The true report of the disputation had & begun in the convocation house at london among the clergy there assembled the xviij. day of October in the year of our lord M.D.LIIII.  i. johan. iiij. Prove every spirit whether they be of god or no.  

To the christian reader.  
IT is not unknown to the world/ christian reader/ what variety and contention hath been about weyghtis matters of religion for a great space/ which were thought to have been so disiussed debated and examined of our clergy/ that all men were in hope that such an uniformity agreeable to the word of god/ to the doctrine of the patriarkis and apostles & to the order of the primative church also/ had been determined for our church of Ingland/ that from henceforth one should have lived with another in much better unity and godly quietness than in many years before they had done: every one embracing one sincere manner of worshipping and invocation off god/ without any superstition/ idolatry or hypocrisy that hath in process of time crept in by the device and fantasy of man's brain. And the thing was brought to such a point that all men/ in manner/ were won to a wonderful in difference/ and begamn to espy their ignorance and errors wherewith they have been heretofore blinded and seduced, But the ancient adversari of man kind/ Satan/ which never ceaseth to seek how he may destroy the works of god in us/ envying that unity in true religion that all men of all agis statis and degrees as well high as low/ had in manner attained and were well nigh comen unto/ hath now stirred up the old contention again bringing the weak unlearned and simple sort thereby in to such a doubt and wavering that they can now lesser tell what they may believe and which way they may stay their faith and constiencies than ever they could before. But as the great prophet (as Moses nameth him) the son of god doth prophecy and witness/ that offences must nediss come/ and that such offences should come that even the veri elect/ (if it were possible) should be seduced/ now we see with our eyes and grope with our senses that it is comen to pass and fulfiled even among us. But let them take heed that have been the authors thereof for as it serveth for the proving and trying of gods elect (to whom all things work to the best) even so shall it serve to their woe and utter damnation/ as he saith that knoweth all things (ve homini illi per quem scandalum venit) woe unto that man thorough whom offence doth come. And let the godly sort now rejoice in the cross of christ/ for they have no less cause/ for as much as by this temptation they have the same token that their profession is the true religion of god/ which all the true believers evermore from time to time have had/ that is to say/ christs cross the token that can not deceive us/ and with out the which we can not be/ if we will be sure to live godly in christ/ as holy. s. Paul saith. But now to my purpose as in other pointies much variety of opinions hatth been/ even so in the high mystery of christs supper (which was instituted to be a sacrament of concord/ love and unity) the difference and diversity of opinions there about hath brought to pass that more discord/ dissension and division hath grown among men about that than in any other one article of our christian religion. And therefore they whose subscription was required in the convocation holden at Paul'S at the last parliament/ judged not amiss/ that thought it necessary to reason and dispute therein before they would subscribe to any conclusion or determinate sentence. And to the intent that all men may know and see what reasons and answers were made on both parties/ I have thought good to publyssh so much thereof as came unto my handis/ trusting that no man will be more offended with the setting forth thereof/ to the intent that such as were not present may read such things as there were done and said/ no more than they were that all that were present should hear them/ and judge indifferently by the toch stone of god's word/ on which part the truth doth remain. Which/ men may well go about to suppress/ but when they have done all they can against it/ yet will it out and have the over hand. God grant that all men may seek and study for the truth and not suffer themselves to be carried about nor changed with every blast of strange doctrine/ nor with every fantastical fable of Antichrist ministers. Amen.  
And as by reading and weighing the reasons and answers of this disputation I doubt not but thou shalt be sussyciently confirmed in the truth of the articles therein reasoned and debated/ even so in a little treatise of the true sacrifice of a christian man which by god's grace shall shortly also be set forth/ thou shalt be instructed what to judge off other articles/ as of the mass/ of altarys/ of the invocation of saints/ and such like. And now that we see how gods wrath is bend over our nation/ that we may now well say with david/ O god/ heathen people are entered in to thine inherytans. (For now Antichrist generation think to establish their kingdom in Ingland for ever) let all faithful hartis yoyne them seluis together in unfeigned and continual prayer that god will have mercy upon us and defend us against them/ that the light of his word which hath now nis shined up on us o may both be preserved among us/ and also preserve us against all the practices and enterprises of his enemies Amen.   

The true report of the disputation had & begonn in the convocation house at london the xviij. of October. Ano Dni. M.D.LIIII.  
WHereas divers and uncertain rumours be spread abroad of the disputation had in the convocation house/ to the intent that all men may know the certainty of all things therein done and said as much as the memory of him that was present thereat can bear a way/ he hath thought good at request/ thoroughly to describe what was said therein on both parts of the matters argued and had in question and of the entrans' thereof.  
first up on wedynsday being the xviij. day off october at after noon/ master weston the prolocutor certified the house that it was the queens pleasure that the company of the same house being many learned men assembled/ should debate of matters of religion and constitute laws thereof/ which her grace and the parliament would ratify. And for that there is a book of late set forth/ called the cathechysme (which he showed forth) bearing the name of this honourable sinody/ and yet put forth with out your consentis/ as I have learned/ being a book very pestiferos/ & full of heresies (as he said) and like wise the book of common prayer/ very abominable (as it pleased him to term it) he thought it therefore best first to begin with the articles of the cathechysme concerning the sacrament of the altar/ for to confirm the natural presence of christ in the same/ and for transubstantiation. In the which on friday next ensuing/ he willed all men there freely to speak their tonsciens and learning/ and they should be fully satisfied.  
The friday coming being the xx. of October/ when men had thought they should have ent●yd disputation of the q̄st●ōs proposed/ the prolocutor did prohibit ij. several billies unto the house: th'one for the natural presence of christ in the sacrament of the altar/ the other concerning the catechism/ that it was not of that house agreament set forth and that they do not agree thereunto. requiring all them to subscribe to the same as he himsylf had done: whereunto the whole house did immedyately assent except vi. which were the dean of rochester the dean of exceter/ the archdeacon of wynchester/ the archdeacon of hertford/ the arthdeacon of stowe and one other/ And while the rest were about to subscribe thes ij. articles. I. filpot stood up and spoke first concerning the article of the cathechysme that he thought they were deceived in the title of the catechism/ in that it beareth the title of the Synod of london last before this/ all though many of them which than were present were never made privy thereof in setting it forth/ for that this house had granted the authority to make ecclesiastical laws unto certain persons to be appointed by the king's majesty/ and what soever ecclesiastical laws they or the most part of them did set forth according to a statute in that behalf provided/ it might be well said to be do/ ne in the synod of london although such as be of this house now had no notice thereof, before the promulgation. And in this point he thought the setterfurth thereof nothing to have slandered the house/ as they by their subscription went about to persuade the world/ sins they had our synodal authority unto them committed to make such spiritual laws as they thought convenient and necessary. And more over he said as concerning the article of the natural presence in the sacrament/ that it was aganyst reason and order of learning and also very prejudicial to the truth that men should be moved to substribe before the matter were thoroughly examined and discussed. But when he saw that allegation might take no place/ being as a man astonied at the multitude of so many learned men as there were off purpose gathered together to maintain old traditions more than the truth of gods holy word/ he made his request unto the prolocutor- that where as there were so many awncyent learned men present on that side as in the realm the like again were not to be found in such number/ and that on the other side of them that had not subscribed/ were not passed .v. or vi. both in age and learning far inferior unto them/ therefore that equality might be had in this disputation he desired that the prolocutor would be a mean unto the lords that some of those that were learned and setters forth of the same catechism might be brought in tooth house to show their learning that moved them to set forth the same/ And that D. rydley and master rogers with ij. or iij. more might be licensed to be present at this disputation and to be associate with them. This request was thought reasonable and was proposed unto the lord bishops who made this answer that it was not in them to call such parsonis unto our house/ sins some of them were prisoners. But they said they would be petiyoners in this behalf unto the council/ and in case any were absent that aught to be of the house/ they willed them to be taken in unto them/ if they listed. Affter this they minding to have entered in to disputation/ there came a gentleman a messenger from the lord great master signifying unto the prolocutor that my lord great master and the earl of deavonshyre would be present at the disputations/ and therefore he differryd the same until monday at one of the clock at affternone.  
Up on monday the twenty-three. of October at the time appointed/ in the presence of many earlies/ lords/ knights/ gentlemen and divers other of the coint and of the city also/ the prolocutor made a protestation that they of the house/ had appointed this disputation/ 
weston  not to call the truth in to doubt/ to the which they had already all subscribed/ saving v. or v●. but that those gain sayers might be resolved of their argumentis in the which they stood/ as it shall appear unto you/ not doubting but they will also condescend unto us. Than he demanded of master haddon whether he would reason against the qnstyons proposed or no?  

M. haddon  To whom he made answer that he had certified him before by writing that he would not/ sins the request of such learned men as were demanded to be assystent with them/ would not be granted. 
M. Elmar  Master elmar likewise was asked/ who made the prolocutor the like answer/ adding moreover this/ that they had done to much prejudice all ready to the truth/ to substrybe before the matter was discussed: and little or nothing it might avail to reason for the truth/ sins all they were now determined to the contrary. Affter this he demanded of master chenye whom the prolocutor said allowed the presence with them/ but he denied the transubstantiation/ by the meanis of certain auctorityes upon the which he standeth and desireth to be resolved/ 
M. cheyny's objections.  as you shall hear whether he will propose his dowtis concerning transubstantiation or no Yea/ quoth he/ I would gladly mi doubts to be resolved which move me not to believe transsubstancyation. The first is out of the scripture of s. Paul to the corinthyans who speaking of the sacrament of the body and blood of christ calleth it oft times bread/ after the consecration. The second is out off Orygen/ who speaking of this sacrament saith that the material part theroff goeth down to the excrementis. The third is out of theodoretus who making mention of the sacramental bread and wine after the consecration saith that they go not out of their former substance/ form and shape. Thes be some of my dowtis among many other which I require to be answered off. Than the prolocutor assigned D. Moreman to answer him. 
moreman's aaswer to s. Paul.  Who to. s. Paul answered him thus/ that the sacrament is called bread by him in deed/ but it is thus to be understand that it is bread off the sacramental bread/ that is/ the form of bread. 
Master cheyny's replication.  Than mastery cheny/ inferred and alleged that hifichyus calleth the sacrament both bread and flesh. Yea/ quoth moreman/ hyfichyus calleth it bread because it was bread and not because it is so. And passing over orygen he came to theodoretus/ and said that men mistoke his authority/ by interpreting a general in to a special/ as peter martyr hath done in that place of theodoret/ 
moreman's answer to theodorete. mark this answer and shyyfft.  interpreting/ ousia/ for substance/ which is a special signification of the word. whereas ousia is a general word as well to accidence as to substance. And therefore I answer thus unto Theodoret that the sacramental bread and wine do not go out of their former substance form and shape/ that is to say/ not out of their accidental substance and shape. Affter this master theny sat him down/ and by and by master elmar stood up/ 
M. elmar.  as one that could not abide to hear so fond an answer to so grave an authority/ And reasonyd up on the authority of theodoret/ alleagyd before by master cheny and declared that moreman's answer to theodoret was no just nor sufficient answer but an illusion and a subtle evasion contrary to Theodoretis meaning. For/ said he/ if (ousia) should signify an accidence in the place alleged as it is answered by master moreman/ than were it a word superfluos set in theodorete/ there where do follow ij. other words which sufficiently do expound the accydens of the bread/ that is/ eidos and shema/ which signify in Inglysh/ shape and form: And so very lernydly proved out of the same auctor by divers allegations that (ousia) in greek could not be so generally taken in that place as moreman for a shyfft would have it. 
moreman's shifft is overthrown.  But moreman as a man having no nother salve for that sore affirmed still that (ousia) which signifieth substance/ must nediss signify accidental substance properly. 
fylpots replication/ to moreman's shyfft.  To whose importunyte sins he could have no nother answer/ elmar as a man wearied with so long talk gave place. Affter this/ stood up john fyllpot and said that he could prove that by the matter that Theodoret entreated off in the place above alleged and by the similitude which he maketh to prove his purpose/ by no meanis master moreman's interpretation of (ousia)/ might be taken for accidental substance as he for a shyfft would interpret it to be. For the matter which theodoret intreatyth off in that place is against eutyches an heretic which denied ij. natures of substance to remain in christ being one parson but that his humanity after thaccomplishment of the mystery of our salvation ascending in to heaven and being yoyned unto the divinity was absorbed or swallowed up of the same/ so that christ should be no more but of one divine substance only by his opinion. Against which opinion Theodoret writeth and by the similitude of the sacrament proveth the contrary against the heretic/ that like as in the sacrament of the body of christ after the consecracyo there is the substance of chrystis humanity with the substance of bread/ remaining as it was before/ not being absorbed of the humanity of christ but yoyned by the divine operation thereunto/ even so in the parson of christ being now in heaven of whom this holy sacrament is a representation/ there be ij. several substancies/ that is/ his divinity and humanity united in one hipostacy or parson/ which is christ/ The humanity not absorbed by the conjunction of the deity/ but remaining in his former substans. And this similitude/ quoth fyllpot/ brought in of theodorete to confownd Eutyches/ should prove nothing at all/ if the very substance off the sacramental bread did not remain as it did before/ but if D. moreman's interpretation might take place for transubstantiation/ than should the heretic have thereby a strong argument by theodoretis authority so taken to maintain his heresy and to prove him filff a good christian man/ and he might well say thus unto theodorete. Like as thou theodoret if thou were of D. moreman's mind/ dost say that after the consecration in the sacrament the substance of the bread is absorbed or transsubstancyate in to the human body of christ coming thereunto/ so that in the sacrament is now but one substance of the humanity alone and not the substance of bread as it was before/ even likewise may I affirm and conclude by thine own similitude that the humanity ascending up by the power of god in to heaven and adjoined unto the deytye was by the might thereof absorbed and turned into one substance with the deytye: so that now there remaineth but one divine substance in christ/ no more than in the sacramental sygnis of the lords supper after the consecration do remain any more than one substance according to your belief and construction. To this D. Moreman stackered in answering/ whose defect fyllpott perceiving/ spoke on this wise. 
moreman stack ryh and can not tell what to answer. weston is offended.  Well master moreman if you havenotan answer ready at this present/ I pray you divyse one if you can conveniently/ against our next meeting here again: with that his saying the prolocutor was grievously offended/ telling him that he should not brag there/ but that he should be fully answered. Than said filpot/ It is the thing that I only desire to be answered directly in this behalf/ and I desire of you & of all the house at this present/ that I may be sufficiently answered/ which I am sure you are not all able to do/ saving theodoretis authority and similitude upright/ as he ought to be taken. No nother answer was made to fillpots reasons/ but that he was commanded to silence. 
Fylpot, 'tis replication answered by commanding him to silence  Than stood up the dean of rochester offering him sylff/ to reason in the first question against the natural presence wishing that the scripture and the awncyent doctors in this point might be weighed/ believed and followed. And against this natural presence he thought the saying of christ in. s. Matthew to make sufficiently enough/ if men would credit and follow scripture: who said there of himself that poor men we should have allweis with us/ 
the dean of rochester.  but him we should not have always/ which was spoken/ quoth he/ concerning the natural presence of christis body/ therefore we ought to believe as he hath taught that christ is not naturally present on earth in the sacrament of the altar. 
westons answer to the dean.  To this was answered by the prolocutor that we should not have christ present always to exercise alms deeds up on him/ but up on the poor. But the dean prosecuted his argument/ and showed out of. s. Austen further/ that the same interpretation of the scripture alleged/ 
The deans replication  was no sufficient answer/ who wrytych in the fyfftye treatise of s. johan on this wise of the same sentence. When as he said/ saith Austen/ me shall ye not have always with you/ he spoke of the presence of his body. For by his majesty/ by his providence/ by his unspeakable and visible grace/ that is fulfilled which is said of him/ behold I am with you until the consummation of the world. 
A notable authority out of. s. Austen  But in the flesh which the wore took up on him/ in that which was borne of the virgin/ in that which was apprehended of the Jews which was crucified on the cross/ which was let down from the cross/ which was wrapped in clowtis/ which was hidden in the sepulchre/ which was manifested in the resurrection/ you shall not have me always with you. And why? For after a bodily presence he was conversant wih his disciples xl. eayes/ and they accompanying him by seeing and not by following/ he ascended and is not here/ for there he sitteth at the right hand of the father/ And yet here he is/ because he is not departed in the presence of his majesty. Affter another manner we have christ allweys by presence of his majesty/ but after the pnsens off his flesh it is uprightly said you shall not verily have me allweys with you. For the church had him in the presence of his flesh a few days/ and now by faith it apprehendeth him and saith him not with eyes. 
watsons' answer to s. Austen.  To this authority D. Watson took up on him to answer/ and said he would answer. s. Austen by. s. Austen/ and having a certain book in his hand of notis/ he alleged out of the xc. treaty up on. 
Fylpot against watson.  s. joan that after that mortal condition and manner we have not now christ on the earth as he was heretofore before his passion. Against whose answer johan fillpott replied and said that watson had not fully answered. s. Austen by. s. Austen as he would seem to have done/ for that in the place above mencionyd by master dean of rochester/ he doth not only teach the immortal state of christis body before his passion/ but also the immortal condition of the same after his resurrection/ in the which mortal body. s: Austen seemeth plainly to affirm that christ is not present-up on the earth neither in form visibly neither in corporal substance invisibly: As in few linis after the place above alleged. s. Austen doth more plainly declare by thes words/ saying/ now thes ij. manner of christis presence declared/ which is by his majesty/ providence/ and grace now present in the world which before his ascension was present in flesh/ being now placed at the right hand of the father is absent in the same from the world/ I think/ (saith. s. Austen) that there remaineth no nother question in this matter. Now/ quoth fillpot/ if. s. Austen acknowledged no more presence of christ to be now on earth but only his divine presence/ and touching his humanity to be in heavyn/ we aught to confess and believe the same. But if we put a third presence of christ/ that is corporally to be pnsent allweys in the sacrament of the altar invisibly/ according to your suppositions/ whereof. s. Austen maketh no mention at all in all his works/ you shall seem to judge that which. s. Austen did never comprehend. Why/ quoth watson. s. Austen in the place by me alleged maketh no mention how. s. Stevyn being in this world saw Christ after his ascension. It is true/ said fyllpot/ but he saw christ as the scripture telleth/ in the heavyns being open/ standing at the right hand of god the father. Further to this/ watson answered not. 
D. weston.  Than the prolocutor went about to furnyssh up an answer to. s. Austen/ saying that he is not now in the world after that manner of bodily presence/ but yet present for all that in his body. To whom fyllpot answered that the prolocutor did grate much up on this word/ (secundum) in. s. Austen/ which signifieth after the manner/ in form/ but he doth not answer to/ (id quod) which is that thing or substance of christ in the which christ suffered/ arose/ and ascended in to heaven In the which thing and substance he is in heaven and not on earth/ as. s. Austen in the place specified most clearly doth define. 
The dean of rochester.  To this nothing else being answered/ master dean of rochester procedid in the maintenance of his argument and red out of a book of annotations/ sundry authorities for the confirmation thereof. 
moreman.  To the which moreman/ who was appointed to answer him/ made no direct answer/ but bad him make an argument/ saying master dean had recited many words of doctors but he made not one argument. Than said master dean/ the authorities of the doctors by me rehearsed/ be sufficient argumentis to prove mine intent/ to the which my desire is to be answered of you. But still moreman cried/ make an argument/ to shifft off the authority which he could not answer unto. Affter this master dean made this argument out of the institution of the sacrament/ (Do this in remembrance of me/ and thus ye shall show forth the lords death until he cometh) The sacrament therefore is the remembrance of christ/ than it is not very christ for yet he is not come. For this word/ (Until he cometh) doth plainly signify the absens of chrystis body. 
weston.  Than the prolocutor meant about to show that this word/ (Until he cometh/) did not import any absence of christ on the earth/ by other placis of scripture where (donec) until/ was placed as well as there/ but directly to the purpose he answered nothing. In conclusion master dean fell to questioning of moreman whether christ ate the pasthalawb with his disciples or no? He answered/ yea. Further he demanded whether he ate likewise the sacrament with them as he did institute it? Moreman answered Yea. Than he axed what he ate/ and whether he ate his own natural body as they imagine it to be/ or no. Than said master dean It is a great absurdity by you granted/ and so he sat down. 
moreman affirmeth that christ ato his own body.  Against this absurdity/ filpot stood up and argued/ saying he could prove by good reason to be diducyd out of scripture/ that christ ate not his own natural body at the institution of the sacrament/ and the reason is this. The body of christ givyn by the sacrament hath a promise of remission of sins adyoyned/ unto all them that receive it duly/ 
Fylpot.  but this promise could take no effect in christ/ ergo christ ate not his own body in the sacrameng. 
moreman denieth the sacrament to have a promise of remission of sin annexed unto it.  To this reason moreman answered/ denienh the former part of the argument/ that the sacrament had a promise of remissyo of sins annexed unto it. Than fillpot showed this to be the promise in the sacrament (Which is given for you/ which is shed for you for the remission of sins) But moreman would not acknowledge that to be any promise/ so that he drove fyllpot to the vi. of joh. to vouch his saying with thes words the bread which I will give/ is my flesh/ which I will give for the life off the world. Moreman answering nothing directly to this argument/ 
harpsfeld affirmeth that which moreman his fellow denied.  harpsfeld start up to supply that which wanted in his behalf/ and thinking to have answered fyllpott/ confirmed more strongly his argument/ saying/ ye mistake the promise which is annexed to the body of christ in the sacrament/ for it pertained not to christ but to his disciples to whom christ said this is my body which is given for you/ and not for christ him sylff. You have said well for me quoth fylpott / for that is mine argument. The promise off the body of christ took no effect in christ/ ergo christ ate not his own body. 
weston also is contrary to more man.  Than the prolocutor to showlder out the matter/ said the argument was nought/ for by the like argument he might go about to prove that christ was not baptized/ because the remission of sin which is annexed unto baptism took no effect in christ. 
fylpots argument is not soluted.  To the which/ fyllpot replied that like as christ was baptized/ so he ate the sacrament/ but he took on him baptism/ not that he had any need thereof/ or that it took any effect in him/ but as our master/ to give the church an example to follow him in the ministration of the sacrament/ and thereby to exhibit unto us/ himself/ and not to give himself to himself. No more was said in this. But afterward the prolocutor demanded of filpot/ whether he would argue against the natural presence or no. To whom he answered/ yea if he would hear his argument with out interruption and assign one to answer him and not many/ which is a confusion to the opponent and specially for him that was of an ill memori. By this time the night was con on/ wherefore the prolocutor broke up the disputation for that time and appointed fillpot to be the first that should begin the disputation the next day after/ concerning the presence of christ in the sacrament.  
On the wedinsday the xxv. of October/ johnnfillpott/ 
Filpot.  as it was before appointed/ was ready to have entered the disputation minding first to have made a certain oration and a true declaration in latin off the matter of christis presence which was than in question which thing the prolocutor perceiving/ by and by he forbade fillpot to make any oration or declaration of any matter/ commanding him also that he should make na argument in latin but to conclude no his argumentis in Inglyssh. Than said fyllpott/ this is contrary to your order taken at the beginning of this disputation: For than you appointed that all the argumentis should be made in latin. And thereupon I have drawn and devised all my argumentis in latin. And because you/ master prolocutor/ have said heretofore openly in this house that I had no learning/ I had thought to have showed such learning as I have/ in a brief oration and short declaration of the questions now in controversy: thinking it so most convenient also/ that in case I should speak otherwise in my declaration than should stand with learning or than I were able to warrant and justify by god's word/ it might the better be reformed by such as were learned of the house/ so that the unlearned sort being present might take the less offence thereat. But this allegation prevailed nothing with the prolocutor who bade him still form an argument in Inglyssh or else to hold his peace.  
Than said fyllpot. You have sore disappointed me thus suddenly to go from your former order/ but I will accomplish your commandment leaving mine oration a part And I will come to my argumentis/ the which as well as so sudden a warning will serve I will make in Inglyssh. But before I bring forth any argument I will in one word declare what manner of presence I do dysallowe in the sacrament to the intent the hearers may the better understand to what end and effect mine argumentis shall tend: not to deny utterly the presence of christ in his sacramentis truly ministryd according to his institution/ but only to deny that gross and carnal presence which you of this house have already substrybed unto to be in the sacrament of the altar contrary to the truth and manifest meaning of the scriptures/ That by transubstantiation of the sacramental bread and wine christis natural body should by the virtue of the words pronounced by the priest be contained and included under the formis or accydenties of bread and wine. This kind of presence imagined by men/ I do deny/ quoth fyllpot/ And against this I will reason: But before he could make an end of that he would have said he was interrupted of the prolocutor/ and commanded to descend to his argument. At whose unjust importunity fyllpot being offenand thinking to purchase him a remedy therefore/ he fell down up on his kneys before the earls and lords which were there present/ being a great number/ whereof some were of the quenis council/ beseeching them that he might have liberty to prosecute his argumentis with out interruption of any man: the which was gentilly granted him of the lords. But the prolocutor putting in ure a point of the practise of prelatis/ would not condescend thereunto/ but still cried hold your peace or else make a short argument. I am about it/ quoth fyllpot/ if you would let me alone. But first I must nedis axe a question of my respondent (who was. D. chedsey) concerning a word or twain of your supposition/ that is/ of the sacrament of the altar/ what he meaneth thereby/ and whether he take as some of the awncyent writers do/ terming the lords supper the sacrament of the altar/ because it is a sacrament of that lively sacrifice which christ offered for our sins up on the altar of the cross and because that chrystis body crucified for us was that bloody sacrifice/ which the blood shedding of all the beasts offered up on the altar in the old law did prefigurate and signify unto us. And in signification thereof/ the old writers sometime do call the sacrament of the body and blood of christ/ among other names which they astrybe thereunto/ the sacrament of the altar and that right well. But if you take it other wise/ as for the sacrament of the altar which now a days is made of lime and stone and hangen over the same/ and to be all one with the sacrament of the mass/ as it is at this present in many placis/ 
chedscy  than I will direct mine argumentis according as your answer shall give me occasion. Than made D. chedsey this answer that in their supposition they took the sacrament of the altar and the sacrament of the mass to be all one. 
Fillpot speaketh plain Inglyssh.  Than quoth fyllpott/ I will speak plain Inglyssh/ as Master prolocutor willeth me/ and make a short resolution thereof/ that that sacrament of the altar which ye reckon to be all one with the mass/ once justly abolished and now put in full use again/ is no sacrament at all/ neither is christ in any wise present in it: And this his saying he offered to prove before the hole house/ if they listed to call him thereunto/ and likewise offered to vouch the same before the quenis grace and her most honourable cowncell/ before the face of vi. of the best learned men of the house of the contrary opinion/ he refused none. And if I shall not be able/ quoth he/ to maintain by god's word that I have said/ and confownd those vi. which shall take up on them to with stand me in this point/ let me be burned with as many faggots as be in london/ before the court gates. This he uttered with a great vehemency of spirit. At this/ the prolocutor with divers other/ were very much offended/ demanding of him whether he wist what he said or no. Yea/ quoth fyllpott I wot well what I say: defiering no man to be offended with his saying/ for that he spoke no more than by god's word he was able to prove. And praised be god quoth he/ that the quenis grace hath granted us off this house (as our prolocutor hath informed us) that we may freely utter our consciences in thes matters of controversy in religion. 
Here weston confuteth fylpot mightily.  And therefore I will speak here my consciens freely/ ground up on gods holy word for the truth: albeit some off you here present mislike the same. Than divers of the house besides the prolocutor/ taunted and reprehended him/ for speaking so unfaryngly against the sacrament of the mass/ And the prolocutor said he was mad and threatened him/ that he would send him to prison if he would not cease his speaking.  
Than fylpot seeing himself thus abused/ and not permitted with free liberty to declare his mind/ fell in to an exclamation/ casting his eyes up towardis the heaven and said/ O lord what a world is this/ O lord what meaneth this world/ that the truth of thy holy word may not be spoken and abidden by? And for very sorrow and heaviness the tearis trykled out of his eyes. Affther this/ the prolocutor being mouth by some that wore about him/ was content that he should make an argument so that he would be viefe therein. 
Fillpot  I will be as brief/ quoth filpot/ as I may convenientli be in uttering all that I have to say. And first I will begin to ground mine argumentis up on the authorities of scriptures/ where up on all the building of our faith ought to be ground. And after I shall confirm the same by ancient doctores of the church. And I take the occasion of my first argument out of the xxiv. of Matthew of the saying of the angel to the iij. mary's seeking christ at the sepulchre saying/ he is risen/ he is not here: and in. s. luke in the twenty-three. chap. the angel asketh them/ why they sought him that liveth among the dead? Like wise the scripture testifieth that christ is risen/ ascended in to heaven and sitteth on the right hand of the father: all the which is spoken of his natural body/ ergo it is not on earth included in the sacrament. I will confirm this yet moie effectually by the saying of christ in the xvi. of. s. john. I came saith christ/ from my father in to the world/ and now I leave the world and go a way to my father. The which coming/ and going/ he ment of his natural body/ therefore we may affirm thereby that it is not now in the world. But I look here/ quoth he/ to be answered with a blind distinction of visibly and invisibly/ that he is visibly departed in his humanity/ but invisibly he remaineth not withstanding in the sacrament: but that answer I provent my sylff that with more expedition I may descend to the pith of mine arguments whereof I have a dozen to propose/ and will prove that no such distinction may take away the force of that argument/ by the answer which his disciples gave unto christ speaking thes words/ now thou speakyst plainly and utteryst forth no proverb: which words. s. cyryll interpreting faith that christ spoke with out any manner of impedy of obscure speech/ And therefore I conclude hereby/ thus: that if christ spoke plainly and with out parable/ (as men say) saying/ I leave/ the world now/ and go a way to my father/ than that obscure/ dark and imperceptible presence of Christ's natural body to remain in the sacrament up on earth invisibly contrary to the plain words of christ/ aught not to be allowed: For nothing can be said more uncertain/ or more parabolical and unsensible than so to say. Here now will I attend what ye will answer/ and so descend to the confirmation of all that I have said by awncyent writers. 
thed seys answer to fyllpot.  Than D. ched say reciting his argument in such order as it was made/ made answer sevaerlly to every part thereof/ on this wise First to the saying of the angel/ that christ is not here/ And why seek ye the living among the dead/ he answered that thes sayngis pertained nothing to the presence of Christ's natural body in the sacrament/ but that they were spoken of Christ's body being in the sepulchre when the iij. mary's thought him to have been in the grave still. And there for the angel said/ why do ye seek him that livyth among the dead. And to the authority of the xvi-of john where christ saith/ Now I leave the world and go to my father/ he ment that of his ascension/ and so likewise did ciryl/ interpreting the saying of the disciples that knew plainly that christ would visibly ascend in to heaven/ but that yet doth not exclude his invisible presence of his natural body in the sacrament. For s. Chrysostom writing to the people of Antioch doth affirm the same/ comparing Helyas and christ together/ and helias clock unto Christis flesh. Helias/ quoth he/ when he was taken up in the fiery chariot/ lefft his clock behind him unto his disciple helyseus/ But christ ascending in to heaven took his flesh with him/ and lefft also his flesh behind him. Whereby we may right well gather that christis flesh is visibly astended in to heaven and invisibly abideth still in the sacrament of the altar. 
fyllpot replied.  To this answer/ fyllpot replied/ and said that he enforced not his argument up on the saying of the angel/ (Christ is risen and is not here)/ but took his beginning thereby to proceed as before is rehearsed: to the process whereof you have not thorowli answered/ for I proceeded further/ as thus/ he is risen/ ascended and sitteth at the right hand of god the father ergo he is not remaining on the earth. Neither is your answer to ciryl/ by me alleged/ sufficient: but by and by I will return to your interpretation of Cyril and more plainly declare the same/ after that I have first refelled the authority of chrysostom which is one of your chief principles that you allege to make for your gross carnal presence in the sacrament/ the which being well weighed and understand pertaineth nothing thereunto. At that the prolocutor starcled that one of the chief pillars in this po●t should be overtrhowen/ and therefore recited the said authority in latin first/ and after ward englished the same/ willing all that were present to note that saying of chrisoston/ which he thought invincible on their side. But I shall make it appear/ quoth fylpot/ by and by to make little for your purpose. And as he was about to declare his mind in that behalf / the prolocutor did interrupt him as he did almost continually/ where with fyllpot not being content/ said/ 
Fillpot is inteerupted.  master prolocutor thinketh that he is in a sophistry school where he knoweth right well the manner is that when the respondent ꝑceiveth that he is like to be enforced with an argument to the which he is not able to answer than he doth what he can with cavillation and interruption to drive him from the same. This saying of fylpot was ill liked of the prolocutor and his adherentis: and the prolocutor said that fillpot could bring nothing to avoid that authority but his own vain imagination. Hear/ quoth fyllpot/ and afterward judge. For I will do in this as in all other auctorityes you shall charge me with in refelling any of my argumentis that I have to prosecute answering either unto the same by sufficient authorities of scripture/ or else by some other testimony of like authority/ and not of mine own imagination: the which if I do/ I will it to be of no credit. And concerning the saying of chrysostom/ I have ij. ways to beat him from your purpose / the one out of scripture/ the other out of chrysostom himself in the place here by you alleged. First where he seemeth to say that christ ascending/ took his flesh with him/ and lefft also his flesh behind him/ truth it is: for we all do confess and believe that christ took on him our human nature in the virgin mary's womb/ and thorough his passion in the same hath united us to his flesh/ and thereby are we beconne one flesh with him/ so that chrysostom might therefore right well say/ that christ ascending took his flesh which he receivid of the virgin mary/ a way with him: And also lefft his flesh behind him/ which are we/ that be his elect in this world/ which are the membres of christ/ and flesh of his flesh: as very aptli. s. Paul to the ephesians in the iiij. chapter doth testify saying we are flesh of Christ's flesh and bones of his bonis/ And if percase any man will affirm that he entreateth there of the sacrament so that this interpretation can not so aptly be applied unto him in that place/ than will I yet interpret chrysostom another way by him sylff. For in that place in few lines before thoo words which were here no rather red are thes words red/ that christ after he ascended in to heaven left unto us endued with his sacramentis/ his flesh in mysteries/ that is sacramentally. And that mystical flesh/ christ leaveth as well to his church in the sacrament of baptism as in the sacramental bread and wine. And that. s. Paul justly doth witness/ saying/ as many of us as are baptized in christ have put up on us christ. And thus you may understand that s. chrysostom maketh nothing for your carnal and gross presence in the sacrament as you wrongfully take him. 
pie and weston round together.  Now in this mean while master pie rownded the prolocutor in the ear to put fyllpot to silence and to appoint some other/ mistrusting lest he would shrewdly shake their carnal presence in conclusion/ if he held on long/ seeing in the beginning he gave one of their chief fowndacyons such a pluck. 
weston.  Than the prolocutor said to fyllpot/ that he had reasoned sufficiently enough/ and that some other should now supply his roomth. Where with he was not well content/ saying/ why sir I have a dozen arguments concerning this matter to be proposed and I have not yet scarce overgone my first argument/ for I have not brought in any confirmation thereof out of any awncyent writer/ whereof I have for the same purpose many/ being hitherto still letted by your oft interrupting of me. 
Fillpot is commanded to silence note this gear  Well/ quoth the prolocutor/ you shall speak no more now and I command you to hold your peace. You perceive/ quoth fyllpot/ that I have stuff enough for you/ and am able to withstand your false supposition and therefore you command me to silence. 
Fillpot is threatened to prison. A good solution for all his argumences  if you will not give place/ ꝙ the prolocutor/ I will send you to prison. This is not/ ꝙ fyllpot/ according to your promise made in this house/ nor yet according to your brag made at pawlies cross that men should be answered in this disputation to what so ever they can say/ sins you will not suffer me of a dozen argumentis to prosecute one. Than M. pie took upon him to promise that he should be answered another day. Filpot seeing he might not proceed on his purpose being there with iustli offended/ ennded: saying thus: a fight of you here/ which heiherto have lurked in corners and dissembled with god and the world/ are now gathered together to suppress the sincere truth of gods holy word/ and to set forth every false the which by the catholic doctrine of the scripture/ ye are not able to maintain. 
M. elmar.  Than stepped forth master elmer chaplain to the duke of suffolk whom master moreman took up on him to answer/ against whom master elmer obyected divers and sundry auctorytyes/ for the confirming of the argument he took the day before in hand to prove that (ousia) in the sentence of Theodorete brought in by master cheyny/ must needs signify substance and not accidence/ whose learned reasons and clerkly approbations because they were all ground and brought out of the greek/ I do pass them over for that they want their grace in Inglissh/ And also their proper understanding. But his allegations so encumbered master moreman that he desieryd a day to over view them/ for at that instant he was with out a convenient answer. 
moreman desireth a day to imagine some crafty shift.  Than did the prolocutor call master haddon dean of exceter and chaplyn to the duke of suff. who prosecuted theodoretis authority in confirming master elmers' argument: to whom D. watson took up on him to give answer/ who after long talk was so confounded that he was not able to answer to a certain word (Misterium/ 
watson confownded by. M. haddon ) but for as much as he seemed to doubt therein/ master haddon took out of his bosom a latin author to confirm his saying/ and showed the same to master watson/ ask him whether he thought the translation to be true or that the printer were in any fault. 
watson for a bare shifft putteth a fault in the printer.  There may be a fault in the printer/ quoth watson/ for I am not rememberyd of this word. Than did master haddon take out of his bosom a greek book/ wherein he showed forth with his finger the same words which master watson could not deny. His argumentis further I omit to declare at large because they were for the most part in greek about the bulting out of the true signification of (ousia). Than stepped forth master perne and in argument/ 
M. perne.  made declaration of his mind against transubstantiation and confirmed the sayings and auctorityes alleged by master elmer and master haddon: to whom the prolocutor answered/ saying I much marvel/ master perne/ that you will say thus/ for so much as on friday last you substribed to the contrary. Which his saying/ master elmer did mislike/ saying to the prolocutor that he was to blame so to reprehend any man/ partly for that this house/ quod he/ is an house of free liberty for every man to speak his conscience/ 
weston praiseth their learning to flatter they but he answereth not their arguments.  and partly for that you promised yesterday that not withstanding any man had substrybed/ yet he should have free liberty to speak his mind. And for that the night did approach and the time was spent/ the prolocutor giving them praises for their learning did yet not with standing conclude that all reasoning set a part/ the order of the holy rhurch must be receivid and all things must be ordered thereby.  
On Friday the xxvii. of october/ D. weston the prolocutor did first propownd the matter showing that the convocation had spent ij. days in disputation allreadi about one only Doctor/ which was theodorete/ and about one only word which was (ousia.) Yet were they comen the third day to answer all things that could be objected/ so that they would shortly put out their arguments. 
M. haddon and watson.  So master haddon dean of exceter/ desired leave to appose master watson/ which with ij. other more that is morgane and harpsfeld/ was appointed to answer. Master haddon demanded this of him/ whether any substance of bread or wine did remain after the consecration: Than master watson asked of him again/ whether he thought there to be a real presence of gods body or no? Master haddon said it was not meet nor orderlyke/ that he which was appointed respondent/ should be opponent: and he whose duty was to obyect/ should answer. Yet master watson a long while would not agree to answer but that thing first granted him. At last an order was set/ and master haddon had leave to go forward with his argument. Than he proved by theodoretes words/ a substance of bread and wine to remain. For thes are his words/ the same they were before the sanctification/ they are after. Master watson/ said that theodorete ment not the same substance but the same essence/ whereupon they were driven again unto the discussing of the greek word (ousia) and master haddon proved it to mean a substance/ both by the etymology of the word and by the words of the doctor. First/ quoth he/ it cometh of the participle/ (on/) which descendeth of the verb/ sum. And so the noun (ousia). Than master watson answered that it had not that signification only. Than master haddon proved that it must medes so signify in that place and he axed/ when the bread and wine became symbolies: whereunto answer was made/ after the consecration and not before. Than gathered master haddon this reason/ out of his auctor: The same thing/ saith theodorete/ that the bread and wine were before they were symbols/ the same they remain still in nature and substance/ after they are ssymbolies: bread and wine they were before/ therefore bread and wine they are after Than master watson fell to the denial off the auctor and said he was a nestoryan: 
watson is driven to a shameful shifft to deny the auctor/ when he can not answer  And he desired that he might answer 'tis master cheyny/ which stood by/ for that he was more meet to dispute in the matter/ because he had granted and substrybed unto the real presence. Master cheyny desired patience of the honourable men to hear him trusting that he should so open the matter that the verity should appear: protesting furthermore/ that he was no obstinate nor stubborn man/ but would be conformable to all reason. 
M. cheyny.  And if they by their learning/ which he acknowledged to be much more than his/ could answer his reasons/ that than he would be ruled by them and say as they said/ for he would be no auctor of schism nor hold any thing contrary to the holy mother the church which is christis spouse. D. Weston liked this well and commended him highly/ saying that he was a well learned man/ and a sober man and well execused in all good learning and in the doctors/ and finally a man meet/ for his knowledge/ to dispute in that place/ I pray you hear him/ quoth he Than master cheyny desyeryd such as there were present to pray ij. 
M. chains prayer.  words with him unto god/ and to say (vincat veritas) let the verity take place and have the victory. And all that were present cried with a loud voice/ vincat veritas/ vincat veritas. Than said doctor weston to him/ that was hypocritical. Men may better say/ quoth he/ vicit veritas/ Truth hath gotten the victory. Master cheyny said again if he would give him leave he would bring it to that point that he might well say so. 
M. cheny and watson.  Than he disputed with master watson after this sort/ you said that master haddon was unmeet to dispute because he granteth not the natural and real presens'/ but I sape you are much more unmeet to answer/ because you take a way the substance of the sacrament Master watson said he had substribed to the real presence and should not go a way from that. So said weston also and the rest of the priests/ in so much that off a great while he could have no leave to say any more/ till the lords spoke and willed that he should be hard. Than he told them what he meant by his subscribing to the real presence/ far other wise than they supposed: so than he went forward and prosecuted master haddons argument in proving that (ousia) was a substance/ using the same reason that master haddon did before him/ and when he had received the same answer also that was made to master haddon/ he said it was but a lewd refuge/ when they could not answer/ to deny the auctor. Yet he proved the auctor to be a catholic doctor/ and this proved/ he confirmid his saying (of the nature and substance) further: for the similitude of theodorete is this/ ꝙ he. As the tokins of Christ's body and blood after the invocation of the priest do change their namies and yet continue the same substance/ So the body of christ after his ascension/ changed his name and was called immortal/ yet had/ it his former fashion/ figure and circumscription/ and to speak at one word/ the same substance off his body. Therefore/ said master cheyny/ if in the former part of the similitude/ you deny the same substance to continue/ than in the latter part of the similitude which agreeth with it/ I will deny the body of christ/ after his ascension to have the former nature and substance: but that were a great heresy/ therefore it is also a great heresy to take a way the substance of bread and wine after the sanctification. Than was master watson enforced to say that the substance of the body in the former part of the similitude brought in by him/ did signify quantity and other accidencies of the sacramental tokens which be seen/ and not the very substance of the same. And therefore theodoret saith/ (que videntur.) et ce, that is those things which be seen for according to philosophy/ the accidents of things be seen/ and not the substances. 
M. cheny appealed to the lords.  Than master cheyny appealed to the honourable men and desired that they should give no credit unto them in so saying/ for if they should so think/ as they would teach/ after their lordshyppies had ridden xl. mylies on horseback/ as their business do sometime require/ they should not be able to say at night that they saw their horses all the day but only the colour of their horses/ and by his reason christ must go to stole and learn of Aristotle to speak. For when he saw nathanaell under the fig tree if Aristotle had stand by/ he would have said/ no christ/ thou sawest not him but the colour of him/ Affter this/ watson said/ what if it were granted that theodorete was on their side/ where as they had one of that opinion/ there were an hundredth on the other side. 
morgan is called for to help at a pinch.  Than the prolocutor called for master morgan to help. And he said that Theodorete did not more than he might laufullly do. For first he granted the truth/ and than/ for fear of such as were not fully instructed in the faith/ he spoke (enigmaticos) that is covertly and in a misteri/ And this was lawful for him to do. For first he granted the truth and called them the body of christ and the blood off christ/ than afterward he seemed to give somewhat to the senses and to reason. but that theodoret was of the same mind that they were of/ the words following quoth he/ do declare. For that which followeth is a cause off that which went before/ and therefore he saith (The immortality &ce. 
morgan is taken with falls alleging of the text ) whereby it doth appear that he meant the divine nature and not the human. Than was morgan taken with misalleaging of the text. For the book had not this word (for) for the greek word did rather signify (truly/) and not/ (for/) so that it might manifestly appear that it was the beginning of a new matter and not a sentence rendering a cause of that he had said be sore. Than was it said by watson again/ suppose that theodorete be with you/ which is one that we never heard off printed/ but iij. or iiij. years ago. Yet he is but one/ And what is one against the hole consent of the church. Affter this master cheyny inferrid/ that not only theodorete was of that mind/ that the substance of bread and wine do remain/ but divers other also and specially Ireneus/ who making mention of this sacrament/ saith thus when the cup which is mingled with wine/ and the bread that is made/ do receive the word of god/ it is made the thanks giving of the body and blood of christ/ by the which the substance of our flesh is nourished and doth consist. if the thanks giving do nourish our body/ than there is some substance besides Christ's body. To the which reason/ both watson and morgan answered/ that (ex quibus/) by the which/ in the sentence of Ireneus were referred to the next antecedent/ that is to the body and blood of christ/ and not to the wine/ which is in the cup and the breed that is made. master cheiny replied that it was not the body of christ/ which nourished our bodies. And let it be that Christ's flesh norissh to immortality yet it doth not answer that argument/ although it be true/ no more than that answer which was made to my allegation out of. s. Paul/ The bread which we break etc. with certain other like/ whereunto you answered that bread was not taken there in his proper signification/ but for that that it had been: no more than the rod of Aaron which was taken for the serpent/ because it had been a serpent. Affter this master cheny brought in hisichius and used the same reason that he did of the custom of burning of Symbolies/ and he axed them what was burnt. Master watson said we must not inquire nor axe/ but if there were any fault/ impute it to christ. 
Harpsfeld called in to help watson  Than said master cheiny/ where of came those ashes/ not of a substance? or can any substance rise of accidence? Than was master harpysfeld called led in/ to see what he could say in the matter. who told a fair tale of the omnipotency of god/ and of the imbecility and weakness of man's reason/ not able to attain to godly things. And he said it was convenient that what so ever we saw/ felt/ ortasted/ not to trust our senses/ And he told a tale out of s. 
here is goodly gear/ as if it wereowt of the legend of lies.  cypryane how a woman saw the sacrament burning in her coffer/ and that which burnid there/ quod harpysfeld/ burnyth here and become asshhes. but what that was that burned he could not tell. But master cheyny continued still and forced them with this question/ what it was that was burnt? It was either/ said he/ the substance of bread or else the substance of the body of christ/ which were to much absurdity to grant. At length they abswered that it was a miracle: 
weston would know whether they were suficientli answered when he nor his had not answered and argument.  where at master cheyny smiled and said that he could than/ say no more. Than D. weston axed of the company there whether those men were sufficiently answered or not certain priests cried yea/ but they were not hard at all/ for the great multitude which cried No/ No: which cry was hard and noised almost to the end of Paul'S. Whereat D. Weston being much moved/ answered bitterly that he axed not the judgement of the rude multitude and unlearned people/ but of them which were of the house. Than ar he of master haddon and his fellows whether they would answer them other iij. days. Haddon/ cheiny and elmer said no. But the archdeacon of winchester stood up and said that they should not say but they should be answered/ and though all other did refuse to answer/ yet he wilt not but offered to answer them all/ one after another: 
mark mestons impudence.  with whose proffer the prolocutor was not contented/ but railed on him and said that he should go to bedlam. To whom the archdeacon soberly made this answer: that he was more worthy to be sent thither who used himself so ragingly in that disputation with out any indifferent-equalite. 
a strong argument of weston, where he is not able to answer he would out fa-  Than rose D. Weston up and said/ There hath all the company subscribed to our article/ saving only thes men/ which you see What their reasons are/ you have hard. We have answered them iij. Days/ op on promise (as it pleased him to descant/ with out truth/ for no such promise was made) that they should answer us again/ as long: As the order of disputation doth require: and if they be able to defend their doctrine/ let them so do. Than master elmer stood up and proved how a vain a man weston was: for he affirmed that they never promised to dispute/ but only to open and testify to the world their consciences: for when they were required to subscribe they refused/ and said they would show good reasons which moved their consciences that they could not with their consciences subscribe/ as they had partly already done and were able to do more sufficiently. Therefore/ quoth he/ it hath been ill called a disputation/ and they worthy to be blamet that were the authors of that name. For we meant not to dispute/ nor now mean not to answer/ before our argumentis/ quoth he/ which we have to propownd/ be soluted according as it was appointed. For by answering we should but encumber ourselves and profit nothing/ sins the matter is already decreed up on and determined/ what so ever we shall prove or dispute to the contrary.  
On monday following being the thirty. of october/ 
weston  the prolocutor demanded of john fyllpot archdeacon of winchester whether he would answer in the questions before propowned/ to their objections or no? To whom he made this answer that he would willingly so do/ if according to their former determination/ they would first answer sufficiently to some of his argumentie as they had promised to do: whereof he had a dozen and not halff of the first yet decided: And if they would answer fully and sufficiently but to one of his argumentis/ he promised that he would answer all the objections that they should bring. Than the prolocutor bade him propownd his argument and it should be resolutely answered/ by one of them/ whereunto master morgan was appointed. 
fylpot and morgan.  Up on wedensday last/ quoth he/ I was enforced to silence before I had beaten out halff of mine argument/ the somme where of was this/ as was gathered by the just context of the scripture/ that the human body of christ was ascended into heaven and placid on the right hand of god the father/ wherefore it could not be situate up on earth in the sacrament of the altar invisible after the imagination of man. The argument was denied by morgane. For the proof whereof/ fyllpot said that this was it that he had to confirm his first argument/ if he might have been fufferid the other day: as thus. one self and same nature/ ꝙ he/ receiveth not in itself any thing that is contrary to it self/ but the body of christ is an human nature distinct from the deity/ and is a proper nature of itself/ ergo/ it can not receive any thing that is contrary to that nature and that varieth from itself but bodily to be present and bodily to be absent/ to be one earth and to be in heaven and all at one present time/ be things contrary to the nature of an human body/ ergo it can not be said of the human body of christ/ that the self-same body is both in heaven and also in earth at one instant/ either visybly or invisibly. Morgan denied the mayor/ that is the first part of the argument. The which fylpot vowched out of vigilius an awneyent writer. 
here is a new evasion invented by morgan who dareth not plainly deny vigilius authority/ but under a colour.  But morgan cavilled/ that it was no scripture and bade him prove the same out of scripture. Filpot said he could also so do/ and right well diduce the same out of. s. Paul/ who saith that christ is like unto us in all points/ except sin/ and therefore/ like as one of our bodies can not receive in itself any thing contrary to the nature of a body as to be in paulis church and at westminster at one instant or to be at london visibly/ and at lyncoln invisibly at one time. for that is so contrary to the nature of a body and of all creatures that as dydimus and basilius do affirm/ that an invisible creature/ as an angel/ can not be at one time in divers placis: where for he concluded/ that the body of christ might not be in more places than in one/ which is in heaven and so consequently/ not to be contained in the sacrament of the altar. To this the prolocutor took up on him to answer/ saying that it was not true that christ was like unto us in all points/ as fylpot took it/ except sin: 
weston. answereth/ wisely/ I warrant you/ and pythily  For that christ was not conceived by the seed of man as we be. To the which fylpot replied that Christ's conception was prophesied before by the angel/ to be supernatural/ but after he had received our nature/ by the operation of the holy ghost in the virgin's womb/ he became affterwardes in all points like unto us except sin. 
morga-  Than morgan inferred that this saying of paul did not plainly prove his purpose. Well quoth fyllpot/ I perceive you do answer but by cavillation: Yet am I not destitute of other scriptures to confirm my first argument/ although you refuse the probation of so ancient and catholic a doctor as vigilius is. S. Peter in the sermon that he made in the third of the acts/ making mention of christ/ saith thes words/ whom heaven must receive/ until the consummation of all things/ et ce. Which words are spoken of his humanity. No wyff heaven must hold christ/ than can he not be here on earth in the sacrament as is pretended Than morgan/ laughing at this and giving no direct answer a tall/ harpisfeld stood up which is one of the bishop of londons chaplains and took up on him to answer to the saying of. s. Peter/ and demandid of filpot whether he would necescitate/ that is/ of necessity force/ christ to any place or no? Fylpot said that he would no notherwise force christ of necessity to any place/ than he is taught by the words of the holy ghost/ which sound thus that Christ's human body must abide in heaven until the day of judgement/ as I rehearsed out of the chapter before mentioned. 
harpsfeld.  Why/ quoth harpisfeld/ do you not know that christ is god omnipotent? Yes/ said fylpot/ I know that right well neither doubt I any thing at all of his omnipotency/ but of Christ's omnipotency what he may do is not our question/ but rather what he doth I know he may make a stone in the wall/ a man/ if he list/ and also that he may make more worlds/ but doth he therefore so?  
It were no good consequent so to conclude/ he may do this or that/ therefore he doth it. We must believe so much of his omnipotency/ as he by his word hath declared and taught us: but by his word he hath taught us that the heavens must receive his body until the day of doom: therefore we ought so to believe. Why/ quoth the prolocutor/ than you will put christ in prison in heaven To the which fylpot answered do you reckon heaven to be a prison? 
weston.  god grant us all to come to that prison. Affter this harpisfeld inferred that this word (oportet) in. 
the prolocutor and fylpor.  s. peter which did signify in Inglissh/ (must/) did not import so much as I would infer of necessity. as by other placis of scripture it may appear/ where (oportet) is as well as there as in the first to timothy where paul saith/ (oportet episcopum esse unius uxoris virum/) a bishop must be the husband of one wife/ here quoth he/ (oportet/) must. doth not import such a necescytie but that he that never was married may be a bishop. To this fylpot said again that the placis were not like which he went about to compare. which thing ought specially to be observed in conferring of words/ or scriptures together. For that in the place by him alleged. s. paul doth declare of what quality a bishop ought to be. but in the other. s. peter teacheth us the place where christ must necessarily be until the end of the world/ which we ought to believe to be true. And this comparison of this word (oportet/) doth no more answer mine argument than if I would say of you/ now being here (oportet te hic esse) you must nediss be here (which importeth such necessity for the time/ that you can no notherwise be but here) and yet you would go about in words to avoid this necessity with another (oportet) or another/ (must/) in another sentence as this/ (oportet te esse virum bonum) you must be a good man. where (oportet) doth not in very deed conclude any such necessity but that you may be an ill man. Thus you may see that your answer is not sufficient/ and as it were no answer to my argument. Than the prolocutor brought in another (oportet) to help this matter if it might be saying/ what say you to this (oportet hereses esse/) must herisyes nediss be therefore bicaus of this word (oportet?) no truly/ quoth fylpot/ it can not other wise be/ if you will add that which followeth immediately up on those words of paul/ that is (ut qui electi sunt manifestentur) that is/ that such as be the elect of god may be manifested and known. Why/ quoth the prolocutor/ the time hath been that no heresies were. I know no such time/ quoth fillpott/ for sins the time of Abel and Cayn heresies have been and than began they. Than said the prolocutor/ will you now answer morgan an argument s●●? I will/ quoth fyllpott/ if I may first be answered of mine argument any thing according to truth and to learning What/ quoth the prolocutor/ you will never be answered. How I am answered/ quoth fyllpott/ let all men that are here present judge: and specially such as be learned/ and with what cavillations you have dallied with me. First to the awncyent authority of vigilius you have answered nothing at all/ but only denying it to be scripture that he saith. Secondarily tot he saying of s. Peter in the acts ye have answered thus/ demanding of me/ whether I would keep christ in prison or no. Let all men now judge if this be a sufficient answer or no. Than stood morgan up again/ and axed filpott whether he would be ruled by the universal church or no? 
Morgan.  Yes/ quoth he/ if it be the true catholic church. And sith you speak so much of the church I would fain that you would declare what the church is. 
The church.  The church/ quoth morhan/ is diffused and dispersed through out the hole world. That is a diffuse definition/ quoth fyllpot/ for I am yet as uncertain as I was before what you mean by the church. But I knowledge no church but that which is ground and founded on god's word as S. Paul saith/ up on the foundation of the prophetis and apostles/ and on on the scriptures off god. What/ quoth moreman/ was the scripture before the church? Yea quoth fylpot/ 
Moreman/ and fylpot.  But I will prove Nay/ quoth moreman/ and I will begin at christis time. The church of christ was before any scripture written. For matthew was the first that wrote the gospel about a dozen years after christ ergo the church was before the scripture. To whom filpot answering/ denied his argument. Which when moreman cold not prove/ filpot showed that his argument was (elechus) or a fallacy/ that is a deceivable argument. For he took the scripture onli to be that which is written by men in letters/ where as in very deed all prophecy uttered by the spirit of god/ was counted to be scripture before it was written in paper and Inck. For that it was wrytton in the hartis and graven in the mindis yea and inspired in the mowthies of good men and off christis apostles by the spirit of christ: As the salutation of the Angel was the scripture of christ and the word of god before it was written. At that moreman cried/ fie/ fie: wondering that the scripture of god should be counted scripture before it was writton/ and affirmed that he had no knowledge that so said. To whom fillpot answered that concerning knowledge in this behalf/ for the trial of the truth about the questions in controversy/ he would wyssh himself no worse matched than with moreman. At the which saying/ the prolocutor was grievously offended/ saying that it was arrogantly spoken of him/ that would compare with such a worshipful learned man as moreman was/ being himself a man unlearned/ yea a mad man metre to be sent to bedlam than to be a 'mong such a sort of learned and grave men as there were/ and a man that never would be answered/ and that troubled the whole house: And therefore he did command him that he should come no more in to the house demanding of the house whether they would agree thereupon or no. To whom a great number answered Yea. Than said fylpot again that he might think himself happy that was out of that company. Affter this morgan rose up and rownded the prolocutor in the ear. And than again the prolocutor spoke to fylpott and said/ lest you should slander the house and say that we will not suffer you to declare your mind we are content/ you shall come in to the house as you have done before/ so that you be apparelyd with a long gown and a tippet as we be/ and that you shall not speak but when I command you. Than quoth fylpot/ I had rather be absent altogether. And thus they ended.  
FINIS.  
All glory to god only.   

Imprinted at Basil by Alexander edmond's.   

Faults estaped in the printing. In the second side of the sixth leaf of the letter B. after thes words (as they imagine it to be/ or no) read thus. Moreman said yea. Than said M. dean. etc.