
the
truth
,
but
specially
whan
godly
matters
be
propounded
.
Orth.
Tel
me
than
,
the
sacramental
signes
,
whiche
be
offered
to
God
by
his
priestes
,
wherof
they
be
signes
sayest
thou
?
Era.
‛
Of
the
Lordes
body
and
bloud
.
Orth.
‛
Of
a
very
body
?
or
not
a
very
body
?
Era.
‛
Of
a
very
body
.
Orth.
Uery
wel
,
for
an
mage
must
be
made
after
a
true
paterne
:
for
Paynters
folowe
nature
,
and
paynt
the
images
of
suche
thynges
as
wee
see
with
our
eyes
.
Era.
‛
Truthe
it
is
.
Orth.
If
therfore
the
godly
sacramentes
represent
a
true
body
,
than
is
the
Lordes
body
yet
styll
a
body
,
not
conuerted
into
the
nature
of
his
Godhead
,
but
replenished
with
Gods
glory
.
Era.
It
commeth
in
good
time
,
that
thou
makest
mencion
of
Gods
sacramentes
for
by
the
same
I
shall
proue
,
the
Christes
body
is
turned
into
another
nature
.
Answer
therfore
vnto
my
questions
Orth.
‛
I
shall
answere
.
Era.
What
callest
thou
that
which
is
offered
,
before
the
inuocation
of
the
priest
?
Orth.
We
must
not
speake
plainly
,
for
it
is
like
that
some
be
present
,
whiche
haue
not
professed
Christ
.
Era.
‛
Answere
couertly
.
Orth.
‛
It
is
a
norishment
made
of
seedes
that
be
like
.
Era.
‛
Than
howe
call
we
the
other
signe
?
Orth.
It
is
also
a
common
name
,
that
signifieth
a
kynde
of
drynke
.
Era.
But
howe
doest
thou
cal
them
after
the
sanctification
?
Orth.
‛
The
body
of
Christ
,
and
the
bloud
of
Christ
.
Era.
And
dost
thou
beleue
that
thou
art
made
parttaker
of
Christes
body
and
bloudde
?
Orth.
‛
I
beleeue
so
.
Era.
Therfore
as
the
tokens
of
Goddes
bodye
and
bloude
,
be
other
thynges
before
the
priestes
inuocation
,
but
after
the
inuocation
they
be
chaunged
,
and
be
other
thynges
:
so
also
the
bodye
of
Christe
after
his
assumption
is
chaunged
into
his
diuine
substaunce
.
Orth.
Thou
art
taken
with
thyne
owne
nette
.
For
the
sacramentall
signes
goe
not
from
their
owne
nature
after
the
sanctification
,
but
continue
in
theyr
former
substance
,
forme
,
and
figure
,
and
may
be
sene
and
touched
as
well
as
before
,
yet
in
our
myndes
we
do
consyder
,
what
they
bee
made
,
and
do
repute
and
esteme
them
,
and
haue
them
in
reuerence
,
acordyng
to
the
same
thynges
that
they
be
taken
for
.
Therfore
compare
the
ymages
to
the
paterne
,
and
thou
shalt
se
them
like
.
For
a
figure
must
be
lyke
to
the
thyng
it selfe
.
For
Christes
bodye
hath
his
former
fashion
,
figure
,
and
bygnesse
,
and
to
speake
at
one
worde
,
the
same
substance
of
his
body
.
But
after
his
resurrection
,
it
was
made
immortall
,
and
of
suche
power
,
that
no
corruption
nor
deth
coulde
come
vnto
it
,
and
it
was
exalted
to
that
dignitee
,
that
it
was
set
at
the
ryght
hande
of
the
father
,
and
honoured
of
all
creatures
,
as
the
body
of
hym
that
is
the
Lorde
of
nature
.
Era.
But
the
sacramentall
token
chaungeth
his
former
name
,
for
it
is
no
more
called
as
it
was
before
,
but
is
called
Christes
voyde
.
Therefore
must
his
body
after
his
ascention
be
called
God
and
not
a
body
.
Orth.
Thou
semest
to
me
ignorant
,
for
it
is
not
called
his
body
onely
,
but
also
the
bread
of
lyfe
,
as
the
Lorde
called
it
.
So
the
bodye
of
Christe
we
call
a
godly
body
,
a
body
that
geueth
lyfe
,
Goddes
body
,
the
Lordes
body
,
our
maisters
bodye
,
meanyng
that
it
is
not
a
common
body
,
as
other
mens
bodies
be
,
but
that
it
is
the
bodye
of
oure
Lord
Iesu
Christ
,
both
god
and
man
.
This
haue
I
rehersed
of
the
great
clerke
and
holy
byshop
Theodoretus
,
whome
some
of
the
Papistes
perceyuynge
to
make
so
playnely
agaynst
them
,
haue
defamed
,
sayeng
that
he
was
infected
with
the
errour
of
Nestorius
.
Here
the
Papistes
shewe
their
old
accustomed
nature
and
condition
,
whiche
is
(
euen
in
a
manifest
matter
)
rather
to
lye
without
shame
,
than
to
geue
place
vnto
the
truthe
,
&
confesse
their
owne
errour
.
And
althoughe
his
aduersaries
falsely
bruted
suche
a
fame
agaynst
hym
,
whan
he
was
yet
alyue
,
neuerthelesse
he
was
pourged
thereof
by
the
whole
councel
of
Calcedon
,
about
aleuen
hundred
yeares
ago
.
And
furthermore
in
his
boke
which
he
wrote
against
heresies
,
he
specially
condemneth
Nestorius
by
name
.
And
also
all
his
.iii.
bookes
of
his
dialoges
before
rehersed
,
he
wrote
chiefly
agaist
.
Nestorius
,
and
was
neuer
herein
noted
of
errour
this
thousande
yere
,
but
hath
euer
been
reputed
and
taken
for
an
holy
byshop
,
a
great
lerned
man
,
and
a
graue
author
,
vntyl
now
at
this
present
tyme
,
when
the
Papistes
haue
nothyng
to
answere
vnto
hym
,
they
begyn
in
excusyng
of
them selues
,
to
defame
hym
.
Thus
muche
haue
I
spoken
for
Theodoretus
,
which
I
praie
the
be
not
wery
to
rede
(
good
reder
)
but
often
and
with
delectation
,
deliberation
,
and
good
aduertisement
to
rede
.
For
it
conteyneth
playnly
and
brefely
the
true
instruction
of
a
christian
man
,
concernyng
the
matter
,
whiche
in
this
boke
we
treate
vpon
.
First
,
Second
,
that
although
the
names
of
breade
and
wyne
were
changed
after
sanctification
,
yet
neuerthelesse
the
thyngs
them selues
remayned
the
selfe
same
,
that
they
were
before
the
sanctification
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
same
breade
and
wyne
in
nature
,
substance
,
forme
and
fashion
.
The
thyrde
,
seynge
that
the
substance
of
the
bread
and
wyne
be
not
chaunged
,
why
bee
then
their
names
changed
?
and
the
bread
called
Christes
flesh
,
and
the
wyne
his
bloud
?
Theodoretus
sheweth
,
that
the
cause
therof
was
this
,
that
we
shuld
not
haue
so
muche
respect
to
the
breade
and
wyne
(
whiche
we
see
with
our
eies
,
and
tast
with
our
mouthes
)
as
we
shuld
haue
to
Christe
hym selfe
,
in
whom
we
beleue
with
our
hertes
,
&
fele
and
tast
him
by
our
faith
,
&
with
whose
flesh
and
bloud
(
by
his
grace
)
we
beleue
that
we
bee
spiritually
fedde
and
nouryshed
.
These
thynges
we
ought
to
remembre
and
reuolue
in
our
myndes
,
and
to
lyfte
vp
our
hartes
from
the
bread
and
wine
vnto
Christ
that
sytteth
aboue
.
And
bicause
we
shuld
so
do
,
therfore
after
the
consecration
,
they
be
no
more
called
bread
&
wyne
,
but
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christe
.
The
fourth
.
It
is
in
these
sacraments
of
bread
and
wyne
,
as
it
is
in
the
very
bodye
of
Christe
.
For
as
the
body
of
Christe
before
his
resurrection
,
and
after
,
is
al
one
in
nature
,
substance
,
bignesse
,
forme
and
fashion
,
and
yet
it
is
not
called
as
an
other
common
body
,
but
with
addition
,
for
the
dignitee
of
his
exaltation
,
it
is
called
a
heauenly
,
a
godly
,
an
immortal
,
and
the
Lords
body
:
so
lykewyse
the
breade
and
wyne
,
before
the
consecration
and
after
,
is
all
one
in
nature
,
substance
,
bygnesse
,
forme
,
and
fashion
,
and
yet
it
is
not
called
as
other
common
bread
,
but
for
the
dignitee
,
whervnto
it
is
taken
,
it
is
called
with
addition
,
Heauenly
breade
,
the
breade
of
lyfe
,
and
the
bread
of
thankes
gyuyng
.
The
fift
,
that
no
man
ought
to
be
so
arrogant
and
presumptuous
to
affirme
for
a
certayn
truth
in
religion
any
thynge
,
whiche
is
not
spoken
of
in
holy
scripture
.
And
this
is
spoken
to
the
great
and
vtter
condemnation
of
the
Papistes
,
which
make
and
vnmake
newe
articles
of
oure
faithe
from
tyme
to
tyme
,
at
their
pleasure
,
without
any
scripture
at
all
,
yea
quite
and
cleane
contrary
to
scripture
.
And
yet
wyll
they
haue
all
men
bounde
to
beleue
what
so
euer
they
inuent
,
vpon
peryll
of
damnation
and
euerlastyng
fyre
.
And
they
woulde
constrayne
with
fyre
and
fagotte
all
men
to
consent
(
contrary
to
the
manyfest
woordes
of
God
)
to
these
their
erroures
in
this
matter
of
the
holy
sacramente
of
Christes
body
and
bloude
.
Fyrst
that
there
remaineth
no
bread
nor
wyne
after
the
consecration
,
but
that
Christes
fleshe
and
bloud
is
made
of
them
.
Seconde
,
that
Christes
body
is
really
,
corporally
,
substancially
,
sensibly
and
naturally
in
the
bread
and
wyne
.
Thyrdely
,
that
wycked
persones
doo
eate
and
drynke
Christes
very
body
and
bloude
.
Fourthly
,
that
priestes
offer
Christ
euery
day
,
make
of
him
a
new
sacrifice
propiciatory
for
syn
.
Thus
for
shortnes
of
tyme
,
do
I
make
an
end
of
Theodoretus
,
with
other
olde
auncient
writers
,
which
do
moste
clerely
affirme
,
that
to
eate
Christes
body
,
and
to
drynke
his
bloude
,
be
figuratiue
speches
.
And
so
be
these
sentences
like
wyse
,
whiche
Christe
spake
at
his
supper
:
This
is
my
body
,
This
is
my
bloudde
.
When
the
Ark
(
which
represented
Gods
maiestee
)
was
come
into
the
army
of
the
Israelites
the
Philistians
said
that
god
was
come
into
the
army
.
[
†
](A19571-e15260-b)
†
Mat.
11.
and.
17.
Iohn
is
Helias
:
[
*
](A19571-e15270-b)
*
Iohn
.
16
I
am
a
vine
,
and
you
be
the
branches
.
[
†
](A19571-e15280-b)
†
Iohn
.
6.
I
am
bread
of
lyte
.
[
*
](A19571-e15290-b)
*
Iohn
.
15
Math.
3.2
.
My
father
is
an
husband
man
,
and
he
hath
his
fanne
in
his
hand
,
and
wil
make
cleane
his
flower
,
and
gather
the
wheat
into
his
barne
,
but
the
chaffe
he
wyll
caste
into
euerlastyng
fyre
.
[
†
](A19571-e15300-b)
†
Iohn
,
4
I
haue
a
meate
to
eate
,
whiche
you
knowe
not
.
[
*
](A19571-e15310-b)
*
Iohn
.
6.
Woorke
not
meate
that
perisheth
,
but
that
endureth
vnto
euerlastyng
life
.
[
†
](A19571-e15320-b)
†
Iohn
.
10
I
am
good
shepherd
.
[
*
](A19571-e15330-b)
*
Mat.
25.
The
sonne
of
man
wyl
set
the
shepe
at
his
right
hand
,
and
the
goates
at
his
left
hand
.
[
†
](A19571-e15340-b)
†
Iohn
.
10
Iohn
,
6
,
Math
,
12
,
I
am
a
doore
:
One
of
you
is
the
deuil
.
Whosoeuer
dothe
my
fathers
wylle
,
he
is
my
brother
,
syster
and
mother
.
And
whan
he
sayd
to
his
mother
,
and
to
Ihon.
This
is
thy
sonne
,
this
is
thy
mother
.
These
with
an
infinite
numbre
of
like
sentences
,
Christe
spake
in
Parables
,
Metaphores
,
tropes
and
figures
.
But
chiefly
whan
he
spake
of
the
sacramentes
,
he
vsed
figuratiue
speches
.
As
whan
in
Baptisme
he
sayd
,
that
wee
must
bee
baptised
with
the
holy
ghost
,
After
thesame
sort
the
mystery
of
our
redemption
,
and
the
passion
of
our
sauiour
Christ
vpon
the
crosse
,
aswel
in
the
newe
,
as
in
the
old
Testament
,
is
expressed
and
declared
by
many
fygures
and
figuratiue
speeches
.
And
leste
we
should
forget
the
same
,
he
ordeyned
not
a
yerely
memory
(
as
the
Paschall
lambe
was
eaten
but
ones
euery
yere
)
but
a
dayely
remembrance
he
ordained
therof
in
bread
&
wyne
,
sanctified
and
dedicated
to
that
purpose
,
saiyng
:
This
is
my
body
,
Admonyshyng
vs
by
these
wordes
,
spoken
at
the
makyng
of
his
laste
wyll
and
testament
,
and
at
his
departyng
out
of
the
worlde
(
bycause
they
should
be
the
better
rememored
)
that
whensoeuer
we
do
eate
the
bread
in
his
holy
supper
,
and
drynke
of
that
cup
,
wee
should
remembre
howe
muche
Christ
hath
done
for
vs
,
As
often
as
ye
shal
eate
of
this
bread
,
and
drinke
the
cuppe
,
you
shall
shew
foorth
the
Lordes
death
vntyll
he
come
.
And
forasmuche
as
this
holy
breade
broken
,
and
the
wine
deuided
,
doo
represent
vnto
vs
the
death
of
Christ
nowe
passed
,
as
the
kyllynge
of
the
Paschall
lambe
dyde
represent
the
same
yet
to
come
:
therfore
our
sauiour
Christ
vsed
the
same
maner
of
speeche
of
the
bread
and
wyne
,
as
God
before
vsed
of
the
Paschall
lambe
.
Also
,
to
eate
Christes
body
,
and
to
drynke
his
bloude
,
I
am
sure
they
wyl
not
say
that
it
is
taken
proprely
,
to
eate
&
drinke
,
as
we
doe
eate
other
meates
and
drynkes
.
And
when
Christe
sayde
,
This
cup
is
a
newe
testament
in
my
bloude
.
here
in
one
sentence
bee
two
figures
.
One
in
this
worde
Cup
,
whych
is
not
taken
for
the
cup
it selfe
,
but
for
the
thynge
conteyned
in
the
cup
.
An
other
is
in
this
worde
,
Testament
,
for
neyther
the
cuppe
,
nor
the
wyne
contained
in
the
cuppe
,
is
Christes
Testament
,
but
is
a
token
,
signe
and
figure
,
whereby
is
represented
vnto
vs
his
Testament
,
confirmed
by
his
bloudde
.
And
if
the
Papists
wil
say
(
as
thei
say
in
dede
)
that
by
this
cup
,
is
neither
ment
the
cup
nor
the
wine
conteyned
in
the
cuppe
,
but
that
therby
is
ment
Christes
bloud
contained
in
the
cuppe
:
yet
must
they
nedes
graunt
,
that
there
is
a
fygure
.
For
Christes
bloude
is
not
in
proper
speche
,
the
New
testament
,
but
it
is
the
thyng
that
confirmed
the
new
testament
.
And
yet
by
this
strange
interpretation
,
the
Papistes
make
a
very
straunge
speche
,
more
strange
then
any
figuratiue
speche
is
.
For
this
they
make
the
sentence
:
This
bloud
is
a
newe
testament
in
my
bloud
.
Which
saiyng
is
so
fonde
and
so
farre
from
all
reason
,
that
the
foolyshenes
therof
is
euident
to
euery
man
.
Nowe
forasmuch
as
it
is
plainly
declared
and
manifestly
proued
,
CHRISTE
,
or
that
we
bee
nouryshed
with
the
body
and
bloude
of
Christ
,
or
that
Christe
is
bothe
gone
hence
,
and
is
styll
here
,
or
that
Christe
at
his
laste
supper
,
bare
hym selfe
in
his
owne
handes
.
These
and
all
other
like
sentences
may
not
be
vnderstanded
of
Christes
humanitee
litterally
and
carnally
,
as
the
wordes
in
common
speeche
doo
proprely
signifie
,
(
for
so
doothe
no
man
eate
Christes
fleshe
,
nor
drinke
his
bloudde
,
nor
so
is
not
the
bread
and
wyne
tourned
into
his
fleshe
and
bloud
,
nor
we
into
hym
:
nor
so
is
the
breade
&
wyne
after
the
consecration
his
flesh
and
blud
,
nor
so
is
not
his
fleshe
and
bloud
whole
heere
in
earth
,
eaten
with
our
mouthes
)
nor
so
dydde
not
Christe
take
hym selfe
in
his
owne
handes
.
But
these
and
all
other
lyke
sentences
(
whiche
declare
Christe
to
be
here
in
earth
,
and
to
be
eaten
and
dronken
of
christian
people
)
are
to
bee
vnderstande
,
eyther
of
his
diuine
nature
(
wherby
he
is
euery
where
)
or
els
they
must
be
vnderstanded
figuratiuely
,
or
spiritually
.
For
figuratiuely
he
is
in
the
breade
and
wyne
,
and
spiritually
he
is
in
them
that
worthyly
eate
and
drinke
the
bread
and
wyne
,
but
really
,
carnally
,
and
corporally
he
is
onely
in
heauen
,
frome
whence
he
shall
come
to
iudge
the
quycke
and
deade
.
This
briefe
aunswere
wyll
suffice
for
all
that
the
Papistes
can
bryng
for
their
pourpose
,
yf
it
bee
aptely
applyed
.
And
for
the
more
euidence
hereof
,
I
shall
applye
the
same
to
somme
suche
places
,
as
the
Papistes
thynke
doo
make
moste
for
theym
:
that
by
the
aunswere
to
those
places
,
the
reste
maye
bee
the
more
easyly
aunswered
vnto
.
Clemens
Epistol
2.
They
alledge
saint
Clement
,
whose
words
be
these
,
as
thei
report
.
The
sacramentes
of
Gods
secretes
are
committed
to
thre
degrees
:
to
a
priest
,
a
Deacon
,
and
a
minister
:
whiche
with
feare
and
tremblyng
ought
to
kepe
the
leauynges
of
the
broken
peeces
of
the
Lordes
body
,
that
no
corruption
be
founde
in
the
holy
place
,
least
by
negligence
great
iniury
bee
done
to
the
portion
of
the
Lordes
bodye
.
And
by
and
by
foloweth
:
So
many
hostes
muste
bee
offered
in
the
altare
,
as
wyll
suffice
for
the
people
.
And
yf
any
remayn
,
they
must
not
be
kept
vntill
the
mornyng
,
but
be
spent
and
consumed
of
the
clearkes
,
with
feare
and
tremblynge
.
And
they
that
consume
the
residue
of
the
Lordes
bodye
,
may
not
by
and
by
take
other
common
meates
,
least
they
shoulde
mixte
that
holy
portion
,
with
the
meate
which
is
dygested
by
the
bealy
,
and
auoyded
by
the
foundament
.
Therfore
if
the
Lordes
portion
bee
eaten
in
the
mornynge
,
the
ministers
that
consume
it
,
must
faste
vnto
sixe
of
the
clocke
:
and
if
thei
do
take
it
at
thre
or
four
of
the
clocke
,
the
minister
must
fast
vntyl
the
euenyng
.
Thus
much
writeth
Clement
of
this
matter
:
If
the
Epistle
,
which
they
alledge
,
were
Clementes
(
as
in
dede
it
is
not
.
)
But
they
haue
fayned
many
thynges
in
other
mennes
names
,
thereby
to
stablyshe
their
fayned
purposes
.
But
whose
so
euer
the
Epistle
was
,
if
it
be
throughly
consydered
,
it
maketh
muche
more
agaynst
the
Papistes
,
than
for
their
pourpose
.
For
by
the
same
Epistle
appereth
euidently
thre
speciall
thyngs
against
the
errours
of
the
Papistes
.
The
fyrst
is
,
that
the
breade
in
the
sacramente
is
called
the
Lordes
body
:
and
the
peeces
of
the
broken
bread
be
called
the
peeces
and
fragmentes
of
the
Lordes
body
.
whyche
can
not
bee
vnderstande
,
but
fyguratiuely
.
The
seconde
is
,
that
the
bread
oughte
not
to
be
reserued
and
hanged
vp
,
as
the
Papistes
euery
where
doo
vse
.
The
third
is
,
that
the
priests
ought
not
to
receyue
the
sacrament
alone
(
as
the
Papistes
commonly
do
,
makyng
a
sale
therof
vnto
the
people
)
but
they
ought
to
communicate
with
the
people
.
And
here
it
is
diligently
to
bee
noted
,
that
we
ought
not
vnreuerently
and
vnaduisedly
to
approche
vnto
the
meate
of
the
Lordes
table
,
as
we
doo
to
other
common
meates
and
drynkes
,
but
with
great
feare
and
dreade
:
least
we
shulde
come
to
that
holy
table
vnworthely
,
wherein
is
not
onely
represented
,
but
also
spirytually
geuen
vnto
vs
very
CHRISTE
hym selfe
.
And
therfore
we
ought
to
come
to
that
boord
of
the
Lorde
with
all
reuerence
,
faythe
,
loue
,
and
charitee
,
feare
and
dread
,
accordyng
to
the
same
.
contra
Valentin
.
Here
I
passeouer
Ignatius
and
Ireneus
,
whiche
make
nothyng
for
the
Papistes
opinions
,
but
stand
in
the
commendacion
of
the
holy
Communion
,
and
in
exhortacion
of
all
men
to
the
often
and
godly
receiuyng
therrof
.
And
yet
neither
they
,
nor
no
manne
els
,
can
extolle
and
commende
the
same
sufficiently
,
accordyng
to
the
dignitee
therof
,
if
it
bee
godly
vsed
,
as
it
ought
to
be
.
Dionysius
de
eccle.
Hierarch
.
cap.
3.
Dionysius
also
,
whom
they
allege
to
praise
&
extoll
this
sacrament
(
as
in
dede
it
is
most
worthy
,
beyng
a
sacrament
of
moste
high
dignitee
and
perfection
,
representyng
vnto
vs
our
moste
perfect
spiritual
coniunction
vnto
Christ
,
&
oure
continual
norishyng
,
feadyng
,
comforte
,
&
spiritual
life
in
him
,
)
yet
he
neuer
sayd
that
the
fleshe
and
bloud
of
Christ
was
in
the
bread
and
wyne
,
really
,
corporally
,
sensibly
and
naturally
(
as
the
Papistes
wold
beare
vs
in
hand
)
but
he
calleth
euer
the
bread
and
wyne
signes
,
pledges
and
tokens
,
declaryng
vnto
the
faythfull
receiuers
of
the
same
,
that
they
receiue
Christ
spiritually
,
and
that
they
spiritually
eate
his
flesh
&
drynke
his
bloud
.
And
although
the
bread
and
wyne
bee
the
figures
,
signes
,
and
tokens
of
Christes
fleshe
and
bloud
(
as
sainct
Dionyse
calleth
them
bothe
before
the
consecracion
and
after
)
yet
the
Greke
annotations
vpon
the
same
Dionyse
do
say
,
that
the
very
thynges
them selfes
be
aboue
in
heauen
.
And
as
the
same
Dionyse
maketh
nothing
for
the
Papistes
opinions
in
this
point
of
Christes
reall
and
corporall
presence
,
so
in
diuers
other
things
he
maketh
quite
and
clean
against
them
,
and
that
specially
in
thre
pointes
,
In
transubstantiation
,
in
reseruacion
of
the
sacrament
,
and
in
the
receauinge
of
the
same
by
the
priest
alone
.
Furthermore
they
do
alleage
Tertulian
,
Tertullanus
de
resurectiōe
carnis
.
that
hee
constantly
affirmeth
,
that
in
the
sacramente
of
the
altare
we
do
eate
the
body
and
drinke
the
blud
of
our
sauiour
Christ
.
To
whom
we
graunte
that
our
flesh
eateth
and
drinketh
the
bread
and
wyne
,
whiche
be
called
the
bodye
and
bloude
of
Christ
,
bicause
(
as
Tertulian
saith
)
they
do
represent
his
body
and
bloude
,
although
they
bee
not
really
the
same
in
very
deed
.
And
we
graunt
also
,
that
oure
soules
by
faith
do
eate
his
verye
body
and
drinke
his
bludde
,
but
that
is
spiritually
,
suckinge
out
of
the
same
euerlastinge
lyfe
.
But
we
deny
that
vnto
this
spirituall
feedinge
is
required
any
reall
and
corporall
presence
.
And
therefore
this
Tertulian
speaketh
nothinge
against
the
truthe
of
our
catholicke
doctrine
,
but
he
speaketh
many
thinges
most
plainly
for
vs
,
and
against
the
Papistes
,
and
specially
in
thre
pointes
.
Firste
in
that
he
saithe
that
Christe
called
breade
his
body
.
The
second
that
Christ
called
it
so
,
bycause
it
representeth
his
bodye
.
The
thirde
,
in
that
he
saithe
,
that
by
these
wordes
of
Christe
,
This
is
my
bodye
,
is
mente
,
This
is
a
figure
of
my
body
.
Origenes
in
Numer
.
Homi.
7.
Moreouer
they
allege
for
theym
Origen
(
because
they
would
seeme
to
haue
many
aunciente
authors
,
fauourers
of
their
erronious
doctrine
)
whiche
Origen
is
moste
clearely
against
them
.
For
although
hee
do
saye
(
as
they
allege
)
that
those
things
which
before
were
signified
by
obscure
figures
,
be
nowe
truely
in
dede
and
in
theyr
very
nature
and
kinde
accomplished
and
fulfilled
.
And
for
the
declaration
therof
,
he
bringeth
forth
thre
examples
,
One
of
the
stone
that
floweth
water
,
an
other
of
the
sea
and
cloude
,
and
the
thirde
of
Manna
,
whiche
in
the
olde
testamente
did
signifie
Christ
to
come
,
who
is
now
come
in
deed
,
and
is
manifested
and
exhibited
vnto
vs
,
as
it
were
face
to
face
,
and
sensibly
,
in
his
worde
,
in
the
sacrament
of
regeneracion
,
and
in
the
sacramentes
of
breade
and
wine
,
Yet
Origene
mente
not
,
that
Christ
is
corporally
either
in
his
worde
,
or
in
the
water
of
baptime
,
or
in
the
breade
and
wine
,
nor
that
we
carnally
and
corporally
be
regenerated
and
borne
againe
,
or
eate
Christes
flesh
&
blood
.
For
our
regeneracion
in
Christ
,
is
spiritual
,
and
our
eating
and
drinking
is
a
spirituall
feeding
,
which
kinde
of
regeneration
and
feeding
,
requireth
no
real
and
corporall
presence
of
Christ
,
but
onlye
his
presence
in
spirite
,
grace
,
and
effectuall
operacion
.
And
that
Origen
thus
mente
,
that
Christes
fleshe
is
a
spirituall
meate
,
and
his
bludde
a
spirituall
drinke
,
and
that
the
eating
and
drynkinge
of
his
fleshe
and
bloude
maye
not
bee
vnderstande
literallye
,
but
spirytually
,
it
is
manifested
by
Origenes
owne
woordes
,
in
his
seuenth
homylye
vppon
the
booke
called
Leuiticus
:
In
Leuit.
hom.
7.
where
hee
sheweth
that
those
wordes
must
bee
vnderstande
figuratiuely
,
and
who
so
euer
vnderstandeth
theim
otherwise
,
they
bee
deceaued
and
take
harme
by
their
owne
grosse
vnderstandinge
.
And
likewise
ment
Cypriane
,
Cyprianus
lib.
2.
epist.
3
in
those
places
whiche
the
aduersaries
of
the
truthe
alleadge
of
hym
,
concernynge
the
true
eatinge
of
Christes
very
fleshe
and
drinkinge
of
his
bludde
.
For
Cyprian
spake
of
no
grosse
and
carnal
eatinge
with
the
mouth
,
but
of
an
inward
spirituall
and
pure
eatinge
with
hart
and
mind
,
which
is
to
beeleue
in
oure
hartes
,
that
his
fleshe
was
rente
and
torne
for
vs
vppon
the
crosse
,
and
his
bludde
shedde
for
our
redemption
,
and
that
the
same
fleshe
and
bludde
nowe
sitteth
at
the
ryght
hande
of
the
father
,
making
continual
intercession
for
vs
,
and
to
imprint
and
digest
this
in
our
mindes
,
puttinge
our
whole
affiaunce
and
trust
in
him
,
as
touchinge
our
saluacion
and
offering
ourselues
clearlye
vnto
hym
,
to
loue
and
serue
hym
all
the
dayes
of
our
lyfe
:
thys
is
trewely
,
sincerely
,
and
spiritually
to
eate
his
flesh
and
to
drinke
his
bludde
.
And
this
sacryfyce
of
Christe
vpon
the
crosse
,
was
that
oblation
whyche
Cypriane
saithe
was
figured
and
signifyed
before
it
was
done
,
And
nowe
when
Christe
is
come
,
and
hath
accomplished
that
sacrifice
,
the
same
is
figured
,
signified
,
and
represented
vnto
vs
,
by
that
bread
and
wine
,
which
faithfull
people
receaue
daylye
in
the
holy
communion
.
Wherein
lyke
as
wyth
their
mouths
carnally
thei
eat
the
bread
&
drink
the
wyne
,
so
by
their
faithe
spiritually
they
eate
Christes
very
fleshe
and
drinke
his
very
bloode
.
And
herby
it
appeareth
that
S.
Cyprian
clearly
affirmeth
the
moste
true
doctrine
,
and
is
wholy
vpon
oure
side
.
And
against
the
Papistes
hee
teacheth
moste
plainly
,
that
the
communion
ought
to
be
receaued
of
all
men
vnder
bothe
the
kindes
:
and
that
CHRIST
called
breade
his
body
,
and
wyne
hys
bloude
:
and
that
there
is
no
transubstantiation
(
but
that
breade
remaineth
there
as
a
figure
,
to
represent
Christes
body
,
and
wine
to
represente
his
blud
)
and
that
those
whyche
bee
not
the
lyuely
membres
of
Christe
,
doo
eate
the
breade
and
drynke
the
wyne
,
and
bee
nouryshed
by
theym
,
but
the
verye
fleshe
and
bludde
of
CHRIST
,
they
neyther
eate
nor
drinke
.
Thus
haue
you
hearde
declared
the
mynde
of
Saint
Cyprian
.
Hylarius
.
8.
de
trinitate
But
Hylarius
(
thynke
they
)
is
plainest
for
theym
in
this
matter
,
whose
woordes
they
translate
thus
.
If
the
worde
was
made
verely
fleshe
,
&
we
verely
receiue
the
worde
beyng
fleshe
,
in
our
Lordes
meate
,
howe
shall
not
Christ
be
thought
to
dwel
naturally
in
vs
?
who
beyng
borne
man
,
hath
taken
vnto
him
the
nature
of
our
fleshe
,
that
can
not
be
seuered
,
and
hath
put
together
the
nature
of
his
fleshe
to
the
nature
of
his
eternitee
,
vnder
the
sacrament
of
the
communion
of
his
fleshe
vnto
vs
.
For
so
wee
bee
all
one
,
because
the
father
is
in
Christe
,
and
Christe
in
vs
.
Wherfore
whosoeuer
will
denye
the
father
to
be
naturally
in
Christe
,
he
muste
denye
fyrste
either
him selfe
to
be
naturally
in
Christ
,
or
Christ
to
be
naturally
in
him
.
For
the
beyng
of
the
father
in
Christe
,
and
the
beyng
of
Christ
in
vs
,
maketh
vs
to
be
one
in
them
.
And
therfore
if
Christ
haue
taken
verily
the
fleshe
of
our
body
,
and
the
man
that
was
verely
borne
of
the
virgyn
Mary
is
Christ
,
and
also
we
receiue
vnder
the
true
mysterye
the
fleshe
of
his
body
,
by
meanes
whereof
wee
shall
bee
one
(
for
the
father
is
in
Christ
,
and
Christ
in
vs
)
how
shall
that
be
called
the
vnitee
of
wylle
,
when
the
naturall
propertie
brought
to
passe
by
the
sacrament
,
is
the
sacrament
of
vnitee
?
Thus
doth
the
Papistes
(
the
aduersaries
of
Gods
woorde
and
of
his
trueth
)
allege
the
authoritee
of
Hilarius
(
either
peruersely
and
purposely
,
as
it
seemeth
,
vntruely
cityng
him
,
and
wrastyng
his
wordes
to
their
purpose
)
or
els
not
truely
vnderstandyng
him
.
For
although
he
sayth
that
Christe
is
naturally
in
vs
,
yet
he
sayth
also
that
we
be
naturally
in
him
.
And
neuerthelesse
in
so
saiyng
,
he
ment
not
of
the
natural
and
corporal
presence
of
the
substance
of
Christes
body
&
of
ours
(
for
as
oure
bodyes
bee
not
after
that
sorte
within
his
body
,
so
is
not
his
body
after
that
sorte
within
our
bodyes
)
but
he
ment
that
Christe
in
his
incarnacion
receyued
of
vs
a
mortall
nature
,
and
vnited
the
same
vnto
his
diuinitee
,
and
so
be
we
naturally
in
him
.
And
the
sacramentes
of
Baptisme
and
of
his
holy
supper
(
if
we
rightly
vse
the
same
)
do
moste
assuredly
certifye
vs
,
that
wee
bee
partakers
of
his
godly
nature
,
hauyng
geuen
vnto
vs
by
him
,
immortalitee
and
life
euerlastyng
,
&
so
is
Christ
naturally
in
vs
.
And
so
bee
wee
one
with
Christ
,
and
Christ
with
vs
,
not
onely
in
wylle
&
mynde
,
but
also
in
very
naturall
properties
.
And
so
concludeth
Hilarius
against
Arrius
,
that
Christe
is
one
with
his
father
,
not
in
purpose
and
wylle
onely
,
but
also
in
very
nature
.
And
as
the
vnion
betwene
Christe
and
vs
in
baptisme
is
spiritual
,
and
requyreth
no
real
and
corporall
presence
,
so
lykewise
oure
vnion
with
Christ
in
his
holy
supper
is
spiritual
,
and
therfore
requyreth
no
real
and
corporall
presence
.
And
therfore
Hilarius
speaking
there
of
both
the
sacramentes
,
maketh
no
difference
betwene
our
vnion
with
Christ
in
baptisme
,
&
our
vnion
with
him
in
his
holy
supper
.
And
sayth
further
,
that
as
Christ
is
in
vs
,
so
be
wee
in
him
,
whiche
the
Papistes
can
not
vnderstand
corporally
and
really
,
except
they
wyll
say
,
that
all
our
bodyes
be
corporally
within
Christes
body
.
Thus
is
Hilarius
answered
vnto
,
both
plainly
&
shortly
.
And
this
answere
of
Hilarius
wyll
serue
also
vnto
Cyril
,
Cyrillus
.
whom
they
allege
to
speake
after
the
same
sort
that
Hilarius
doth
,
that
Christ
is
naturally
in
vs
.
The
wordes
whiche
they
recite
be
these
.
We
denye
not
(
sayth
Cyril
against
the
heretike
)
but
we
be
spiritually
ioyned
to
Christ
,
by
fayth
and
syncere
charitee
:
but
that
we
shuld
haue
no
maner
of
coniunction
in
our
fleshe
with
Christ
,
that
we
vtterly
deny
,
and
thynke
it
vtterly
discrepant
from
Goddes
holy
scriptures
.
For
who
doubteth
,
but
Christ
is
so
the
vyne
tre
,
&
we
so
the
branches
,
as
we
get
thence
our
life
.
Heare
what
sainct
Paule
sayth
,
Wee
be
all
one
body
with
Christe
,
for
though
we
be
many
,
we
be
one
in
him
.
All
we
participate
in
one
foode
.
Thynketh
this
hereticke
that
we
knowe
not
the
strength
and
vertue
of
the
mistical
benediction
?
whiche
when
it
is
made
in
vs
,
doth
it
not
make
Christ
by
communication
of
his
fleshe
to
dwell
corporally
in
vs
?
Why
be
the
membres
of
faythful
mens
bodyes
called
the
membres
of
Christe
?
dwelleth
in
me
and
I
in
him
.
Although
in
these
wordes
Cyril
doth
say
,
that
Christ
doth
dwell
corporally
in
vs
,
whan
we
receiue
the
mistical
benediction
:
yet
he
neither
sayth
that
Christ
dwelleth
corporally
in
the
bread
,
nor
that
he
dwelleth
in
vs
corporally
onely
at
suche
tymes
as
wee
receiue
the
sacrament
,
nor
that
he
dwelleth
in
vs
,
&
not
we
in
him
,
but
he
sayth
aswel
,
that
we
dwel
in
him
,
as
that
he
dwelleth
in
vs
.
Whiche
dwellyng
is
neither
corporal
nor
local
,
but
an
heauenly
,
spiritual
&
supernatural
dwellyng
,
wherby
so
long
as
we
dwell
in
him
&
he
in
vs
,
we
haue
by
him
euerlastyng
life
.
And
therfore
Cyril
sayth
in
the
same
place
,
And
this
ment
Cyril
by
this
worde
Corporally
,
when
he
sayth
,
that
Christ
dwelleth
corporally
in
vs
.
And
the
same
ment
also
sainct
Hilarius
by
this
woorde
Naturally
,
whan
he
sayd
that
Christ
dwelleth
naturally
in
vs
.
And
as
sainct
Paule
,
Corporally
,
by
this
worde
Corporally
,
he
ment
not
that
the
diuinitee
is
a
body
,
&
so
by
that
body
dwelleth
bodely
in
Christ
.
But
by
this
worde
Corporally
,
he
ment
that
the
diuinitee
is
not
in
Christ
accidentally
,
lightly
and
slenderly
,
but
substantially
and
perfectely
,
wyth
all
hys
mighte
and
power
:
so
that
CHRIST
was
not
onely
a
mortall
manne
,
to
suffre
for
vs
,
but
also
hee
was
immortall
God
,
able
to
redeeme
vs
.
So
S.
Cyril
,
whan
he
sayd
that
Christ
is
in
vs
corporally
,
he
mente
that
we
haue
him
in
vs
,
not
lightly
and
to
small
effecte
and
purpose
,
but
that
we
haue
him
in
vs
substantially
,
pythelye
,
and
effectually
,
in
suche
wise
,
that
wee
haue
by
hym
redemption
and
euerlastinge
lyfe
.
And
this
I
sucke
not
out
of
myne
owne
fyngers
,
In
Iohan
.
līb
.
4.
cap.
17
but
haue
it
of
Cyrils
owne
expresse
words
,
where
he
saith
:
A
lyttle
benediction
draweth
the
whole
manne
to
god
,
and
filleth
him
with
grace
and
after
this
manner
Christe
dwelleth
in
vs
,
and
we
in
CHRIST
.
But
as
for
corporall
eatinge
and
drinkinge
with
our
mouths
,
and
digesting
with
our
bodies
Cyril
neuer
ment
that
Christ
doth
so
dwel
in
vs
,
as
he
plainly
declareth
.
Our
sacrament
(
saith
he
)
doth
not
affirme
the
eatinge
of
a
manne
,
An
athematismo
.
11.
drawynge
wickedly
christen
people
to
haue
grosse
imaginacions
and
carnal
fantasies
of
suche
thinges
as
be
fine
and
pure
,
&
receiued
onely
with
a
sincere
faithe
.
But
as
twoo
waxes
,
In
Iohan
.
Lib
4.
Cap.
17
.
that
be
molten
&
put
togither
,
they
close
so
in
one
,
that
euery
part
of
the
one
,
is
ioyned
to
euery
parte
of
the
other
,
euen
so
(
saith
Cyril
)
he
that
receiueth
the
flesh
and
bloode
of
the
Lord
,
muste
needes
bee
so
ioyned
with
Christ
,
that
Christ
must
be
in
him
,
and
he
in
Christ
.
By
these
wordes
of
Cyril
appeareth
his
mind
plainly
,
that
wee
maye
not
grossely
and
rudelye
thinke
of
the
eating
of
Christ
with
our
mouths
,
but
with
our
faith
,
by
which
eatinge
(
although
he
be
absente
hence
bodely
and
be
in
the
eternall
life
and
glorye
with
his
father
)
yet
we
bee
made
partakers
of
hys
nature
,
to
bee
immortal
,
and
haue
eternall
lyfe
and
glorye
with
him
.
And
thus
is
declared
the
minde
aswell
of
Cyryll
as
of
Hylarius
.
Basilius
.
Nissenus
&
Nazianzenus
.
And
here
may
be
wel
enough
passed
ouer
Basilius
,
Gregorius
Nissenus
and
Gregorius
Nazianzenus
,
partely
bycause
they
speake
lyttle
of
this
mattier
,
and
partely
bycause
they
maye
bee
easyly
aunswered
vnto
,
by
that
which
is
,
before
declared
and
often
repeted
,
whiche
is
that
a
fygure
hath
the
name
of
the
thing
wherof
it
is
the
figure
,
and
therefore
of
the
fygure
maye
be
spoken
the
same
thinge
,
that
maye
be
spoken
of
the
thynge
it selfe
.
And
as
concerninge
the
eatinge
of
Christes
fleshe
and
drinkinge
of
his
bludde
,
they
spake
of
the
spirituall
eatinge
and
drinkinge
thereof
by
faith
,
and
not
of
corporall
eating
and
drnkinge
with
the
mouth
and
teethe
.
And
now
I
wyll
come
to
the
saying
of
S.
Ambrose
,
Ambrosius
de
sacramentis
libro
.
4.
cap.
4.
whiche
is
alwaies
in
their
mouthes
.
Before
the
consecration
saith
he
(
as
they
allege
)
it
is
bread
,
but
after
the
woordes
of
consecration
it
is
the
body
of
Chryste
.
For
answere
herevnto
,
yt
muste
be
fyrste
knowen
what
Consecration
is
.
Consecration
is
the
separation
of
anye
thing
from
a
prophane
and
wordely
vse
,
And
therfore
whan
vsual
and
common
water
is
taken
frome
other
vses
,
and
put
to
the
vse
of
baptisme
in
the
name
of
the
father
and
of
the
sonne
,
and
of
the
holy
ghost
,
than
it
may
rightly
be
called
Consecrated
water
,
that
is
to
saye
,
water
put
to
an
holy
vse
.
Euen
so
whan
common
bread
&
wine
be
taken
&
seuered
from
other
bread
and
wyne
,
to
the
vse
of
the
holy
communion
,
that
portion
of
bread
and
wyne
,
although
it
be
of
the
same
substance
that
the
other
is
,
from
the
whych
it
is
seuered
,
yet
it
is
nowe
called
consecrated
or
holy
bread
,
and
holy
wyne
.
Not
that
the
bread
and
wine
haue
or
can
haue
any
holynes
in
them
,
but
that
they
be
vsed
to
an
holy
worke
,
and
represent
holy
&
godly
thinges
.
And
therfore
S.
Dionyse
calleth
the
breade
,
De
eccl
Hie
rar
.
cap.
3.
holy
breade
,
and
the
cuppe
an
holy
cuppe
,
as
soone
as
they
bee
sette
vppon
the
aultate
to
the
vse
of
the
holy
communion
.
But
specially
they
maye
be
called
holye
and
consecrated
,
when
they
be
separated
to
that
holy
vse
of
Christes
owne
wordes
,
whiche
he
spake
for
that
purpose
,
So
that
commonly
the
authors
,
before
those
wordes
be
spoken
,
do
take
the
breade
and
wyne
but
as
other
common
bread
and
wine
,
but
after
those
woordes
be
pronounced
ouer
theym
,
than
they
take
theym
for
consecrated
and
holy
breade
and
wyne
.
Not
that
the
bread
and
wine
can
be
partakers
of
any
holynes
or
godlynesse
,
or
can
be
the
body
and
bloode
of
Christ
,
but
that
they
represent
the
very
bodye
and
bloude
of
Christe
,
and
the
holy
foode
and
nourishement
,
which
we
haue
by
him
,
And
so
thei
be
called
by
the
names
of
the
body
&
bloud
of
Christ
,
as
the
signe
,
token
and
figure
is
called
by
the
name
of
the
very
thinge
,
whiche
it
sheweth
and
signifieth
.
And
therefore
as
S.
Ambrose
in
the
wordes
before
cited
by
the
aduersaries
,
saith
,
that
beefore
the
consecration
,
it
is
bread
,
and
after
the
consecration
,
it
is
Christes
body
:
so
in
other
places
he
dothe
more
plainly
sette
forth
his
meaninge
,
saying
these
wordes
:
De
his
qui
mysterijs
ini
ciātur
ca.
ul.
Before
the
benediction
of
the
heauenly
wordes
,
it
is
called
an
other
kinde
of
thinge
,
but
after
the
consecration
,
is
signified
the
body
of
Christ
.
Likewise
before
the
consecration
it
is
called
an
other
thing
,
but
after
the
consecration
it
is
named
the
bludde
of
Christe
.
cap.
4.
And
again
he
saith
:
When
I
treated
of
the
sacramentes
,
I
tolde
you
that
that
thinge
whiche
is
offered
before
the
woordes
of
Christ
,
is
called
Bread
,
but
when
the
wordes
of
Christ
be
pronounced
,
than
it
is
not
called
bread
,
but
it
is
called
by
the
name
of
Christes
body
.
By
whiche
woordes
of
S.
Ambrose
,
it
appereth
plainly
,
that
the
bread
is
called
by
the
name
of
Christes
body
after
the
consecration
,
and
although
it
be
styll
bread
,
yet
after
consecration
it
is
dignyfyed
by
the
name
of
the
thing
,
whych
it
representeth
,
as
at
lengthe
is
declared
before
in
the
proces
of
transubstantiation
,
and
speciallye
in
the
woordes
of
Theodoretus
.
And
as
the
bread
is
a
corporal
meat
,
De
sacramentis
lib.
6.
ca.
1.
and
corporally
eaten
,
so
saith
S.
Ambrose
,
is
the
bodye
of
Christe
a
spirituall
meate
,
and
spiritually
eaten
,
and
that
requireth
no
corporall
presence
.
Now
let
vs
examine
S.
Iohn
Chrysostome
,
in
sermone
de
Eucharistia
in
Encaenijs
.
And
the
other
is
De
perditione
Iudae
.
And
as
touchyng
the
first
,
no
man
can
speake
more
plainly
against
them
,
than
sainct
Iohn
Chrysostome
speaketh
in
that
sermone
.
Wherefore
it
is
to
be
wondered
,
why
they
should
allege
him
for
their
partie
,
vnlesse
they
be
so
blynde
in
their
opinion
,
that
they
can
see
nothyng
,
nor
decerne
what
maketh
for
them
,
nor
what
against
them
.
〈◊〉
sermone
de
Eucharistia
in
Encaenijs
.
For
there
he
hath
these
woordes
.
Whan
you
comme
to
these
mysteries
(
speakyng
of
the
Lordes
boorde
and
holy
Communion
)
do
not
thynke
that
you
receyue
by
a
man
the
body
of
God
,
meanyng
of
Christe
.
These
bee
S.
Ihon
Chrysostome
his
owne
wordes
in
that
place
.
Than
if
we
receiue
not
the
body
of
Christe
at
the
handes
of
a
man
,
Ergo
,
the
body
of
Christ
is
not
really
,
corporally
and
naturally
in
the
sacrament
,
and
so
geuen
to
vs
by
the
priest
.
And
than
it
foloweth
,
that
all
the
Papistes
bee
lyars
,
because
they
fayue
and
teache
the
contrary
.
But
this
place
of
Chrysostome
is
touched
before
more
at
length
in
answeryng
to
the
Papistes
Transubstantiation
.
Wherfore
nowe
shall
be
answered
the
other
place
whiche
the
allege
of
Chrysostome
in
these
wordes
.
De
perditione
Iudae
.
Here
he
is
present
in
the
sacrament
and
dothe
consecrate
,
whiche
garnished
the
table
at
the
maundy
or
last
supper
.
For
it
is
not
man
,
whiche
maketh
of
the
bread
and
wyne
,
beyng
set
furth
to
be
consecrated
,
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christe
,
but
it
is
Christe
him selfe
:
(
whiche
for
vs
is
crucifyed
)
that
maketh
him selfe
to
bee
there
present
.
The
wordes
are
vttered
and
pronounced
by
the
mouthe
of
the
priest
,
but
the
consecration
is
by
the
vertue
,
myght
,
and
grace
of
God
hym selfe
.
And
as
this
saying
of
God
(
Increase
,
the
saiyng
of
Christe
,
This
is
my
bodye
.
beyng
but
ones
spoken
,
doth
throughout
all
churches
to
this
present
,
and
shall
to
his
last
commyng
,
geue
force
and
strength
to
this
sacrifice
.
Thus
farre
they
reherse
of
Chrysostomes
wordes
.
Whiche
woordes
although
they
sound
muche
for
their
purpose
,
yet
if
they
be
throughly
considered
,
and
conferred
with
other
places
of
the
same
author
,
it
shall
well
appeare
,
that
he
mente
nothyng
lesse
,
than
that
Christes
bodye
should
be
corporally
and
naturally
present
in
the
bread
and
wyne
,
but
that
in
suche
sorte
he
is
in
heauen
only
,
and
in
our
myndes
by
fayth
we
ascend
vp
into
heauen
,
to
eat
him
there
,
although
sacramentally
as
in
a
signe
and
figure
,
he
be
in
the
bread
and
wyne
(
and
so
is
he
also
in
the
water
of
Baptisme
)
&
in
theim
that
rightly
receiue
the
bread
&
wyne
,
he
is
in
a
much
more
perfection
than
corporally
(
whiche
should
auayle
them
nothyng
)
but
in
them
he
is
spiritually
with
his
diuine
power
,
geuing
them
eternall
lyfe
.
And
as
in
the
first
creation
of
the
world
,
al
lyuyng
creatures
had
their
first
life
by
gods
only
word
.
(
for
god
only
spake
his
word
,
and
al
thinges
were
created
by
and
by
accordingly
)
and
after
their
creation
hee
spake
these
woordes
:
And
therefore
dooeth
hee
so
often
saye
,
that
wee
receaue
Christe
in
baptisme
,
and
whanne
he
hathe
spoken
of
the
receauinge
of
hym
in
the
holy
Communion
,
by
and
by
he
speaketh
of
the
receauing
of
him
in
baptisme
,
withoute
declarynge
any
diuersytee
of
his
presence
in
the
one
,
from
his
presence
in
the
other
.
Ad
populum
Antiochenum
hom.
61.
&
in
Ioannem
hom.
45.
He
saieth
also
in
many
places
,
that
we
ascende
into
heauen
,
and
do
eate
Christe
sittinge
there
aboue
.
AND
where
S.
Chrysostome
and
other
Authors
doo
speake
of
the
wonderfull
operation
of
God
in
his
sacramentes
,
passynge
all
mannes
wytte
,
senses
,
and
reason
,
he
meaneth
not
of
the
workyng
of
God
in
the
water
,
bread
and
wyne
,
but
of
the
meruaylous
workyng
of
God
in
the
hartes
of
them
that
receaue
the
sacramentes
,
secretely
,
inwardly
,
and
spiritually
transformyng
them
,
renuyng
,
fedyng
,
comfortyng
and
nourishyng
them
with
his
fleshe
and
bloud
,
thorough
his
most
holy
spirite
,
the
same
fleshe
and
bloud
styll
remaynyng
in
heauen
.
Thus
is
this
place
of
Chrysostome
sufficiently
answered
vnto
.
And
yf
any
man
requyre
any
more
,
than
let
hym
looke
what
is
recited
of
the
same
author
before
in
the
matter
of
transubstantiation
.
Yet
furthermore
they
bryng
for
theim
Theophilus
Alexandrinus
,
CHRISTE
gyuynge
thankes
,
dydde
breake
,
(
which
also
we
do
)
addynge
therto
praier
.
And
he
gaue
vnto
them
,
sayeng
:
Take
,
this
is
my
body
.
this
that
I
doo
now
gyue
,
and
that
whiche
ye
nowe
doo
take
.
For
the
breade
is
not
a
figure
onely
of
Christes
body
,
but
it
is
chaunged
into
the
very
body
of
Christe
.
For
Christ
saith
:
The
bread
whiche
I
wyll
geue
you
,
he
doth
tourne
the
very
bread
and
wyne
into
the
very
fleshe
and
bloude
of
Christe
.
These
be
the
wordes
whyche
the
Papistes
do
cite
out
of
Theophilus
vpon
the
gospel
of
saint
Marke
.
But
by
this
one
place
it
appeereth
euidently
,
either
howe
negligente
the
Papistes
bee
in
serchyng
out
and
examynyng
the
saiynges
of
the
authors
,
which
they
allege
for
their
purpose
,
or
els
howe
false
and
deceytfull
they
be
,
whyche
willyngly
and
wittyngly
haue
made
in
this
one
place
,
and
as
it
were
with
one
breath
,
two
loude
and
shamefull
lyes
.
The
first
is
,
that
bycause
they
wolde
geue
the
more
authorite
to
the
woordes
by
them
alleged
,
they
(
like
fals
Potycaties
that
sell
quid
pro
quo
)
falsifie
the
authors
name
,
fatherynge
suche
sayenges
vpon
Theophilus
Alexandrinus
,
an
olde
and
auncient
author
,
whiche
were
in
dede
none
of
his
wordes
,
but
wer
the
wordes
of
Theophilactus
,
who
was
many
yeres
after
Theophilus
Alexandrinus
.
But
suche
hathe
euer
been
the
Papisticall
subtiltees
,
to
set
forth
their
owne
inuentions
,
dreames
,
and
lyes
,
vnder
the
name
of
antiquitee
and
auncient
Authors
The
second
lye
or
falshod
is
,
that
thei
falsifie
the
authors
wordes
and
meanyng
,
subuertynge
the
truth
of
his
doctrine
.
For
where
Theophylactus
(
accordynge
to
the
catholike
doctrine
of
auncient
authors
)
sayth
,
that
almightie
God
(
condescendyng
to
our
infirmitee
)
reserueth
the
kynde
of
bread
&
wyne
,
and
yet
tourneth
them
into
the
vertue
of
Christes
fleshe
and
bloud
:
They
saye
that
he
reserueth
the
formes
and
apparances
of
bread
&
wyne
,
and
turneth
them
into
the
Uerite
of
his
fleshe
and
bloud
.
so
tornyng
and
alteryng
kyndes
into
fourmes
and
apparances
,
and
vertue
into
Ueritee
,
that
of
the
vertue
of
the
fleshe
and
bloud
,
thei
make
the
veritee
of
his
flesh
and
bloud
.
And
thus
haue
they
falsified
as
well
the
name
as
the
wordes
of
Theophilactus
,
turnyng
veritee
into
playne
and
flatte
falsitee
.
But
to
sette
foorth
playnely
the
meanyng
of
Theophylactus
in
this
matter
,
As
hot
and
burnyng
yron
is
yron
styll
,
and
yet
hath
the
force
of
fyer
,
and
as
the
fleshe
of
Christ
styl
remainynge
fleshe
,
geueth
lyfe
,
as
the
flesshe
of
hym
that
is
God
:
so
the
sacramentall
bread
&
wyne
remayne
styll
in
their
propre
kyndes
,
and
yet
to
them
that
worthyly
eate
and
drynke
them
,
they
be
tourned
not
into
the
corporall
presence
,
but
into
the
vertue
of
Christes
fleshe
and
bloud
.
And
although
Theophylactus
spake
of
the
eatyng
of
the
very
body
of
Christ
,
and
the
drinkyng
of
his
very
bloud
,
(
and
not
only
of
the
figures
of
them
)
and
of
the
conuersion
of
the
bread
and
wyne
into
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
yet
he
meaneth
not
of
a
grosse
,
carnal
,
corporall
,
and
sensible
conuersion
of
the
breade
and
wyne
,
nor
of
a
lyke
eatyng
and
drynkynge
of
his
fleshe
and
bloud
(
for
so
not
only
our
stomakes
wold
yerne
and
oure
heartes
abhorre
to
eate
his
fleshe
and
to
drynke
his
bloude
,
but
also
suche
eatyng
and
drynkynge
could
nothyng
profit
and
auayle
vs
)
but
he
spake
of
the
celestial
and
spiritual
eatyng
of
Christ
,
and
of
a
sacramental
conuersion
of
the
bread
,
callyng
the
bread
not
onely
a
figure
,
but
also
the
bodye
of
Christ
,
geuynge
vs
by
those
woordes
to
vnderstande
,
that
in
the
sacramente
wee
not
onely
eate
corporally
the
bread
(
whyche
is
a
sacrament
and
figure
of
Christes
body
)
but
spiritually
we
eate
also
his
very
body
,
&
drynke
his
very
bloud
.
And
this
doctrine
of
Theophilactus
is
both
true
,
godly
and
comfortable
.
Panes
propositionis
,
and
the
body
of
Christe
,
as
there
is
betwene
a
shadowe
of
a
bodye
,
and
the
body
it selfe
,
and
as
there
is
betwene
an
ymage
and
the
thyng
it self
,
and
betwene
an
example
of
thynges
to
come
,
and
the
thynges
that
be
prefigured
by
them
.
These
wordes
of
saincte
Hierome
truely
vnderstand
,
serue
nothyng
for
th
entent
of
the
Papistes
.
For
he
ment
that
the
Shew
breade
of
the
lawe
,
was
but
a
darke
shadow
of
Christ
to
come
,
but
the
sacrament
of
Christes
body
is
a
clere
testimony
,
that
Christ
is
already
comme
,
&
that
he
hath
performed
that
whiche
was
promysed
,
and
doth
presently
comforte
and
feede
vs
spiritually
with
his
precious
body
and
bloud
,
not
withstandyng
that
corporally
he
is
ascended
into
heuen
.
Augustinus
Sedulius
.
And
the
same
is
to
be
answered
vnto
all
that
the
aduersaries
bryng
of
S.
Augustin
,
Sedulius
,
Leo
,
Fulgentius
.
Cassiodorus
Gregorius
.
Fulgentius
,
Cassiodorus
,
Gregorius
,
and
other
,
concernyng
the
eatyng
of
Christe
in
the
sacrament
.
Which
thyng
can
not
be
vnderstanded
plainly
as
the
wordes
sounde
,
but
fyguratiuely
and
spiritually
,
as
before
is
sufficiently
proued
,
and
herafter
shal
be
more
fully
declared
in
the
fourth
parte
of
this
booke
.
But
here
Iohn
Damascene
maye
in
no
wyse
be
passed
ouer
,
Damascenus
de
fide
orth.
lib.
4.
cap.
14.
whom
for
his
auctoritee
the
aduersaries
of
Christes
true
naturall
bodye
do
reken
as
a
stout
champion
sufficient
to
defend
all
the
whole
matter
alone
,
But
neyther
is
the
authoritee
of
Damascene
so
greate
,
that
they
may
oppresse
vs
thereby
,
nor
his
woordes
so
playne
for
them
,
as
they
boaste
and
vntruely
pretende
.
For
he
is
but
a
yonge
newe
author
in
the
respect
of
those
which
we
haue
brought
in
for
our
party
And
in
diuers
pointes
he
varieth
from
the
most
ancient
authors
(
if
he
meane
as
thei
expound
him
)
as
when
he
saith
,
that
the
bread
and
wine
be
not
figures
,
which
all
the
old
authors
call
figures
,
and
that
the
bread
and
wyne
consume
not
,
nor
be
auoyded
downewarde
,
which
Origen
and
S.
Augustine
affirme
,
or
that
they
be
not
called
the
examples
of
Christes
body
after
the
consecration
,
whiche
shall
manyfestely
appere
false
by
the
Liturgy
ascribed
vnto
S.
Basill
.
And
moreouer
,
the
sayde
Damascene
was
one
of
the
byshoppe
of
Romes
chiefe
proctoures
against
the
Emperours
,
and
as
it
were
his
ryght
hande
,
to
set
abroade
all
ydolatrye
by
his
owne
handewrytynge
.
And
therefore
yf
he
loste
his
hande
(
as
they
saye
he
dyd
)
he
lost
it
by
Goddes
moste
righteous
iudgemente
,
what
soeuer
they
faine
and
fable
of
the
miraculous
restitution
of
the
same
.
And
yet
what
so
euer
the
sayd
Damascene
writeth
in
other
mattiers
,
surely
in
this
place
wiche
the
aduersaries
doo
alledge
,
he
writeth
spiritually
and
godly
,
although
the
Papistes
either
of
ignorance
mystake
hym
,
or
els
willyngly
wraste
him
and
writhe
hym
to
their
purpose
,
cleane
contrary
to
his
meanynge
.
The
sum
of
Damascene
his
doctrine
in
this
matter
is
this
.
That
as
Christ
beyng
both
God
&
man
hath
in
him
two
natures
,
so
hath
he
twoo
natiuitees
,
one
eternal
,
&
thother
temporall
.
And
so
lykewise
we
(
beyng
as
it
were
double
men
,
or
hauyng
euery
one
of
vs
two
men
in
vs
,
the
new
man
&
the
old
man
,
the
spirituall
man
&
the
carnall
man
)
haue
a
double
natiuitee
:
One
of
oure
first
carnall
father
Adam
(
by
whom
as
by
ancient
inheritance
cometh
vnto
vs
malediction
and
euerlastyng
damnation
)
&
the
other
of
our
heauenly
Adam
,
that
is
to
saye
,
of
Christ
,
by
whom
we
be
made
heires
of
celestiall
benediction
,
and
euerlastyng
glory
and
immortalitee
.
And
bycause
this
Adam
is
spirituall
,
therefore
our
generation
by
hym
muste
be
spirituall
,
&
our
feedyng
muste
bee
lykewise
spirituall
.
And
our
spirituall
generation
by
hym
is
playnly
set
forth
in
baptisme
,
and
our
spirituall
meate
and
foode
is
set
foorth
in
the
holy
Communion
&
supper
of
the
Lorde
.
And
because
our
sightes
bee
so
feble
that
we
cannot
see
the
spiritual
water
wherwith
we
be
washed
in
baptisme
,
nor
the
spiritual
meat
wherwith
we
be
fedde
at
the
Lordes
table
,
therfore
to
healpe
oure
infirmities
,
and
to
make
vs
the
better
to
see
the
same
with
a
pure
fayth
,
our
sauiour
Christ
hath
set
furth
the
same
,
as
it
were
before
our
eyes
,
by
sensible
signes
and
tokens
,
whiche
we
be
daily
vsed
and
accustomed
vnto
.
And
because
the
common
custome
of
men
is
to
washe
in
water
,
therfore
our
spiritual
regeneration
in
Christe
,
or
spirituall
washyng
in
his
blud
,
is
declared
vnto
vs
in
baptisme
by
water
.
Lykewise
oure
spiritual
norishement
&
feadyng
in
Christ
,
is
sette
before
oure
eyes
by
bread
and
wyne
,
because
they
be
meates
and
drynkes
whiche
chiefly
and
vsually
we
be
fedde
withal
,
that
as
they
feade
the
body
,
so
doth
Christe
with
his
fleshe
and
bloud
spiritually
feade
the
soule
.
And
therefore
the
bread
and
wyne
bee
called
examples
of
Christes
fleshe
and
bloud
,
and
also
they
be
called
his
very
fleshe
and
blode
,
to
signifie
vnto
vs
,
that
as
they
feade
vs
carnally
,
so
do
they
admonishe
vs
that
Christe
with
his
fleshe
and
bloud
doth
feade
vs
spiritually
,
and
moste
truely
vnto
euerlastyng
life
.
And
as
almyghty
God
by
his
moste
myghty
worde
and
his
hollye
spirite
and
infinite
power
brought
forth
all
creatures
in
the
begynnyng
,
and
euer
sithens
hath
preserued
theym
,
euen
so
by
the
same
worde
and
power
he
woorketh
in
vs
from
time
to
tyme
this
meruailous
spiritual
generation
&
wonderfull
spirituall
norishment
&
feedyng
,
which
is
wrought
onely
by
God
,
and
is
comprehended
and
receiued
of
vs
by
fayth
.
And
as
bread
and
drynke
by
natural
norishement
be
chaunged
into
a
mannes
body
,
and
yet
the
body
is
not
chaunged
,
but
the
same
that
it
was
before
:
so
although
the
bread
and
wyne
be
sacramentally
chaunged
into
Christes
body
,
yet
his
body
is
the
same
and
in
the
same
place
that
it
was
before
,
that
is
to
say
,
in
heauen
,
without
any
alteracion
of
the
same
.
And
the
bread
and
wyne
bee
not
so
chaunged
into
the
fleshe
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
that
they
bee
made
one
nature
,
but
they
remayne
styll
distinct
in
nature
,
so
that
the
bread
in
it selfe
is
not
his
fleshe
,
&
the
wyne
his
bloud
,
but
vnto
them
that
worthely
eate
and
drinke
the
bread
and
wyne
,
to
them
the
bread
and
wyne
be
his
flesh
and
bloud
,
that
is
to
say
,
by
thynges
naturall
and
whiche
they
be
accustomed
vnto
,
they
bee
exalted
vnto
thynges
aboue
nature
.
For
the
sacramental
bread
and
wyne
be
not
base
and
naked
figures
,
but
so
pithy
and
effectuous
,
that
whosoeuer
worthely
eateth
them
,
eateth
spiritually
Christes
fleshe
and
bloud
,
and
hath
by
them
euerlastyng
life
.
Wherfore
,
whosoeuer
commeth
to
the
Lordes
table
,
must
come
with
all
humilitee
,
feare
,
reuerence
and
puritie
of
life
,
as
to
receiue
not
onely
bread
and
wyne
,
but
also
our
sauior
Christ
,
both
God
and
man
,
with
al
his
benefites
,
to
the
relief
and
sustentacion
both
of
their
bodies
and
soules
.
This
is
briefly
the
summe
and
true
meanyng
of
Damascene
,
concernyng
this
matter
.
Wherfore
they
that
gather
of
hym
,
either
the
natural
presence
of
Christes
body
in
the
sacramentes
of
bread
and
wyne
,
or
the
adoration
of
the
outward
and
visible
sacrament
,
or
that
after
the
consecracion
there
remayneth
no
bread
nor
wyne
nor
other
substaunce
but
onely
the
substaunce
of
the
body
and
bloude
of
Christe
:
eyther
they
vnderstand
not
Damascen
,
or
els
of
wilful
frowardnes
they
wyll
not
vnderstande
hym
:
whyche
rather
seemeth
to
bee
true
,
by
suche
collections
as
they
haue
vniustly
gathered
&
noted
out
of
him
.
For
although
he
say
,
that
Christe
is
the
spirituall
meate
,
yet
as
in
baptisme
the
holy
ghost
is
not
in
the
water
,
but
in
hym
that
is
vnfaynedly
baptised
:
so
Damascene
ment
not
that
Christ
is
in
the
bread
,
but
in
hym
that
worthily
eateth
the
bred
.
And
though
he
say
that
the
bread
is
Christes
body
,
and
the
wyne
his
bloud
,
yet
he
mente
not
that
the
bread
considered
in
it selfe
,
or
the
wyne
in
it selfe
,
beyng
not
receyued
,
is
his
fleshe
and
bloud
:
but
to
suche
as
by
vnfayned
faith
woorthely
receyue
the
breade
and
wyne
,
to
suche
the
breade
and
wyne
,
are
called
by
Damascene
the
body
and
bloude
of
Christe
,
bycause
that
suche
persons
,
through
the
workyng
of
the
holy
gost
,
be
so
knytte
and
vnited
spirituallye
to
Christes
fleshe
and
bloude
,
and
to
his
diuinitee
also
,
that
they
bee
fedde
with
them
vnto
euerlastyng
life
.
Furthermore
Damascene
sayeth
not
that
the
sacrament
should
be
worshipped
and
adored
,
as
the
Papistes
terme
it
(
whiche
is
playne
ydolatrye
)
but
we
must
worship
Christ
God
and
man
.
And
yet
we
may
not
worship
him
in
bread
and
wyne
,
but
sittyng
in
heauen
with
his
father
,
and
beyng
spiritually
within
our selues
.
Nor
he
sayeth
not
,
that
there
remayneth
no
bread
nor
wyne
,
nor
none
other
substaunce
,
but
onely
the
substaunce
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christe
:
but
he
sayeth
playnely
,
that
as
a
burnyng
coale
is
not
wodde
onely
,
but
fyre
&
wodde
ioyned
together
.
so
the
bread
of
the
Communion
is
not
bread
onely
,
but
bread
ioyned
to
the
diuinitee
.
But
those
that
say
,
that
there
is
none
other
substance
but
the
substance
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christe
,
doo
not
onely
denye
that
there
is
bread
and
wyne
,
but
by
force
they
must
denye
also
,
that
there
is
either
Christes
diuinitee
or
his
soule
.
For
if
the
fleshe
and
bloud
,
the
soule
and
diuinitee
of
Christe
bee
foure
substances
,
and
in
the
sacrament
be
but
two
of
them
,
that
is
to
say
,
his
fleshe
and
bloud
,
than
where
be
his
soule
and
diuinitee
?
And
thus
these
men
diuide
Iesus
,
separatyng
his
diuinitee
from
his
humanitee
.
Of
whom
sainct
Ihon
sayeth
,
And
moreouer
these
men
do
so
separate
Christes
body
from
his
membres
in
the
sacrament
,
that
they
leaue
hym
no
mans
body
at
all
.
For
as
Damascene
saith
,
But
by
these
Papistes
doctrine
,
there
is
no
suche
distinction
of
membres
in
the
sacramente
,
for
eyther
there
is
no
head
,
fete
,
handes
,
armes
,
legges
,
mouthe
,
eyes
,
and
nose
at
all
:
or
elles
all
is
heade
,
all
feete
,
all
handes
,
all
armes
,
all
legges
,
all
mouthe
,
all
eyes
,
and
all
nose
.
And
so
they
make
of
Christes
body
,
no
mannes
bodye
at
all
.
Thus
beynge
confuted
the
Papistes
errours
as
well
concernyng
Transubstantiation
,
as
the
reall
,
corporall
and
natural
presence
of
Christ
in
the
sacrament
,
whiche
were
two
principall
pointes
purposed
in
the
begynnyng
of
this
woorke
.
Nowe
it
is
tyme
som
thyng
to
speke
of
the
third
errour
of
the
Papistes
,
whyche
is
concernynge
the
eatynge
of
CHRISTES
very
bodye
and
drynkyng
of
his
bloude
.
Thus
endeth
the
thirde
booke
.
THE
FOVRTH
BOOKE
IS
OF
THE
EATYNG
AND
DRINKYNG
OF
the
body
and
bloud
of
our
Sauiour
Christe
.
Chap.
1.
THE
GROSSE
errour
of
the
Papistes
,
is
of
the
carnal
eatyng
and
drynkyng
of
Christes
fleshe
&
bloud
,
For
they
say
,
that
whosoeuer
eate
and
drynke
the
sacramentes
of
bread
and
wyne
,
do
eate
and
drynk
also
with
their
mouthes
Christes
very
fleshe
and
bloud
,
be
they
neuer
so
vngodly
and
wicked
persons
.
But
Christ
hym selfe
taughte
cleane
contrary
in
the
.vi.
of
Iohn
,
that
we
eate
not
hym
carnally
with
our
mouths
,
but
spiritually
with
our
faith
,
Uerely
verely
I
say
vnto
you
:
he
that
beleueth
in
me
,
hath
euerlasting
life
.
I
am
the
bread
of
life
.
Your
fathers
did
eate
Manna
in
the
wildernes
,
and
died
.
This
is
the
bread
that
cam
from
heauen
,
that
who
so
euer
shall
eate
therof
,
shall
not
dye
.
I
am
the
liuely
bread
that
cam
from
heuen
,
If
any
man
eate
of
this
bread
,
he
shal
lyue
for
euer
.
And
the
bread
whiche
I
wyll
geue
,
is
my
fleshe
,
whyche
I
wyll
geue
for
the
lyfe
of
the
worlde
.
This
is
the
moste
trewe
doctrine
of
our
sauiour
Christe
,
that
who
so
euer
eateth
hym
,
shall
haue
euerlasting
life
.
And
by
and
by
it
foloweth
in
the
same
place
of
Iohn
more
cleerely
.
Ueryly
verely
I
say
vnto
you
,
except
you
eate
the
fleshe
of
the
sonne
of
man
,
and
drynke
his
bloud
,
you
shall
not
haue
lyfe
in
you
.
He
that
eateth
my
fleshe
and
drynketh
my
bloud
,
hath
lyfe
euerlastyng
,
and
I
wyll
rayse
hym
agayne
at
the
laste
daye
:
For
my
fleshe
is
very
meate
,
and
my
bloudde
is
very
drynke
,
He
that
eateth
my
fleshe
,
and
drynketh
my
bloud
,
dwelleth
in
me
,
and
I
in
hym
.
As
the
lyuyng
father
hath
sente
me
,
and
I
lyue
by
the
father
,
euen
so
he
that
eateth
me
,
shal
lyue
by
me
.
This
is
the
bread
whiche
came
downe
from
heauen
,
not
as
your
fathers
dyd
eate
Manna
,
and
are
dead
,
he
that
eateth
of
this
bread
,
shall
lyue
for
euer
.
This
taught
our
sauiour
Christe
as
well
his
disciples
as
the
Iewes
at
Capernaum
,
that
the
eatyng
of
his
fleshe
and
drynkyng
of
his
bloude
was
not
lyke
to
the
eatyng
of
Manna
.
For
both
good
and
badde
dyd
eate
Manna
,
but
none
do
eate
his
fleshe
and
drynke
his
bloudde
,
but
they
haue
euerlastyng
lyfe
.
For
as
his
father
dwelleth
in
hym
,
and
he
in
his
father
,
and
so
hathe
lyfe
by
his
father
:
so
he
that
eateth
Christes
fleshe
and
drynketh
his
bloud
,
dwelleth
in
Christ
&
Christ
in
him
,
&
by
Christ
he
hath
eternall
lyfe
.
What
nede
we
any
other
witnesse
?
whan
Christe
hym selfe
doth
testifie
the
matter
so
plainly
,
that
who
so
euer
eateth
his
fleshe
and
drynketh
his
bloud
,
hath
euerlastynge
lyfe
?
and
that
to
eate
his
fleshe
and
to
drinke
his
bloud
,
is
to
beleue
in
hym
?
And
who
so
euer
beleueth
in
him
,
hath
euerlastyng
lyfe
.
Whereof
it
foloweth
necessaryly
,
that
vngodly
persons
(
beyng
lymmes
of
the
diuell
)
do
not
eate
Christes
fleshe
nor
drynke
his
bloud
,
excepte
the
Papistes
wold
saie
,
that
suche
haue
euerlastyng
lyfe
.
But
as
the
dyuell
is
the
foode
of
the
wycked
,
whiche
he
nourisheth
in
all
iniquitee
,
and
bryngeth
vp
into
euerlastyng
damnation
:
so
is
Christe
the
very
fode
of
al
them
that
bee
the
liuely
membres
of
his
body
,
and
them
he
norisheth
,
fedeth
,
bringeth
vp
and
cherisheth
vnto
euerlasting
life
Chap.
2.
And
euery
good
and
faythfull
christian
man
feeleth
in
hym selfe
,
bowe
he
feedeth
of
Christe
,
eatyng
his
fleshe
,
And
this
is
the
eatyng
of
Christes
flesh
&
drinkyng
of
his
blud
,
the
felyng
wherof
is
to
euery
man
,
the
felyng
how
he
eateth
&
drynketh
Christ
,
which
none
euil
man
nor
membre
of
the
diuel
can
do
Chap.
3.
For
as
Christ
is
a
spiritual
meate
,
so
is
he
spritually
eaten
&
digested
with
the
spirituall
part
of
vs
,
Therfore
saith
S.
Cyprian
,
Cyprianus
de
coena
Domini
.
he
that
drynketh
of
the
holy
cup
,
remembrynge
this
benefite
of
God
,
is
more
thirsty
than
he
was
before
.
And
lifting
vp
his
hart
vnto
the
lyuyng
God
,
is
taken
with
suche
a
singular
hunger
and
appetite
,
that
he
abhorreth
all
gally
and
bytter
drynkes
of
synne
,
and
al
sauour
of
carnall
pleasure
is
to
him
as
it
were
sharpe
&
sowre
vineger
.
And
the
synner
beyng
conuerted
,
receauyng
the
holy
mysteries
of
the
Lordes
supper
,
geueth
thankes
vnto
God
,
&
boweth
downe
his
head
,
knowyng
that
his
sinnes
be
forgeuen
,
and
that
he
is
made
cleane
and
perfecte
,
and
his
soule
(
whiche
God
hath
sanctified
)
he
rendreth
to
God
agayne
as
a
faythfull
pledge
,
and
than
he
glorieth
with
Paule
,
and
reioyseth
,
saieng
:
Nowe
it
is
not
I
that
lyue
,
but
it
is
Christ
that
lyueth
within
me
.
These
thynges
be
practised
and
vsed
among
faithfull
people
,
and
to
pure
myndes
,
the
eatyng
of
his
fleshe
is
no
horrour
but
honour
,
and
the
spirite
delyteth
in
the
drynkyng
of
the
holy
and
sanctifyenge
bloude
.
And
dooyng
this
,
we
whette
not
our
teethe
to
byte
but
with
pure
faith
we
breake
the
holy
breade
.
These
be
the
woordes
of
Cyprian
.
And
acording
vnto
the
same
S.
Austen
saith
,
August.
de
verbis
domini
sermo
.
33.
In
Ioan.
tracta
.
25.
Prepare
not
thy
iawes
,
but
thy
hert
.
And
in
an
other
place
(
as
it
is
cited
of
him
)
he
saith
,
why
dost
thou
prepare
thy
bely
&
thy
teeth
?
beleue
,
&
thou
hast
eaten
.
But
of
this
matter
is
sufficiently
spoken
before
,
where
it
is
proued
,
that
to
eate
Christs
flesh
and
drinke
his
bloud
,
bee
figuratiue
speeches
.
Cha.
4.
And
now
to
returne
to
our
purpose
,
that
only
the
liuely
membres
of
Christ
do
eate
his
fleshe
&
drynke
his
blud
,
Fyrst
Origen
writeth
plainly
after
this
maner
.
The
worde
was
made
fleshe
and
very
meat
,
Origenes
in
Math
▪
ca.
15.
whiche
whoso
eateth
,
shall
surely
liue
for
euer
,
whiche
no
euil
man
can
eate
.
For
if
it
could
be
,
that
he
that
contynueth
euil
,
might
eate
the
woorde
made
fleshe
,
seyng
that
he
is
the
woorde
&
bread
of
life
,
it
should
not
haue
been
written
:
Whosoeuer
eateth
this
bread
shall
liue
for
euer
.
These
wordes
be
so
plaine
,
that
I
nede
say
nothyng
for
the
more
cleare
declaracion
of
them
.
Wherfore
you
shal
heare
howe
Cyprian
agreeth
with
him
.
Cyprianus
in
sermo.
de
coena
domini
.
Cyprian
in
his
sermon
ascribed
vnto
him
of
the
Lordes
supper
,
sayth
:
The
author
of
this
tradicion
sayd
,
that
except
we
eate
his
fleshe
and
drynke
his
bloud
,
we
should
haue
no
life
in
vs
,
instructyng
vs
with
a
spiritual
lesson
,
and
openyng
to
vs
a
way
to
vnderstand
so
priuy
a
thing
,
that
we
should
knowe
,
that
the
eatyng
is
our
dwellyng
in
him
,
and
our
drinkyng
is
as
it
were
an
incorporation
in
him
,
beyng
subiecte
vnto
him
in
obedience
,
ioyned
vnto
him
in
our
wylles
,
and
vnited
in
our
affections
.
The
eatyng
therefore
of
this
fleshe
,
is
a
certaine
hunger
and
desire
to
dwell
in
him
.
Thus
wryteth
Cyprian
of
the
eatyng
&
drynkyng
of
Christe
.
And
a
lytle
after
he
sayth
,
that
none
do
eate
of
this
lambe
,
but
suche
as
be
true
Israelites
,
that
is
to
say
,
pure
christian
menue
without
colour
or
dissimulacion
.
And
Athanasius
speakinge
of
the
eatinge
of
Christes
fleshe
and
drinking
of
his
bloud
,
that
for
this
cause
he
made
mention
of
his
ascencion
into
heauen
,
to
plucke
them
from
corporall
phantasie
,
that
thei
might
learne
hereafter
,
that
his
fleshe
was
called
the
celestiall
meate
that
came
from
aboue
,
and
a
spirituall
foode
which
he
would
geue
.
For
those
thinges
that
I
speake
to
you
(
saithe
he
)
be
spirite
and
life
.
Whiche
is
as
muche
to
say
,
as
that
thinge
which
you
see
,
shal
be
slayne
,
&
gyuen
for
the
norishment
of
the
worlde
,
that
it
maye
bee
distributed
to
euerye
body
spiritually
and
be
to
all
men
a
conseruacion
vnto
the
resurrection
of
eternall
lyfe
.
In
these
woordes
Athanasius
declareth
the
cause
why
Christ
made
mention
of
his
ascention
into
heauen
,
whan
hee
spake
of
the
eatinge
and
drinking
of
his
fleshe
and
blud
.
The
cause
after
Athanasius
mynde
was
thys
,
that
his
hearers
shuld
not
thinke
of
any
carnal
eating
of
his
body
with
their
mouths
(
for
as
concerning
the
presence
of
his
body
,
he
should
be
taken
from
them
,
and
ascende
into
heauen
,
but
that
they
shuld
vnderstande
him
to
be
a
spirituall
meate
,
and
spiritually
to
be
eaten
,
and
bi
that
refreshing
to
giue
eternall
lyfe
,
which
he
doth
to
none
,
but
to
suche
as
be
his
lyuely
membres
.
And
of
this
eatinge
speaketh
also
Basilius
,
Basilius
epistola
.
141.
that
we
eate
Christes
flesh
and
drinke
his
blud
,
beynge
made
,
by
hys
incarnation
and
sensyble
lyfe
,
partakers
of
his
worde
and
wysedome
.
For
his
fleshe
and
bludde
he
called
all
his
mysticall
conuersation
here
in
his
fleshe
and
his
doctrine
,
consistinge
of
his
whole
lyfe
,
pertaininge
bothe
to
his
humanitie
and
diuinitye
,
whereby
the
soule
is
norished
and
brought
to
the
contemplacion
of
thinges
eternall
Thus
teacheth
Basilius
howe
we
eate
Christes
flesh
and
drinke
his
blud
,
which
pertaineth
only
to
the
true
and
faithful
membres
of
Christ
.
Hieronymus
in
Esaiam
caput
.
66.
Saint
hierome
also
saith
:
All
that
loue
pleasure
more
than
god
,
eate
not
the
fleshe
of
Iesu
,
nor
drinke
his
bludde
,
of
the
whiche
himselfe
saith
:
He
that
eateth
my
fleshe
and
drinketh
my
blud
,
hath
euerlastynge
lyfe
.
In
Hiere
miam
.
And
in
an
other
place
S.
Hierome
saith
,
that
heretiques
do
not
eat
and
drynk
the
body
and
bludde
of
the
Lorde
.
In
Oseam
.
caput
.
8.
And
moreouer
he
saithe
,
that
heretiques
eate
not
the
fleshe
of
Iesu
,
whose
flesh
is
the
meate
of
faythfull
men
.
Thus
agreeth
S.
Hierome
with
the
other
before
rehersed
,
that
heretiques
and
such
as
folow
wordly
pleasures
,
eat
not
Christs
flesh
nor
drink
his
blud
,
bicause
that
Christ
said
,
He
that
eateth
my
flesh
&
drinketh
mi
blud
,
hath
euerlasting
life
.
that
Iesus
is
the
bread
which
is
the
meat
of
Saintes
,
and
that
he
that
taketh
this
breade
,
dieth
not
a
sinners
deathe
.
For
this
breade
is
the
remission
of
sinnes
.
And
in
an
other
booke
to
him
intituled
he
writeth
thus
.
This
breade
of
lyfe
whiche
came
frome
heauen
doth
minister
euerlasting
life
,
De
ijs
qui
mysterijs
initiantur
.
and
whosoeuer
eateth
this
bread
shall
not
dye
for
euer
,
and
is
the
bodye
of
Christe
.
And
yet
in
an
other
booke
sette
forth
in
his
name
,
De
sacramentis
li.
4.
ca.
5
he
saith
on
this
wise
:
He
that
did
eat
Manna
,
died
,
but
he
that
eateth
this
body
,
shal
haue
remission
of
his
synnes
,
and
shall
not
dye
for
euer
.
And
againe
he
saith
:
Lib.
5
ca.
3.
As
often
as
thou
drinkest
,
thou
haste
remission
of
thy
sinnes
.
These
sentences
of
S.
Ambrose
be
so
playne
in
this
matter
,
that
there
needeth
no
more
,
but
only
the
rehersall
of
theim
.
But
S.
Augustine
in
many
places
plainlye
discussing
this
mattier
,
Augustinus
in
sententijs
ex
prospero
decerptis
cap.
339
,
saith
:
He
that
agreeth
not
with
Christe
,
doeth
neither
eate
his
bodye
nor
drinke
his
bludde
,
although
to
the
condemnation
of
hys
presumption
,
he
receiue
euery
day
the
sacramente
of
so
highe
a
mattier
.
And
moreouer
S.
Augustine
,
De
Ciuitate
Dei
lib.
21.
capite
.
25
most
plainly
resolueth
this
matter
in
his
booke
De
ciuitate
Dei
,
disputing
against
two
kinds
of
heretiques
:
Wherof
the
one
said
,
that
as
many
as
were
christened
,
and
receaued
the
sacrament
of
Christs
body
and
bludde
,
shuld
be
saued
,
howe
so
euer
thei
liued
or
beleued
,
bicause
that
Christe
saide
:
This
is
the
breade
that
came
from
heauen
,
that
whosoeuer
shal
eate
thereof
,
shall
not
dye
.
I
am
the
bread
of
life
,
which
came
from
heauen
,
whosoeuer
shall
eate
of
this
breade
shall
lyue
for
euer
.
Therfore
(
said
these
heretiques
)
all
such
men
must
needes
be
deliuered
from
eternall
deathe
,
and
at
length
to
be
brought
to
eternall
life
.
The
other
said
,
that
heretiques
and
scismatiques
myghte
eate
the
sacrament
of
Chrystes
bodye
,
but
not
his
verye
body
,
bicause
they
be
no
membres
of
his
bodye
.
And
therfore
they
promised
not
euerlasting
life
,
to
all
that
receaued
Christes
baptisme
,
and
the
sacrament
of
his
body
,
but
all
suche
as
professed
a
true
fayth
,
althoughe
they
lyued
neuer
so
vngodlye
.
For
suche
(
sayde
they
)
doo
eate
the
bodye
of
Christe
,
not
only
in
a
sacrament
,
but
also
in
deede
,
bicause
they
bee
membres
of
Christes
body
.
But
Saint
Augustine
aunsweringe
to
bothe
these
heresyes
,
saith
:
That
neither
heretiques
,
nor
such
as
professe
a
true
fayth
in
their
mouths
&
in
their
lyuyng
shew
the
contrary
,
haue
either
a
true
faith
(
which
worketh
by
charity
and
doth
none
euel
)
or
are
to
be
counted
among
the
membres
of
Christ
.
For
they
can
not
be
both
membres
of
Christ
and
membres
of
the
diuell
.
Therefore
(
saith
he
)
it
maye
not
be
saide
that
any
of
theim
eate
the
bodye
of
Christe
.
For
when
Christe
saythe
,
he
that
eateth
my
flesh
and
drinketh
my
bludde
,
dwelleth
in
me
and
I
in
him
.
he
sheweth
what
it
is
(
not
sacramentally
,
but
in
deede
)
to
eate
his
bodye
and
drynke
his
bludde
:
whiche
is
,
when
a
man
dwelleth
in
Christe
,
that
Christ
dwelleth
in
him
.
For
Christe
spake
those
wordes
,
as
if
he
should
say
:
He
that
dwelleth
not
in
me
,
and
in
whom
I
dwell
not
lette
him
not
saye
or
thinke
,
that
he
eateth
my
body
or
drinketh
my
bloode
.
These
be
the
plaine
wordes
of
S.
Augustine
,
that
suche
as
liue
vngodly
,
although
they
may
seme
to
eate
Christes
body
(
because
they
eat
the
sacrament
of
his
body
)
yet
in
deede
they
neither
bee
membres
of
his
body
,
nor
do
eate
his
body
.
Also
vpon
the
gospel
of
sainct
Ihon
he
sayth
,
In
Iohan.
tractatu
.
26.
that
he
that
doth
not
eate
his
fleshe
and
drynke
his
bloud
,
hath
not
in
him
euerlastyng
life
.
And
he
that
eateth
his
fleshe
,
and
drynketh
his
bloud
hath
euerlastyng
life
.
But
it
is
not
so
in
those
meates
,
whiche
we
take
to
sustayne
our
bodyes
.
For
although
without
them
we
can
not
liue
,
yet
it
is
not
necessarye
,
that
whosoeuer
receyueth
them
,
shall
liue
,
for
they
may
dye
for
age
,
sickenes
or
other
chaunces
.
But
in
this
meat
and
drynke
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
our
Lord
,
it
is
otherwise
.
For
both
thei
that
eate
and
drynke
them
not
,
haue
not
euerlastyng
life
:
And
contrary
wyse
,
whosoeuer
eate
and
drynke
them
,
haue
euerlastyng
life
.
Note
and
ponder
well
these
wordes
of
sainct
Augustyne
,
that
the
bread
and
wyne
and
other
meates
and
drynkes
(
whiche
norishe
the
body
)
a
man
may
eate
&
neuerthelesse
dye
:
but
the
very
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
no
man
eateth
,
but
that
hath
euerlastyng
life
.
So
that
wicked
men
can
not
eate
nor
drynke
them
,
for
then
they
must
nedes
haue
by
them
euerlastyng
life
.
And
in
thesame
place
sainct
Augustyne
sayth
further
.
The
sacrament
of
the
vnite
of
Christes
body
and
bloud
,
is
taken
in
the
Lordes
table
of
some
men
to
life
,
&
of
some
men
to
death
:
but
the
thyng
it selfe
(
wherof
it
is
a
sacrament
)
is
taken
of
all
men
to
life
,
and
of
no
man
to
death
.
And
moreouer
he
sayth
.
This
is
to
eate
that
meate
and
drynke
that
drynke
,
to
dwell
in
Christ
,
&
to
haue
Christ
dwellyng
in
him
.
And
for
that
cause
,
he
that
dwelleth
in
him
.
And
for
that
cause
,
he
that
dwelleth
not
in
Christe
,
and
in
whom
Christe
dwelleth
not
,
without
doubt
he
eateth
not
spiritually
his
fleshe
nor
drynketh
his
bloud
,
although
carnally
and
visibly
with
his
teethe
,
he
byte
the
sacrament
of
his
body
and
bloud
.
Thus
wryteth
sainct
Augustyne
in
the
xxvi
.
Homelie
of
sainct
Ihon.
And
in
the
next
homelie
folowyng
,
In
Iohan.
tract
.
27.
he
sayth
thus
.
This
day
our
sermon
is
of
the
body
of
the
Lorde
,
whiche
he
sayd
he
would
geue
to
eate
for
eternal
life
.
And
he
declared
the
maner
of
his
gift
&
distribution
,
howe
he
would
geue
his
fleshe
to
eate
,
saiyng
:
He
that
eateth
my
fleshe
&
drynketh
my
bloud
,
dwelleth
in
me
and
I
in
him
.
This
therefore
is
a
token
or
knowlege
,
that
a
man
hath
eaten
and
dronken
,
that
is
to
say
,
if
he
dwell
in
Christe
,
and
haue
Christe
dwellyng
in
him
.
If
he
cleaue
so
to
Christe
,
that
he
is
not
seuered
from
him
.
This
therfore
Christe
taught
&
admonished
by
these
misticall
or
figuratiue
Wordes
,
that
we
should
be
in
his
body
vnder
him
our
head
,
among
his
membres
,
eatyng
his
fleshe
,
not
forsakyng
his
vnitee
.
De
doctrina
Christiana
.
li.
3.
cap.
14.
And
in
his
boke
De
doctrina
Christiana
,
sainct
Augustyne
sayth
(
as
before
is
at
length
declared
)
that
to
eate
Christes
flesh
and
to
drynk
his
blud
is
a
figuratiue
speache
,
signifiyng
the
participation
of
his
passion
,
&
the
delectable
remembrance
to
our
benefite
and
profite
,
that
his
fleshe
was
crucified
and
wounded
for
vs
.
And
in
another
sermon
also
De
verbis
Apostoli
he
expoundeth
what
is
the
eatyng
of
Christes
body
&
the
drinkyng
of
his
bloud
,
The
eatyng
is
to
be
refreshed
,
and
the
drinkyng
what
is
it
but
to
liue
?
Eate
life
,
drinke
life
:
And
that
shall
be
,
when
that
whiche
is
taken
visibly
in
the
sacrament
,
is
in
very
deede
eaten
spiritually
and
drunken
spiritually
.
By
all
these
sentences
of
S.
Augustyne
it
is
euident
&
manifest
,
that
all
men
,
good
and
euil
,
may
with
their
mouthes
visibly
&
sensibly
eate
the
sacrament
of
Christes
body
&
bloud
,
but
the
very
body
and
bloud
them selues
bee
not
eaten
but
spiritually
,
&
that
of
the
spirituall
membres
of
Christ
,
whiche
dwell
in
Christ
,
&
haue
Christ
dwellyng
in
them
,
by
whom
they
be
refreshed
&
haue
euerlastyng
life
.
And
therefore
sayth
sainct
Augustyne
,
In
Iohan.
Tract
.
57.
that
when
thother
Apostles
did
eate
bread
that
was
the
Lorde
,
yet
Iudas
did
eate
but
the
bread
of
the
Lorde
,
and
not
the
bread
that
was
the
Lorde
.
So
that
the
other
Apostles
with
the
sacramentall
bread
did
eate
also
Christ
him selfe
,
whom
Iudas
did
not
eate
.
And
a
great
numbre
of
places
moe
hath
sainct
Augustyne
for
this
purpose
,
whiche
for
eschewyng
of
tediousnes
,
I
let
passe
for
this
tyme
,
&
wyll
speake
some
thyng
of
sainct
Cyrill
.
Cyrillus
in
Iohan
Lib.
4
cap.
10.
Cyrill
vpon
sainct
Ihon
is
Gospell
sayth
,
that
those
whiche
eate
Manna
,
dyed
,
because
thei
receyued
thereby
no
strength
to
liue
euer
(
for
it
gaue
no
life
,
but
only
put
away
bodely
hunger
)
but
they
that
receyue
the
bread
of
lyfe
,
shal
be
made
immortal
,
and
shall
eschewe
all
the
euils
that
partayne
to
death
,
liuyng
with
Christ
for
euer
.
And
in
another
place
he
sayth
.
Cap.
18.
Forasmuche
as
the
fleshe
of
them
to
Christe
doth
naturally
geue
life
,
therefore
it
maketh
lyfe
,
that
bee
partakers
of
it
.
For
it
putteth
death
awaye
from
them
,
and
vtterly
dryueth
destruction
out
of
them
.
Cap.
14.
And
he
concludeth
the
matter
shortly
in
another
place
in
fewe
woordes
,
saiyng
,
that
when
wee
eate
the
fleshe
of
our
sauiour
,
then
haue
wee
life
in
vs
.
For
if
thynges
that
were
corrupt
,
were
restored
by
onely
touchyng
of
his
clothes
,
howe
can
it
bee
,
that
wee
shall
not
liue
that
eate
his
fleshe
?
And
further
he
sayth
,
Cap.
17.
that
as
two
waxes
that
be
molten
together
,
do
runne
euery
part
into
other
:
so
he
that
receyueth
Christes
fleshe
and
bloud
,
must
needes
be
ioyned
so
with
him
,
that
Christ
must
be
in
him
,
and
he
in
Christ
.
Here
sainct
Cyrill
declareth
the
dignitee
of
Christes
fleshe
,
beyng
inseperately
annexed
vnto
his
diuinitee
,
saiyng
,
that
it
is
of
suche
force
and
power
,
that
it
geueth
euerlastyng
life
.
And
whatsoeuer
occasion
of
death
it
fyndeth
,
or
let
of
eternal
life
,
it
putteth
out
and
dryueth
cleane
away
all
the
same
,
from
them
that
eate
that
meate
and
receiue
that
medicine
.
Other
medicines
or
plaisters
somtyme
heale
,
and
somtyme
heal
not
,
but
this
medicine
is
of
that
effect
and
strength
,
that
it
eateth
awaye
all
rotten
and
deade
fleshe
,
and
perfectely
healeth
all
woundes
and
sores
,
that
it
is
laide
vnto
.
This
is
the
dignitie
and
excellencie
of
Christes
fleshe
and
bloode
ioyned
to
his
diuinitie
,
of
the
whyche
dignytie
,
Christes
aduersaries
the
Papistes
,
depriue
and
robbe
him
when
they
affirme
,
that
suche
men
do
eate
his
fleshe
&
receiue
this
plaister
,
as
remaine
styll
sicke
and
sore
,
and
be
not
holpen
thereby
.
And
now
for
corroboration
of
Cyrils
saying
,
Chap.
5.
I
would
thus
reason
with
the
Papistes
,
and
demaunde
of
them
,
When
an
vnrepentant
synner
receiueth
the
sacrament
,
whether
he
haue
Christes
body
within
him
or
no
?
If
they
saye
no
,
than
haue
I
my
purpose
,
that
euel
men
although
they
receaue
the
sacramente
of
Christes
body
,
yet
receiue
they
not
his
verye
body
.
Yf
they
saye
yea
,
Then
I
wolde
aske
them
further
,
Whether
they
haue
Christs
spirit
with
in
them
or
no
?
If
they
say
nay
,
then
do
they
separate
Christs
body
from
his
spirite
,
and
his
humanitye
frome
his
diuinite
,
and
be
condemned
by
the
scripture
as
very
Antichristes
that
diuide
Christe
.
And
yf
they
say
yea
,
that
a
wicked
man
hathe
Christes
spirit
in
him
,
then
the
scripture
also
condemneth
them
,
Roman
.
8.
saying
:
that
as
he
which
hath
no
spirite
of
Christes
,
is
none
of
his
,
so
he
that
hathe
Christe
in
him
,
lyueth
because
he
is
iustified
.
And
yf
his
spirite
that
raised
Iesus
from
death
dwell
in
you
,
he
that
raised
Christe
from
death
,
shall
gyue
lyfe
to
your
mortall
bodyes
,
for
his
spirits
sake
,
whiche
dwelleth
in
you
.
Thus
on
euery
side
the
scripture
condemneth
the
aduersaries
of
goddes
worde
.
And
this
wickednes
of
the
Papistes
is
to
bee
wondred
at
,
that
thei
affirme
Christs
flesh
,
blud
,
soule
,
holy
spirite
,
and
his
deite
to
be
a
man
,
that
is
subiect
to
sin
,
and
a
limme
of
the
diuell
.
They
be
wonderfull
iuglers
and
coniurers
,
that
with
certayne
woordes
can
make
god
and
the
dyuell
to
dwel
togither
in
one
man
,
and
make
him
both
the
temple
of
god
,
and
the
temple
of
the
diuell
.
It
apeareth
that
they
be
so
blinde
,
that
they
can
not
see
the
light
from
darknes
:
Beliall
from
Christ
,
nor
the
table
of
the
lord
,
from
the
table
of
diuels
.
Thus
is
confuted
this
third
intollerable
errour
and
heresye
of
the
Papistes
,
That
they
which
be
the
lymmes
of
the
diuell
,
do
eate
the
very
bodye
of
Christ
,
and
drinke
his
bludde
,
manifestly
and
directly
contrary
to
the
wordes
of
Christ
himself
,
who
saith
:
Who
so
euer
eateth
my
flesh
and
drinketh
my
bludde
,
hath
euerlasting
life
.
Chap.
6.
But
leaste
they
shuld
seeme
to
haue
nothinge
to
say
for
themselues
,
But
S.
Paule
in
that
place
speaketh
of
the
eatinge
of
the
breade
and
drinkinge
of
the
wine
,
and
not
of
the
corporall
eating
of
Christes
flesh
&
blud
,
as
it
is
manifest
to
euery
man
that
wyll
read
the
text
.
For
these
be
the
words
of
S.
Paul
:
Let
a
man
examine
himselfe
,
and
so
eat
of
the
bread
and
drynk
of
the
cuppe
,
for
he
that
eateth
and
drinketh
vnworthely
,
eateth
and
drinketh
his
owne
damnation
,
not
discerninge
the
Lordes
bodye
.
In
these
wordes
S.
Paules
mynde
is
,
that
for
asmuche
as
the
breade
and
wyne
in
the
Lordes
supper
,
do
represent
vnto
vs
the
very
bodye
and
blud
of
our
sauiour
Christe
,
by
his
owne
institution
and
ordinance
,
therfore
although
he
sit
in
heauen
at
his
fathers
right
hand
,
yet
shuld
we
come
to
this
mysticall
bread
&
wine
with
faithe
,
reuerence
,
purite
and
feare
,
as
we
wold
do
,
if
we
should
come
to
see
and
receaue
Christe
himselfe
sensibly
present
.
For
vnto
the
faithfull
Christ
is
at
his
owne
holy
table
present
,
with
his
mightye
spirite
and
grace
,
and
is
of
them
more
frutefully
receaued
,
than
if
corporally
they
shulde
receaue
him
bodely
present
.
And
therefore
they
that
shal
worthely
come
to
this
goddes
bord
,
muste
after
due
triall
of
themselues
,
considre
first
,
who
ordained
this
table
,
also
what
meate
and
drinke
they
shall
haue
that
come
therto
,
and
how
thei
ought
to
behaue
themselues
therat
.
He
that
prepared
the
table
is
Christ
himselfe
.
The
meat
&
drynke
wherwith
he
feedeth
theim
that
come
thereto
as
they
ought
to
do
,
is
his
owne
body
,
flesh
&
blud
.
They
that
come
therto
,
muste
occupy
their
myndes
in
considering
howe
his
bodye
was
broken
for
them
,
and
his
blud
shed
for
their
redemption
.
and
so
ought
they
to
approache
to
this
heauenly
table
with
all
humblenes
of
hart
,
and
godlynes
of
minde
,
as
to
the
table
wherin
Christe
himselfe
is
gyuen
.
And
they
that
come
otherwise
to
thys
holy
table
,
thei
come
vnworthely
,
and
do
not
eat
&
drinke
Christes
flesh
&
blud
,
but
eat
and
drink
their
owne
damnacion
:
bicause
thei
do
not
duely
considre
Christes
very
fleshe
and
blud
,
which
be
offered
ther
spiritually
to
be
eaten
and
drunken
,
but
dispising
Christs
most
holy
supper
,
do
come
therto
as
it
were
to
other
meates
and
drinkes
,
without
regard
of
the
lordes
body
,
which
is
the
spirituall
meat
of
that
table
.
Chap.
7.
But
here
maye
not
be
passed
ouer
the
answere
vnto
certain
places
of
auncient
Authors
,
which
at
the
firste
shew
,
Augustinus
contra
Cresconium
lib.
1
cap.
25.
The
first
place
is
of
S.
Augustin
contra
Cresconium
grammaticum
,
wher
he
saith
,
that
although
Christ
himselfe
say
,
He
that
eateth
not
my
fleshe
and
drinketh
not
my
bludde
,
shall
not
haue
lyfe
in
him
.
yet
doth
not
his
apostels
teache
that
the
same
is
pernicious
to
theim
whiche
vse
it
not
well
?
for
hee
saith
:
Whosoeuer
eateth
the
bread
and
drinketh
the
cuppe
of
the
Lorde
vnworthely
Shal
be
gylty
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
the
Lorde
.
In
whiche
wordes
S.
Augustyne
seemeth
to
conclude
,
that
aswell
the
euil
as
the
good
do
eat
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
although
the
euil
haue
no
benefite
but
hurt
therby
.
But
consider
the
place
of
S.
Augustyne
diligently
,
and
then
it
shall
euidently
appeare
,
that
he
ment
nat
of
the
eatyng
of
Christes
body
,
but
of
the
sacrament
therof
.
For
the
intent
of
sainct
Augustyne
there
,
is
to
proue
that
good
thinges
auaile
not
to
suche
persons
,
as
do
euil
vse
them
,
and
that
many
thynges
whiche
of
them selues
be
good
,
and
be
good
to
some
,
yet
to
other
some
they
bee
not
good
.
As
that
light
is
good
for
whole
eyes
,
and
hurteth
soore
eyes
:
that
meate
whiche
is
good
for
some
,
is
euil
for
other
some
:
One
medicine
healeth
some
,
and
maketh
other
sicke
.
One
harnes
doth
arme
one
,
and
combreth
another
:
one
coate
is
mete
for
one
,
&
to
straight
for
another
.
And
after
other
examples
,
at
the
last
S.
Augustyne
sheweth
the
same
to
bee
true
in
the
sacramentes
,
both
of
Baptisme
and
of
the
Lordes
body
,
whiche
he
sayth
do
profite
onely
them
,
that
receiue
the
same
worthely
.
And
the
wordes
of
sainct
Paule
,
which
sainct
Augustyne
citeth
,
do
speake
of
the
sacramental
bread
and
cuppe
,
&
not
of
the
body
and
bloud
.
And
yet
sainct
Augustyne
calleth
the
bread
and
the
cuppe
,
the
fleshe
and
bloud
,
not
that
they
be
so
in
dede
,
but
that
they
so
signifie
,
As
he
sayth
in
another
place
contra
Maximinum
.
Contra
Maximinum
.
lib.
3
.
cap.
22
In
sacramentes
(
sayth
he
)
is
to
be
considered
,
not
what
they
be
,
but
what
they
shewe
.
For
they
be
signes
of
other
thynges
,
beyng
one
thyng
,
and
signifiyng
another
.
Therfore
as
in
baptisme
,
those
that
come
faynedly
and
those
that
come
vnfaynedly
,
both
bee
washed
with
the
sacramental
water
,
but
both
be
not
washed
with
the
holy
ghost
,
&
clothed
with
Christ
:
so
in
the
Lordes
supper
,
bothe
eate
and
drynke
the
sacramental
bread
&
wyne
,
but
bothe
eate
not
Christ
himselfe
,
and
bee
fedde
with
his
fleshe
and
bloud
,
but
those
only
which
worthely
receiue
the
sacrament
.
De
bap.
contra
Donast
.
lib.
5.
ca.
8.
And
this
answere
wyll
serue
to
another
place
of
sainct
Augustyne
against
the
Donatistes
,
where
he
sayth
,
that
Iudas
receiued
the
body
and
bloud
of
the
Lorde
.
For
as
S.
Augustyne
in
that
place
speaketh
of
the
sacrament
of
Baptisme
,
so
doth
he
speake
of
the
sacrament
of
the
body
and
bloud
,
whiche
neuerthelesse
he
calleth
the
body
and
bloud
,
because
they
signifie
and
represent
vnto
vs
the
very
body
,
fleshe
and
bloud
.
Chap.
8.
And
(
as
before
is
at
length
declared
)
a
figure
hath
the
name
of
the
thyng
that
is
signifyed
thereby
.
Figures
be
called
by
the
names
of
the
thinges
which
thei
signifie
,
As
a
mannes
ymage
is
called
a
man
,
a
Lyons
image
,
a
Lyon
:
a
byrdes
image
,
a
byrde
:
and
an
image
of
a
tree
and
herbe
,
is
called
a
tree
or
herbe
.
So
were
we
wont
to
say
,
Our
lady
of
Walsyngham
:
Our
lady
of
Ipiswyche
:
Oure
lady
of
Grace
:
Our
lady
of
pytie
:
sainct
Peter
of
Myllan
:
Sainct
Ihon
of
Amyas
.
and
suche
like
,
not
meanyng
the
thynges
them selues
,
but
callyng
their
images
by
the
name
of
the
thynges
by
them
prepresēted
.
And
lykewise
we
were
wont
to
say
,
Great
sainct
Christopher
of
Yorke
or
Lyncolne
:
Oure
lady
smyleth
,
or
rocketh
her
childe
:
Let
vs
go
in
Pilgrymage
to
sainct
Peter
at
Rome
,
and
sainct
Iames
in
Compostella
,
And
a
thousand
lyke
speeches
,
whiche
were
not
vnderstand
of
the
very
thinges
,
but
onely
of
the
images
of
them
.
So
doth
sainct
Ihon
Chrysostome
say
,
that
wee
see
Christ
with
oure
eyes
,
touche
him
,
feele
him
,
and
grope
him
with
our
handes
,
fixe
oure
teethe
in
his
fleshe
,
taste
it
,
breake
it
,
eate
it
,
and
digest
it
,
make
redde
our
tongues
and
dye
them
with
his
bloud
,
and
swalowe
it
,
and
drynke
it
.
And
in
a
Cathechisme
by
me
translated
&
set
furth
,
I
vsed
like
maner
of
speeche
,
saiyng
,
that
with
our
bodely
mouthes
we
receiue
the
body
&
bloud
of
Christ
.
Whiche
my
saiyng
diuers
ignorant
persones
(
not
vsed
to
reade
olde
auncient
authors
,
nor
acquainted
with
their
phrase
and
maner
of
speeche
)
did
carpe
and
reprehende
,
for
lacke
of
good
vnderstandyng
.
For
this
speeche
,
and
other
before
rehersed
of
Chrysostome
,
&
all
other
like
,
he
not
vnderstand
of
the
very
fleshe
and
bloud
of
our
sauior
Christ
(
whiche
in
very
deede
wee
neither
feele
nor
see
)
but
that
whiche
wee
do
to
the
bread
and
wyne
,
by
a
figuratiue
speeche
,
is
spoken
to
bee
done
to
the
fleshe
&
bloud
,
because
they
bee
the
very
signes
,
figures
and
tokens
instituted
of
Christ
,
to
represent
vnto
vs
,
his
very
fleshe
and
bloud
.
And
yet
as
with
our
corporal
eyes
,
corporal
handes
and
mouthes
wee
do
corporally
see
,
feele
,
taste
,
and
eate
the
bread
,
and
drynke
the
wyne
(
beyng
the
signe
and
sacramentes
of
Christes
body
,
)
euen
so
with
oure
spiritual
eyes
,
handes
and
mouthes
,
we
do
spiritually
see
,
feele
,
taste
,
&
eate
his
very
fleshe
and
drynke
his
very
bloud
.
Eusebius
Emissenus
.
in
sermo
.
de
Eucharistia
As
Eusebius
Emissenus
sayth
:
Whan
thou
commest
to
the
reuerend
altare
to
be
fylled
with
spiritual
meates
,
with
thy
fayth
looke
vpon
the
body
&
bloud
of
him
that
is
thy
god
,
honor
him
touche
him
with
thy
mynde
,
take
him
with
the
hand
of
thy
heart
,
&
drynke
him
with
the
draught
of
thyne
inwarde
man
.
And
these
spiritual
thinges
requyre
no
corporall
presence
of
Christ
him selfe
,
who
sytteth
continually
in
heauen
at
the
right
hand
of
his
father
.
And
as
this
is
most
true
,
so
is
it
ful
and
sufficient
,
to
answere
all
thynges
that
the
Papistes
can
bryng
in
this
matter
,
that
hath
any
apparance
for
their
partie
.
Chap.
9.
Nowe
it
is
requisite
,
to
speake
some
thyng
of
the
maner
and
forme
of
worshippyng
of
Christ
,
by
them
that
receiue
this
sacrament
,
And
yet
haue
the
very
Antichristes
(
the
subtilest
enemies
that
Christe
hath
(
by
their
fyne
inuentions
and
crafty
scholastical
diuinitee
,
For
els
what
made
the
people
to
runne
frome
theyr
seates
to
the
altar
,
&
from
aultar
to
aultar
,
and
from
sakeryng
(
as
they
called
it
)
to
sakeryng
,
peepyng
,
tootyng
,
and
gasynge
at
the
thynge
,
whiche
the
priest
helde
vp
in
his
handes
,
if
they
thought
not
to
honour
that
thyng
,
whiche
they
sawe
?
What
moued
the
priestes
to
lyft
vp
the
sacrament
to
hye
ouer
their
beades
?
or
the
people
to
crie
to
the
prieste
,
holde
vp
,
holde
vp
,
and
one
man
to
saie
to
an
other
,
stoupe
downe
before
,
or
to
saie
:
This
daie
I
haue
sene
my
maker
.
And
,
I
can
not
be
quiet
,
excepte
I
see
my
maker
ones
a
daie
?
What
was
the
cause
of
al
these
,
and
that
as
well
the
priest
as
the
people
so
deuoutely
dyd
knocke
and
kneele
at
euery
syghte
of
the
sacrament
?
but
that
they
woorshypped
that
vysyble
thynge
,
whyche
they
sawe
with
theyr
eyes
,
and
tooke
it
for
very
God
?
For
yf
they
worshypped
in
spirite
onely
Christe
,
syttynge
in
heauen
with
his
father
,
what
needed
they
to
remoue
oute
of
theyr
seates
to
toote
and
gaase
?
as
the
apostles
dyd
after
Christe
,
whan
he
was
gone
vp
into
heauen
.
If
thei
worshypped
nothyng
that
they
sawe
,
why
dyd
they
ryse
vp
to
see
?
Doubtles
many
of
the
simple
people
woorshipped
that
thyng
which
they
sawe
with
their
eies
.
And
although
the
subtyl
Papistes
doo
colour
and
cloke
the
matter
neuer
so
finely
,
sayeng
that
they
worshyp
not
the
sacramentes
,
whiche
they
see
with
theyr
eyes
,
but
that
thyng
,
whyche
they
beleue
with
their
faith
to
be
really
and
corporally
in
the
sacramentes
,
yet
why
doo
they
than
run
from
place
to
place
,
to
gase
at
the
thinges
whiche
they
see
,
yf
they
worshyp
them
not
?
giuyng
therby
occasion
to
them
that
be
ignorant
,
to
worship
that
whyche
they
see
.
Why
doo
they
not
rather
quietly
syt
styll
in
their
seates
,
and
moue
the
people
to
doo
the
lyke
,
woorshyppynge
God
in
hart
and
in
spirite
,
than
to
gadde
aboute
from
place
to
place
,
to
see
that
thyng
,
whyche
they
confesse
theim selues
is
not
to
bee
worshipped
?
And
yet
to
eschue
one
inconuenience
(
that
is
to
saie
,
the
worshyppyng
of
the
sacrament
)
they
fall
into
an
other
as
euyl
,
and
worshyp
▪
nothyng
there
at
al.
For
they
worship
that
thyng
(
as
thei
say
)
whiche
is
really
and
corporally
,
and
yet
inuisibly
present
vnder
the
kinds
of
bread
and
wine
,
whiche
(
as
before
is
expressed
and
proued
)
is
vtterly
nothyng
.
And
so
they
geue
vnto
the
ignorant
occasion
,
to
worshyp
breade
and
wyne
,
and
they
them selues
worshyp
nothynge
there
at
all
.
But
the
Papistes
(
for
their
owne
commoditee
to
kepe
the
people
styll
in
Idolatrye
)
do
often
allege
a
certain
place
of
S.
Augustyne
vpon
the
Psalmes
,
August
.
in
psal.
98.
where
he
sayth
,
that
no
man
dothe
eate
the
fleshe
of
Christe
,
excepte
he
fyrste
worship
it
,
and
that
we
do
not
offende
in
worshippyng
therof
,
but
we
should
offende
,
if
we
should
not
worship
it
.
That
is
true
,
whiche
sainct
Augustyne
saithe
in
this
place
.
For
who
is
hee
,
that
professeth
Christe
,
and
is
spiritually
fedde
and
nourished
with
his
fleshe
and
bloud
,
but
he
wyll
honour
and
worship
him
,
sittyng
at
the
right
hande
of
his
father
,
and
tendre
vnto
him
from
the
bottome
of
his
heart
,
all
laude
,
prayse
and
thankes
,
for
his
mercyfull
redemption
?
AND
as
this
is
moste
true
,
whiche
sainct
Augustyne
sayth
,
so
is
that
moste
false
whiche
the
Papistes
would
persuade
vpon
sainct
Augustynes
woordes
,
that
the
sacramentall
bread
and
wyne
,
or
any
vysyble
thynge
is
to
bee
woorshypped
in
the
Sacrament
.
For
sainct
Augustynes
mynde
was
so
farre
from
any
suche
thought
,
that
hee
forbyddeth
vtterly
to
woorship
Christes
owne
fleshe
and
bloud
alone
,
but
in
consideracion
,
and
as
they
bee
annexed
and
ioyned
to
his
diuinitee
.
Howe
muche
lesse
than
could
he
thynke
or
allowe
,
that
we
should
worshyp
the
sacramentall
bread
and
wyne
,
or
any
outwarde
or
visible
sacrament
?
whiche
bee
shadowes
,
figures
and
representacions
of
Christes
very
fleshe
and
bloudde
.
And
saynt
Augustin
was
afrayde
,
lest
in
worshyppyng
of
Christes
very
body
,
we
shoulde
offende
,
and
therfore
he
byddeth
vs
,
whan
we
worshyp
Christe
,
that
we
shoulde
not
tarry
and
fixe
our
myndes
vpon
his
fleshe
(
whyche
of
it self
auayleth
nothyng
)
but
that
we
shuld
lyfte
vp
but
our
myndes
from
the
fleshe
to
the
spirite
,
whiche
giueth
lyfe
:
and
yet
the
Papistes
be
not
afrayde
by
crafty
meanes
to
induce
vs
,
to
worship
those
thynges
,
whyche
be
signes
and
sacramentes
of
Christes
bodye
.
But
what
wyl
not
the
shamelesse
Papistes
alledge
for
theyr
purpose
,
whan
they
be
not
ashamed
to
maynteyne
the
adoration
of
the
Sacrament
,
by
these
wordes
of
saynt
Augustins
?
wherin
he
Speaketh
not
one
word
of
the
adoration
of
the
sacrament
,
but
onely
of
Christe
hym selfe
.
And
although
he
saie
,
that
Christe
gaue
his
fleshe
to
be
eaten
of
vs
,
yet
he
ment
not
,
that
his
fleshe
is
here
corporally
presente
,
and
corporally
eaten
,
but
onely
spiritually
.
As
his
wordes
declare
playnly
,
whyche
folowe
in
the
same
place
,
where
saynt
Augustine
as
it
were
in
the
persone
of
Christe
,
speaketh
these
wordes
.
It
is
the
spirite
that
geueth
lyfe
,
but
the
fleshe
profiteth
nothynge
.
The
wordes
whiche
I
haue
spoken
vnto
you
,
be
spirite
and
lyfe
.
That
whiche
I
haue
spoken
,
vnderstande
you
spiritually
.
You
shall
not
eate
this
body
,
which
you
se
,
and
drynke
that
blud
whyche
they
shall
shedde
,
that
shall
crucifie
me
.
I
haue
commended
vnto
you
a
sacramente
,
vnderstande
it
spiritually
,
and
it
shall
geue
you
lyfe
.
And
although
it
must
bee
visibly
minystred
,
yet
it
muste
be
inuisibly
vnderstande
.
These
wordes
of
sayncte
Augustine
with
the
other
before
recited
,
do
expresse
his
mynd
playnlye
,
that
Christe
is
not
otherwyse
to
bee
eaten
than
spiritually
,
(
whyche
spirituall
eatynge
requyreth
no
corporall
presence
)
and
that
he
intended
not
to
teache
heere
any
adoration
,
eyther
of
the
visible
sacramentes
,
or
of
any
thyng
that
is
corporally
in
them
.
For
in
dede
there
is
nothyng
really
and
corporally
in
the
bread
to
be
worshipped
,
although
the
Papistes
say
,
that
Christe
is
in
euery
consecrated
breade
But
our
Sauiour
Christe
hym selfe
hath
geuen
vs
warnyng
before
hande
,
that
suche
false
christians
and
false
teachers
shoulde
come
,
and
hath
bydde
vs
to
beware
of
them
,
If
any
man
telle
you
that
Christe
is
here
,
or
Christe
is
there
,
beleue
hym
not
.
For
there
shall
ryse
false
Christes
and
false
prophetes
,
and
shall
shew
many
signes
and
wonders
,
so
that
if
it
were
possyble
,
the
verye
electe
shoulde
bee
broughte
into
erroure
.
Take
heede
,
I
haue
tolde
you
before
hande
.
Thus
our
Sauiour
Christe
(
lyke
a
moste
louynge
pastour
and
sauioure
of
our
soules
)
hath
gyuen
vs
warnyng
before
hande
,
of
the
perylles
and
daungers
that
were
to
come
,
and
to
bee
wise
and
ware
,
that
we
shoulde
not
geue
credite
vnto
suche
teachers
,
as
woulde
perswade
vs
to
worshyppe
a
peece
of
breade
,
to
kneele
to
it
,
to
knocke
to
it
,
to
creepe
to
it
,
to
folowe
it
in
Procession
,
to
lyfte
vp
our
handes
to
it
,
to
offer
to
it
,
to
lyght
candels
to
it
,
to
shut
it
vp
in
a
cheste
or
boxe
,
to
dooe
all
other
honoure
vnto
it
,
more
than
we
dooe
vnto
God
:
hauynge
alwaye
this
pretence
or
excuse
for
our
Idolatrie
,
Beholde
,
here
is
Christe
.
But
oure
sauiour
Christe
calleth
theym
false
Prophetes
,
and
saieth
:
Take
heede
,
And
yf
you
wyll
aske
me
the
question
,
who
be
those
false
Prophetes
and
seducers
of
the
people
,
Cha.
10.
They
bee
the
Papistes
that
haue
deceiued
the
people
.
the
aunswere
is
soone
made
:
The
Romishe
Antichristes
and
theyr
adherentes
,
the
authors
of
all
errour
,
ignorance
,
blyndenesse
,
superstition
,
hypocrisie
,
and
ydolatrie
.
Innocentius
tertius
.
For
Innocentius
the
thyrd
(
one
of
the
moste
wycked
men
that
euer
was
in
the
sea
of
Rome
)
dyd
ordeyne
and
decree
,
that
the
hoste
should
be
diligently
kept
vnder
locke
and
keye
.
Honorius
tertius
.
And
Honorius
the
thirde
,
not
only
confirmed
the
same
,
but
commanded
also
,
that
the
priestes
shulde
diligently
teache
the
people
from
tyme
to
tyme
,
that
whan
they
lyfted
vp
the
breadde
called
the
hoste
,
the
people
should
then
reuerently
bowe
downe
,
and
that
lykewyse
they
shoulde
do
whan
the
prieste
carrieth
the
hoste
vnto
sycke
folkes
.
These
be
the
statutes
and
ordynances
of
Rome
,
vnder
pretence
of
holynesse
,
to
leade
the
people
vnto
all
errour
and
Idolatrie
:
not
bryngynge
theym
by
breadde
vnto
Christe
,
but
from
Christe
vnto
bread
.
But
all
that
loue
and
beleeue
Christe
hym selfe
,
Cha.
11.
lette
theym
not
thynke
,
that
Christe
is
corporally
in
the
breadde
,
Thus
is
sufficientely
reproued
the
thyrde
pryncipall
errour
of
the
Papistes
,
concernynge
the
Lordes
supper
,
whyche
is
,
That
wycked
membres
of
the
deuyl
,
do
eate
Christes
very
bodye
,
and
drynke
his
bloude
.
Thus
endeth
the
fowerth
booke
.
THE
FIFTH
BOKE
IS
OF
THE
OBLATION
AND
SACRIfice
of
our
Sauiour
Christe
.
Chap.
1.
The
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
.
The
greatest
blasphemye
&
iniury
that
can
be
against
Christe
,
&
yet
uniuersally
vsed
through
the
Popishe
kyngdom
,
is
this
,
that
the
priestes
make
their
Masse
a
sacrifice
propitiatory
,
to
remit
the
synnes
aswell
of
theim selues
,
as
of
other
both
quicke
and
dead
,
to
whom
they
list
to
apply
the
same
.
Thus
vnder
pretence
of
holynes
,
the
Papistical
priestes
haue
taken
vpon
them
to
be
Christes
successours
,
and
to
make
suche
an
oblacion
and
sacrifice
,
as
neuer
creature
made
but
Christe
alone
,
neither
he
made
the
same
any
mo
tymes
than
ones
,
and
that
was
by
his
death
vpon
the
crosse
.
Chap.
2.
For
as
sainct
Paule
in
his
Epistle
to
the
Hebrues
witnesseth
,
Although
the
high
priestes
of
the
olde
lawe
offered
many
tymes
(
at
the
least
euery
yere
ones
)
yet
Christe
offereth
not
him selfe
many
tymes
,
And
furthermore
S.
Paule
sayth
,
That
the
sacrifices
of
the
olde
lawe
,
although
they
were
contynually
offered
from
yere
to
yere
,
yet
could
they
not
take
away
synne
,
nor
make
men
perfect
.
For
if
they
coulde
ones
haue
quieted
mens
consciences
,
And
yet
further
he
sayth
,
concernynge
the
old
testament
,
that
it
was
disanulled
and
taken
away
,
Here
in
his
Epistle
to
the
Hebrues
,
S.
Paule
hath
plainly
and
fully
described
vnto
vs
,
the
difference
betwene
the
priesthode
and
sacrifices
of
the
olde
testamente
,
and
the
moste
high
and
worthy
priesthode
of
Christe
,
his
most
perfect
and
necessary
sacrifice
,
and
the
benefitte
that
commeth
to
vs
thereby
.
For
Christ
offred
not
the
blud
of
calues
,
shepe
and
goates
(
as
the
priestes
of
the
old
lawe
vsed
to
doo
)
but
he
offered
his
owne
bloud
vpon
the
Crosse
.
And
he
went
not
into
an
holy
place
made
by
mans
hande
(
as
Aaron
dyd
)
but
he
ascended
vp
into
heauen
,
where
his
eternall
father
dwelleth
,
and
before
hym
he
maketh
continuall
supplication
for
the
synnes
of
the
whole
worlde
,
presentynge
his
owne
body
,
whyche
was
torne
for
vs
,
and
his
precious
bloud
,
whyche
of
his
most
gracious
and
liberall
charitee
,
he
shedde
for
vs
vpon
the
Crosse
.
And
that
sacrifice
was
of
suche
force
,
that
it
was
no
nede
to
renewe
it
euery
yere
,
as
the
bysshops
dyd
of
the
olde
testament
,
(
whose
sacrifices
were
many
tymes
offred
,
and
yet
were
of
no
great
effecte
or
profite
,
because
they
were
sinners
them selues
that
offered
theym
,
and
offered
not
theyr
owne
bloude
,
but
the
bloude
of
brute
beastes
)
but
Christes
sacrifice
ones
offred
,
was
sufficient
for
euermore
.
Chap.
3.
Two
kids
of
sacrifices
.
And
that
al
men
mai
the
better
vnderstand
this
sacrifice
of
Christ
(
which
he
made
for
the
greate
benefite
of
all
men
)
it
is
necessary
to
knowe
the
distinction
and
diuersitee
of
sacrifices
.
One
kynd
of
sacrifice
ther
is
,
whiche
is
called
a
Propiciatorie
or
mercyfull
sacrifice
,
that
is
to
saie
,
suche
a
sacrifice
as
pacifieth
Gods
wrathe
and
indignation
,
and
obteyneth
mercye
and
forgeuenes
for
all
our
synnes
,
and
is
the
raunsome
for
our
redemption
from
euerlastyng
damnation
.
And
although
in
the
old
testament
there
were
certain
sacrifices
called
by
that
name
yet
in
very
dede
there
is
but
one
such
sacrifice
,
This
is
the
honoure
and
glorie
of
this
oure
high
priest
,
wherin
he
admitteth
neither
partner
nor
successour
.
For
by
his
one
oblation
he
satisfied
his
father
for
all
mens
synnes
,
and
reconciled
mankynd
vnto
his
grace
and
fauoure
.
And
who
soeuer
depriue
hym
of
this
honour
,
and
go
about
to
take
it
to
them selues
,
they
be
very
Antichristes
,
&
most
arrogant
blasphemers
against
God
,
and
against
his
sonne
Iesus
Christ
,
whom
he
hath
sente
.
An other
kynde
of
sacrifice
there
is
,
whyche
dothe
not
reconcile
vs
to
God
,
but
is
made
of
them
that
be
reconciled
by
Christe
,
to
testifie
our
dueties
vnto
god
,
and
to
shew
our selues
thankfull
vnto
hym
.
And
therfore
they
be
called
Sacrifices
of
laude
,
praise
and
thankes
geuyng
.
The
fyrst
kynde
of
sacrifice
Christe
offered
to
God
for
vs
,
the
seconde
kynde
we
our selues
offer
to
God
by
Christe
.
And
by
the
fyrste
kynde
of
sacrifice
Christ
offered
also
vs
vnto
his
father
,
and
by
the
second
wee
offer
our selues
and
all
that
wee
haue
vnto
hym
and
his
father
.
And
this
sacrifice
generally
is
our
whole
obedience
vnto
God
,
in
kepyng
his
lawes
and
commaundementes
.
Of
whiche
maner
of
sacrifice
speaketh
the
prophete
Dauid
,
Chap.
4.
But
nowe
to
speake
somwhat
more
largely
of
the
priesthode
and
sacrifice
of
Christ
,
he
was
suche
an
hygh
byshop
,
Thus
the
scripture
teacheth
,
that
yf
Christe
hadde
made
any
oblation
for
synne
more
than
ones
,
he
shoulde
haue
dyed
more
thanne
ones
:
for
as
muche
as
there
is
none
oblation
and
sacrifyce
for
synne
,
but
onely
his
deathe
.
And
nowe
there
is
no
more
oblation
for
synne
,
seyng
that
by
hym
our
synnes
bee
remytted
,
and
oure
consciences
quieted
.
AND
althowgh
in
the
olde
Testament
,
Chap.
5.
there
were
certayne
sacrifices
,
called
Sacryfices
for
synne
,
And
for
this
signification
they
had
the
name
of
a
sacrifice
propiciatorie
,
and
wer
called
sacrifices
for
synnes
,
not
bycause
they
in
dede
toke
away
our
sinnes
,
but
bycause
they
were
ymages
,
shadowes
,
and
fygures
,
wherby
godly
men
wer
admonyshed
of
the
trewe
sacrifice
of
Christ
than
to
come
,
whyche
shulde
truely
abolyshe
syn
and
euerlastyng
death
.
And
that
those
sacrifices
,
whyche
were
made
by
the
priestes
in
the
olde
lawe
,
coulde
not
be
able
to
purchase
our
pardon
,
and
deserue
the
remission
of
oure
synnes
,
S.
Paule
doeth
clerely
affirme
in
his
said
epistle
to
the
Hebrues
,
Wherfore
all
godly
men
,
althoughe
they
dyd
vse
those
sacrifices
ordeined
of
God
,
yet
they
did
not
take
them
as
thynges
of
that
value
and
estimation
,
that
therby
they
shulde
be
able
to
obteyn
remission
of
their
synnes
before
God
.
But
they
toke
theym
partely
for
fygures
and
tokens
ordeined
of
God
,
by
the
whiche
he
declared
,
that
he
wold
sende
that
seede
,
whiche
he
promysed
to
be
the
very
true
sacrifice
for
synne
,
and
that
he
would
receaue
them
that
trusted
in
that
promyse
,
and
remytte
theyr
synnes
for
the
sacrifice
after
to
come
.
And
partely
they
vsed
them
as
certayne
ceremonies
,
wherby
suche
persones
as
had
offended
against
the
lawe
of
Moyses
,
and
were
cast
out
of
the
congregacion
,
were
receiued
again
among
the
people
,
and
declared
to
be
absolued
.
As
for
lyke
purposes
we
vse
in
the
Churche
of
Christ
,
sacramentes
by
him
instituted
.
And
this
outwarde
castyng
out
from
the
people
of
God
,
and
receiuyng
in
agayne
,
was
accordyng
to
the
lawe
and
knowledge
of
manne
,
but
the
true
reconciliation
and
forgeuenes
of
synne
before
God
,
nother
the
fathers
of
the
olde
lawe
had
,
nor
we
yet
haue
,
but
only
by
the
sacrifice
of
Christ
,
made
in
the
mount
of
Caluary
.
And
the
sacrifices
of
the
olde
lawe
were
pronostications
and
figures
of
the
same
than
to
come
,
as
our
sacramentes
bee
fygures
and
demonstrations
of
the
same
nowe
passed
.
Nowe
by
these
foresayd
thynges
may
euery
manne
easily
perceiue
,
Cha.
6.
that
the
offeryng
of
the
priest
in
the
Masse
,
For
yf
only
the
death
of
Christ
be
the
oblation
,
sacrifice
and
price
wherfore
our
synnes
bee
pardoned
,
then
the
acte
or
ministration
of
the
priest
can
not
haue
the
same
office
.
Wherefore
it
is
an
abhominable
blasphemy
,
to
geue
that
office
or
dignitee
to
a
priest
,
whiche
perteyneth
onely
to
Christ
:
or
to
affirme
that
the
Churche
hath
nede
of
any
suche
sacrifice
,
as
who
shoulde
saye
,
that
Christes
sacrifice
wer
not
sufficient
for
the
remission
of
our
synnes
:
orels
that
his
sacrifice
shuld
hange
vpon
the
sacrifice
of
a
priest
.
But
all
suche
prestes
,
as
pretende
to
be
Christes
successours
in
makynge
a
sacrifice
of
hym
,
they
be
his
most
haynous
and
horrible
aduersaries
.
For
neuer
no
persone
made
a
sacrifyce
of
Christ
,
but
he
hym selfe
only
.
And
therfore
sainct
Paule
sayth
,
But
it
is
a
wonderous
thinge
,
to
see
what
shiftes
and
cautels
the
Popishe
antichristes
deuise
,
to
colour
and
cloke
theyr
wycked
erroures
.
And
as
a
chaine
,
is
so
ioyned
togither
,
that
one
lynke
draweth
an
other
after
it
,
so
bee
vyces
and
erroures
knit
togither
,
that
euery
one
draweth
his
felowe
with
him
.
And
so
doth
it
here
in
this
mattier
.
For
the
Papists
(
to
excuse
them selues
)
do
sai
,
Chap.
7.
that
they
make
no
newe
sacrifice
,
And
here
they
runne
hedlonges
into
the
fowlest
and
most
haynous
errour
that
euer
was
immagined
.
For
yf
they
make
euerye
daye
the
same
oblation
and
sacrifice
for
sinne
,
that
Christ
himselfe
made
,
and
the
oblation
that
hee
made
was
his
deathe
,
and
the
effusion
of
hys
moste
preciouse
bludde
vppon
the
crosse
,
for
our
redemption
and
price
of
our
synnes
:
then
foloweth
it
of
necessitie
,
that
they
euerye
daye
slaye
Christ
and
shed
his
bludde
,
and
so
be
they
worse
then
the
wicked
Iewes
and
Pharises
,
whiche
slewe
him
,
and
shedde
his
bludde
but
ones
.
Chap.
8.
Almighty
god
the
father
of
lyght
and
truthe
,
banish
all
suche
darkenes
and
errour
out
of
hys
churche
,
If
we
be
in
deed
(
as
we
professe
)
christian
men
,
we
may
ascribe
this
honour
and
glory
to
no
man
,
but
to
Christe
alone
.
Wherfore
lette
vs
giue
the
whole
laude
and
prayse
hereof
vnto
hym
,
let
vs
flye
only
to
him
for
socour
,
let
vs
holde
him
faste
&
hange
vppon
him
,
&
gyue
our selues
wholy
to
him
.
And
forasmuch
as
he
hathe
giuen
himselfe
to
death
for
vs
,
to
be
an
oblation
and
sacrifice
to
his
father
for
our
sinnes
,
let
vs
giue
our selues
again
vnto
him
,
making
vnto
him
an
oblation
,
not
of
goates
,
sheep
,
kine
and
other
beastes
that
haue
no
reason
,
(
as
was
accustomed
before
Christes
coming
)
but
of
a
creature
that
hath
reason
,
that
is
to
sai
,
of
our selues
,
not
killing
our
owne
bodies
,
but
mortefying
the
beastly
&
vnreasonable
affections
,
that
wold
gladly
rule
&
raigne
in
vs
.
So
long
as
the
lawe
did
raigne
,
god
suffered
dum
beasts
to
be
offered
vnto
him
,
but
now
that
we
be
spiritual
,
we
must
offre
spiritual
oblations
,
in
the
place
of
calues
,
sheepe
,
goates
and
doues
.
We
must
kyll
diuelish
pryde
,
furious
angre
,
insatiable
couetousnes
,
filthy
lucre
,
stinking
lechery
,
deadly
hatred
&
malice
,
foxy
wilines
,
woluish
rauening
&
deuouring
,
and
al
other
vnreasonable
lustes
and
desires
of
the
fleshe
.
And
as
many
as
belonge
to
Christe
,
These
be
the
sacrifices
of
chrystian
men
,
these
hostes
&
oblations
be
acceptable
to
Christ
.
And
as
Christ
offered
himselfe
for
vs
,
so
is
it
our
duties
after
this
sorte
to
offre
our selues
to
hym
againe
.
And
so
shal
we
not
haue
the
name
of
christian
men
in
vaine
,
but
as
we
pretend
to
belong
to
Christe
in
woorde
and
profession
,
so
shall
wee
in
deede
be
his
in
lyfe
and
inward
affection
.
So
that
within
&
without
we
shal
be
altogither
his
,
cleane
from
al
hyporisie
or
dissimulacion
.
And
if
we
refuse
to
offre
our selues
after
this
wise
vnto
hym
,
by
crucifiyng
our
own
willes
,
&
committyng
vs
wholy
to
the
wyl
of
god
,
we
be
moste
vnkind
people
,
superstitious
hypocrites
,
or
rather
vnreasonable
beastes
,
worthy
to
be
excluded
vtterly
from
all
the
benefites
of
Christes
oblation
.
And
if
wee
putte
the
oblation
of
the
prieste
in
the
steede
of
the
oblation
of
Christe
,
Chap.
9.
The
Papish
masse
is
detestable
ydolatry
,
utterly
to
be
banished
from
al
christian
congregations
refusing
to
receaue
the
sacrament
of
his
body
and
bludde
our selues
(
as
hee
ordained
)
and
trustinge
to
haue
remission
of
our
sinnes
by
the
sacrifice
of
the
prieste
in
the
Masse
,
and
thereby
also
to
obtayne
release
of
the
paines
in
Purgatorye
,
wee
doo
not
onlye
iniurye
to
Christe
,
but
also
committe
moste
detestable
ydolatry
.
For
these
bee
but
false
doctrines
,
without
shame
deuised
,
and
fayned
by
wicked
Popishe
priestes
,
Idolatres
,
Monkes
and
Friers
,
whiche
for
lucre
haue
altered
and
corrupted
the
moste
holye
supper
of
the
Lorde
,
and
tourned
yt
into
manifeste
Idolatrye
.
Wherefore
all
godly
men
ought
with
all
their
harte
to
refuse
and
abhorre
all
suche
blasphemy
againste
the
sonne
of
God
.
And
forasmuche
as
in
suche
Masses
is
manifeste
wyckednes
and
Idolatrye
(
wherein
the
prieste
alone
maketh
oblation
satisfactorye
,
and
applieth
the
same
for
the
quicke
and
the
dead
at
hys
wyll
and
pleasure
)
all
suche
popishe
Masses
are
to
bee
clearlye
taken
awaye
oute
of
chrystiane
Churches
,
and
the
trewe
vse
of
the
Lordes
supper
is
to
be
restored
again
,
wherin
godlye
people
assembled
togither
,
maye
receaue
the
sacrament
euery
man
for
himself
,
to
declare
that
he
remembreth
what
benefite
he
hathe
receaued
by
the
deathe
of
CHRIST
,
and
to
testifye
that
he
is
a
membre
of
Christes
body
,
fed
with
hys
fleshe
and
drinkynge
hys
bludde
spiritually
.
CHRIST
dyd
not
ordayne
his
sacramentes
to
this
vse
,
Chap.
10
Euery
man
ought
to
receiue
the
sacrament
him selfe
,
&
not
one
for
another
.
that
one
should
receiue
them
for
another
,
or
the
priest
for
all
the
laye
people
,
but
he
ordayned
them
for
this
intent
,
that
euery
man
should
receiue
them
for
him selfe
,
to
ratify
,
confirme
and
stablishe
his
owne
faith
and
euerlastyng
saluacion
.
Therefore
as
one
man
may
not
be
baptized
for
another
(
and
if
he
be
,
it
auayleth
nothyng
,
)
so
ought
not
one
to
receiue
the
holy
Communion
for
another
.
For
if
a
man
be
drye
or
hungry
,
he
is
neuer
a
whit
eased
,
if
another
man
drynke
or
eate
for
him
:
or
if
a
man
bee
all
befyled
,
it
healpeth
him
nothyng
,
another
man
to
be
washed
for
him
:
So
auayleth
it
nothyng
to
a
man
,
if
another
man
bee
baptized
for
him
,
or
bee
refreshed
for
him
with
the
meate
and
drynke
at
the
Lordes
table
.
And
therfore
sayd
sainct
Peter
:
And
our
sauiour
Christe
sayd
to
the
multitude
:
Take
and
eate
.
And
further
he
sayd
:
Drynke
you
all
of
this
.
Whosoeuer
therfore
wyll
be
spiritually
regenerated
in
Christe
,
he
must
bee
baptized
him selfe
.
And
he
that
wyll
lyue
him selfe
by
Christe
,
must
by
him selfe
eate
Christes
fleshe
and
drynke
his
bloud
.
And
briefely
to
conclude
,
he
that
thynketh
to
come
to
the
kyngdome
of
Christe
himselfe
,
must
also
come
to
his
sacramentes
him selfe
,
and
kepe
his
commaundementes
himselfe
,
&
do
all
thynges
that
partaine
to
a
christen
man
and
to
his
vocation
himselfe
,
least
if
he
referre
these
thynges
to
another
man
to
do
them
for
him
,
the
other
may
with
as
good
right
clayme
the
kingdom
of
heauen
for
him
.
Chap.
11.
Therfore
Christ
made
no
suche
difference
betwene
the
priest
and
the
lay
man
,
that
the
priest
should
make
oblacion
and
sacrifice
of
Christ
for
the
lay
man
,
As
in
a
princes
house
the
officers
&
ministers
prepare
the
table
,
and
yet
other
(
aswell
as
they
)
eate
the
meate
and
drynke
the
drynke
:
so
do
the
priestes
and
ministers
prepare
the
Lordes
supper
,
reade
the
Gospell
,
and
reherse
Christes
woordes
,
but
all
the
people
say
therto
:
Amen
.
All
remembre
Christes
death
,
all
geue
thankes
to
God
,
all
repent
and
offre
themselues
an
oblacion
to
Christe
,
all
take
him
for
their
Lorde
and
sauiour
,
and
spiritually
feade
vpon
him
,
and
in
token
therof
they
eate
the
bread
and
drynke
the
wyne
in
his
mistical
supper
.
And
this
nothing
diminisheth
the
estimation
and
dignitee
of
priesthod
and
other
ministers
of
the
church
,
Nowe
forasmuche
,
Chap.
12.
as
I
trust
,
that
I
haue
playnly
enough
set
furth
the
propitiatory
sacrifice
of
our
sauior
Iesu
Christ
,
The
place
of
sainct
Paule
vnto
the
Hebrues
(
whiche
they
do
cite
for
their
purpose
)
maketh
quite
and
cleane
against
them
.
And
as
litle
serueth
for
the
Papistes
purpose
the
texte
of
the
Prophete
Malachie
,
For
the
prophet
in
that
place
spake
no
worde
of
the
Masse
,
nor
of
any
oblacion
propitiatory
to
bee
made
by
the
priestes
,
but
he
spake
of
the
oblation
of
all
faythfull
people
(
in
what
place
soeuer
they
bee
)
whiche
offre
vnto
God
,
with
pure
heartes
and
myndes
,
sacrifices
of
laude
and
prayse
:
propheciyng
of
the
vocacion
of
the
Gentyles
,
that
God
would
extende
his
mercy
vnto
them
,
and
not
be
the
God
onely
of
the
Iewes
,
but
of
all
nations
,
from
East
to
West
,
that
with
pure
fayth
call
vpon
him
,
and
glorify
his
name
.
But
the
aduersaries
of
Christe
,
Chap.
13.
gather
together
a
greate
heape
of
authors
,
whiche
(
as
they
say
)
cal
the
Masse
or
holy
communion
a
Sacrifice
.
Augustinus
ad
Bonifac.
before
rehersed
in
this
booke
,
fol.
64.
And
in
his
boke
De
fide
ad
Petrum
diaconum
before
rehersed
also
.
De
ciuitat
.
lib.
10.
cap.
5
And
in
his
booke
De
ciuitate
Dei
,
he
saith
.
That
which
men
call
a
sacrifice
,
is
a
signe
or
representacion
of
the
true
sacrifice
.
And
the
Maister
of
the
sentence
(
of
whom
all
the
schoole
authors
take
their
occasion
to
write
)
iudged
truly
in
this
point
,
Lombardus
li.
4.
dist.
12
saying
:
That
which
ys
offered
&
consecrated
of
the
priest
,
is
called
a
sacrifice
and
oblation
,
bicause
it
is
a
memorye
and
representacion
of
the
trewe
sacrifice
and
holye
oblation
made
in
the
altare
of
the
crosse
.
And
S.
Iohn
Chrysostome
,
Chrysost.
ad
Heb.
ho.
17
after
he
hath
said
that
Christe
is
our
Byshop
,
whiche
offered
that
sacrifice
that
made
vs
cleane
,
and
that
we
offre
the
same
nowe
,
least
any
man
might
be
deceaued
by
his
manner
of
speakinge
,
he
openeth
his
meaninge
more
plainly
,
saying
:
That
whiche
wee
doo
,
is
doone
for
a
remembraunce
of
that
whiche
was
doone
by
Christe
.
For
Christe
saith
:
Do
this
in
remembraunce
of
me
.
Also
Chrysostome
declaring
at
length
,
that
the
priests
of
the
old
law
offered
euer
new
sacrifices
,
and
changed
them
from
time
to
tyme
,
&
that
christian
people
do
not
so
,
but
offre
euer
one
sacrifice
of
Christ
:
yet
by
&
by
(
lest
some
men
might
be
offended
with
this
speache
)
he
maketh
as
it
were
a
correction
of
his
wordes
,
saying
:
But
rather
we
make
a
remembrance
of
Christes
sacrifice
.
As
though
he
shuld
say
:
Although
in
a
certaine
kinde
of
speach
we
may
sai
,
that
euery
day
we
make
a
sacrifice
of
Christe
,
yet
in
very
deede
,
to
speake
properly
,
we
make
no
sacrifice
of
him
,
but
only
a
commemoration
&
remembrance
of
that
sacrifice
.
whiche
he
alone
made
,
&
neuer
none
but
he
.
Nor
Christ
neuer
gaue
this
honor
to
any
creature
,
that
he
shuld
make
a
sacrifice
of
him
,
nor
did
not
ordain
the
sacrament
of
his
holi
supper
,
to
the
intent
that
either
the
people
shuld
sacrifice
Christ
againe
,
or
that
the
priests
shuld
make
a
sacrifice
of
him
for
the
people
:
but
his
holy
supper
was
ordained
for
this
purpose
,
that
euery
man
eating
&
drinking
therof
,
shuld
remembre
that
Christ
died
for
him
,
and
so
shuld
exercise
his
faith
,
and
comforte
him selfe
by
the
remembraunce
of
Christes
bnefites
,
and
so
giue
vnto
Christ
most
harty
thanks
,
and
giue
himselfe
also
clearly
vnto
him
.
Wherfore
the
ordinance
of
Christ
ought
to
be
folowed
,
the
priest
to
minister
the
sacrament
to
the
people
,
&
they
to
vse
it
to
their
consolation
.
And
in
this
eating
,
drinking
and
vsing
of
the
lords
supper
,
we
make
not
of
Christ
a
newe
sacrifice
propitiatory
for
remission
of
sinne
.
But
the
humble
confession
of
al
penitent
hartes
,
Chap.
14.
theyr
knowledgyng
of
Chrystes
benefytes
,
And
as
for
the
saying
or
singing
of
Masse
by
the
priest
,
Chap.
15
as
it
was
in
time
passed
vsed
,
CHRIST
:
That
thing
which
seemeth
an
high
thinge
before
men
,
is
abhominacion
before
God
.
They
therfore
which
gather
of
the
doctours
,
that
the
Masse
is
a
sacrifice
for
remission
of
syn
,
and
that
it
is
applied
by
the
prieste
to
theim
,
for
whom
he
saith
or
singeth
:
they
whiche
so
gather
of
the
doctours
,
do
to
them
most
greuous
iniury
and
wronge
,
moste
falsely
belying
them
.
Chap.
16.
For
these
monstrous
thinges
were
neuer
seen
nor
knowen
of
the
olde
and
primitiue
churche
,
But
these
priuate
Masses
sprange
vppe
of
late
yeares
,
partelye
throughe
the
ignoraunce
and
supersticion
of
vnlearned
Monks
and
Fryers
,
(
whiche
knewe
not
what
a
sacrifyce
was
,
but
made
of
the
Masse
a
sacrifice
propiciatorye
,
to
remytte
both
synne
and
the
paine
due
for
the
same
)
but
chiefely
they
sprange
of
lucre
and
gaine
,
when
priestes
founde
the
meanes
to
sell
Masses
to
the
people
,
whiche
caused
Masses
so
muche
to
encrease
,
that
euerye
daye
was
sayde
an
infinite
numbre
,
and
that
no
priest
would
receaue
the
communion
at
an
other
preestes
hand
,
but
euery
one
would
receaue
it
alone
:
neither
regardyng
the
godly
decree
of
the
most
famous
&
holy
counsail
of
Nice
(
which
appointeth
in
what
order
priestes
should
be
placed
aboue
Deacons
at
the
Communion
,
Canones
Apostolorum
Cap.
8.
whiche
commaunde
that
when
any
Communion
is
ministred
,
all
the
priestes
together
should
receiue
the
same
,
or
els
bee
excomunicate
.
So
muche
the
olde
fathers
mislyked
,
that
any
priest
should
receyue
the
sacrament
alone
.
Therefore
when
the
olde
fathers
called
the
Masse
or
supper
of
the
Lorde
a
Sacrifice
,
they
ment
that
it
was
a
sacrifice
of
laudes
&
thankes
geuyng
(
and
so
aswel
the
people
as
the
priest
do
sacrifice
)
or
els
that
it
was
a
remembraunce
of
the
very
true
sacrifice
propitiatorye
of
Christe
:
but
they
ment
in
no
wyse
that
it
is
a
very
true
sacrifice
for
sinne
,
and
applicable
by
the
priest
to
the
quicke
and
dead
.
For
the
priest
may
well
minister
Christes
wordes
and
sacramentes
,
to
all
men
both
good
and
bad
,
but
he
can
applye
the
benefite
of
Christes
passion
to
no
man
(
beyng
of
age
and
discrecion
)
but
onely
to
suche
as
by
their
owne
fayth
do
applye
the
same
vnto
them selues
.
So
that
euery
man
of
age
and
discrecion
,
taketh
to
him selfe
the
benefites
of
Christes
passion
or
refuseth
theim
,
himself
,
by
his
own
fayth
,
quicke
or
dead
.
That
is
to
say
,
by
his
true
and
liuely
fayth
(
that
worketh
by
charitee
)
he
receiueth
them
,
or
els
by
his
vngodlynes
or
fayned
fayth
reiected
them
.
And
this
doctrine
of
the
scripture
clearely
condempneth
the
wicked
inuencions
of
the
Papistes
in
these
latter
dayes
,
which
haue
deuised
a
purgatory
to
torment
soules
after
this
life
,
&
oblations
of
Masses
sayd
by
the
priestes
,
to
deliuer
them
from
the
sayd
tormentes
,
and
a
great
number
of
other
commodities
do
they
promise
to
the
symple
ignorant
people
by
their
Masses
.
Cha.
17.
Nowe
the
nature
of
man
beyng
euer
prone
to
Idolatry
from
the
beginnyng
of
the
worlde
,
And
finally
,
they
extoll
their
Masses
farre
aboue
Christes
passion
:
promisyng
many
thynges
thereby
,
whiche
were
neuer
promised
vs
by
Christes
passion
.
As
that
if
a
man
heare
Masse
,
he
shal
lacke
no
bodely
sustenance
that
day
,
nor
nothyng
necessarye
for
him
,
nor
shal
be
letted
in
his
iourney
,
he
shall
not
lose
his
sight
that
day
,
nor
dye
no
sodayn
death
,
he
shall
not
waxe
olde
in
that
tyme
that
he
heareth
Masse
,
nor
no
wicked
spirites
shal
haue
power
of
him
,
be
he
neuer
so
wicked
a
man
,
so
long
as
he
loketh
vpon
the
sacrament
.
All
these
folishe
and
deuilishe
superstitions
,
the
Papistes
of
their
owne
idle
brayne
haue
deuised
of
late
yeres
,
whiche
deuises
were
neuer
knowen
in
the
olde
churche
.
And
yet
they
crye
out
against
them
that
professe
the
gospell
,
Chap.
18.
&
say
that
they
dissent
from
the
churche
,
But
thankes
be
to
the
eternal
God
,
the
maner
of
the
holy
Communion
(
whiche
is
nowe
sette
furth
within
this
Realme
)
is
agreable
with
the
institution
of
Christ
,
with
sainct
Paule
and
the
olde
primitiue
and
Apostolike
churche
,
with
the
right
fayth
of
the
sacrifice
of
Christe
vpon
the
Crosse
for
oure
redemption
,
and
with
the
true
doctryne
of
oure
saluacion
,
iustificacion
and
remission
of
all
our
synnes
by
that
onely
sacrifice
.
AMEN
.
FINIS
.