A WAY OF RECONCILIATION OF A GOOD AND learned man, TOUCHING THE Truth, Nature, and Substance of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament.  
Translated out of Latin into English by the Right Honourable Lady Elizabeth Russell, Dowager to the Right Honourable the Lord john Russell, Baron, and son and heir to Francis Earl of Bedford.  
AT LONDON PRINTED BY R. B. ANNO 1605.   

The Author to the Reader.  
TO seek the atonement of men is to be commended, and it hath a sure promise of God: Blessed be the peacemakers. But I fear me, lest in greedily following the same, it happen to me which chanceth to them that part frays, while they seek others safety, they bear the blows themselves. And I, while I study to make enemies friends, perhaps shall have small thanks of them. Which if it happen, the example of him shall comfort me, which said: If I should please men, I should not be the servant of Christ. Farewell, and endeavour thyself to please Christ.   

TO THE RIGHT HOnourable my most entirely beloved and only daughter, the Lady ANNE HERBERT, wife to the Lord HENRY HERBERT, son and heir apparent to EDWARD the most noble Earl of Worcester.  
MOst virtuous and worthily beloved daughter, Even as from your first birth and cradle I ever was most careful, above any worldly thing, to have you suck the perfect milk of sincere Religion: So willing to end as I began, I have left to you, as my last Legacy, this Book. A most precious jewel to the comfort of your Soul, being the work of a most good, learned, and worthy man; Made above fifty years since in Germany, After by travail a French creature, Now naturalised by me into English like to his learned Author, to whom from my part most Honour and service is due. Surely at the first I meant not to have set it abroad in Print, but myself only to have some certainty to lean unto, in a matter so full of controversy, and to yield a reason of my opinion. But since by my lending the Copy of mine own hand to a friend, I am bereft thereof by some; And fearing lest after my death it should be Printed according to the humours of other, and wrong of the dead, who in his life approved my Translation with his own allowance: Therefore dreading, I say, wrong to him above any other respect, I have by Anticipation prevented the worst. I meant this to you, good daughter, for a Newyears gift, but altered by grief for your Brother's broken arm. Farewell my good sweet Nanne. God bless thee with the continuance of the comfort of his holy Spirit, that it may ever work in you, and persevere with you to the end, and in the end.   

IN ANNAM FILIAM.  
 veniens Annus tibi plurima commodet ANNA,  
Voce pia Mater, supplice mente precor,  
 valeas, paritérque tuo cum Coniuge, Proles,  
Officijs iunctis, vita serena fluat.  
ELIZABETHA RUSSELLA, Dowager.   

¶ A CERTAIN MAN wisheth to all Christians the health and peace of our Lord JESUS CHRIST.  
THE question of the Supper of JESUS CHRIST, and Sacrament of Thanksgiving, hath brought forth to us, above other things, a cruel and pernicious contention. For the other Authors of sects, Anabaptists, and Suencfeldians, be neither learned nor of our family. But this is a civil and domestical evil, a bloody and deadly wound hidden in our bowels. Surely it is a lamentable and horrible matter, that the thing which was first instituted for the confirmation of men's minds in love, and concord, and fellowship of the body of Christ, which is the Church, is now wrested to variance, and confusion. And if there have been any good in this broil, it hath been in the silence and sorrow of good and learned men: of whom aswell the misliking showeth that there is somewhat in both parts that might be amended, and prayer and earnest desire may percase somewhat obtain at God's hand, that contention taken away, the agreement of minds may again join in one. But this book which is made touching this question, whose soever it be, sure it seemeth to be the work of a good, learned and modest man, and one that hath been long, much, and well exercised in the Monuments of our Fathers and Elders. Neither doth it move me, that he would not be named; for because there is no bitter word in this disputation, and he doth reason of the matter learnedly, well, and truly, neither doth seem willing to crave thanks at men's hands, nor to have taken this Treaty in hand, either for desire of praise or greediness of Honour, but to be moved thereunto by the common sorrow and hurt, to make an entry to that thing, the which many men greatly desiring the peace of Christ's Church, have wished with earnest and continual prayers: namely, the remembrance of the Christian peace, and the forgetting of devilish debate.  
Bucer, whom I with honour speak of and for remembrance sake, had found and made a way to this concord, and there was great agreement of minds between him and Luther: and he pacified the Churches of the Helvetians, and while he lived there was peace and quietness: but when they were both dead, behold again bitter books on both sides. And surely they be to be pardoned which writ unwillingly: but those which without cause have renewed this wound, (if there be any such) these surely seem to me little to fear what men judge of them, or to esteem the peace which Christ gave and left unto us. But I return to this Book, which pleaseth me best above other in this kind of argument; not, that I will altogether allow it to the Congregation, but because it seemeth to come nearest to the taking away of this contention. For which cause he that cannot invent a better, if he be not content with this, and cannot defend his own, let him take heed that he do not that for man's sake, which he ought to leave undone for Christ's cause: namely, that he nourish not contention, which is the greatest enemy the Church can have. I see nothing concluded in this disputation, that either is repugnant from the nature of our Religion, or not honourably enough spoken of this so great & singular mystery; both which things if both the parts had retained or followed, we should have had quietness long ere this. I blame neither part, I bear good will to both, I love both. And if that were done in writing that is done, and that of many, with good conscience in the leading of our life, and retaining and esteeming the friends on both sides, men should both have written and disputed of this question on both sides, with less offence and bitterness. But now we writ in such sort, as though we did defend the persons, and not the cause, and apply the truth of the cause, not to the ordinance of Christ, but to the interpretation of men. jesus Christ restore to us his peace, which he gave and left unto us when he departed hence, which we have lost by these our contentions: jesus Christ, I say, whose Victory, Triumph, Honour, Praise, and Glory, be for ever and ever. Amen.   

¶ A way of Reconciliation touching the truth, nature and substance of the Body, or of the Flesh and Blood of CHRIST in the Sacrament.  
WHat good man doth not sorrow, or what man zealous in Religion, doth not often bewail the pitiful and unlucky contention about the LORDS SUPPER, which hath now many years troubled the Churches of CHRIST which have embraced the pure doctrine, whereby not only brotherly Love is broken, but also cities and whole countries be thereby brought in danger? For whereas after the expelling the darkness of Ignorance, and the happy restoring to the Church the gift of tongues, a certain new Light was restored to the world, and the Gospel had begun to take so great root, that thereby hope of very great fruit was offered to ensue: By and by this sharp and vehement contention, bursting in among the chief champions of the Word, hath miserably troubled these very good beginnings. For look what weapons they had valiantly used, in setting forth the truth, & in overthrowing the enemies of the Gospel, the very same, after this strife was risen, did they bend one against another. So that the happy course of the Gospel that began to flourish is not only hindered, but also by factions & discords, the matter is come to that pass, that unless the mighty right-hand of the Lord do resist, the truth doth seem to appaule and decay again, yea, and to return to the former confusion.  
For if we will judge the matter truly, no force hath so much withstand the enlarging of the Gospel, no not the deceits and enchantments of the idol of Rome, not the cruelty of Princes against the flock of CHRIST, not the troublesome motions of breeders of Sects, as this only rash contention hath done hurt, which bringeth to the minds of godly men sorrow, to the enemy's cause to rejoice, and to the weak and unlearned, offence and falling. And surely there is no doubt, but that our own wickedness hath been the original of this so great an evil, as it hath been of many other: For we not regarding, or rather contemning the light offered us, are justly thought unworthy of so great a benefit. Which thing also is the cause, that albeit many learned & good men understand what profit it should be for the Christian common wealth speedily to pacify this quarrel, and to end the contentions, few notwithstanding do earnestly travail about this matter; And if any have attempted it, it seemeth to fall out as unluckily taken in hand to the contrary part. For my part, when I saw no end could be made of strife, nor any hope in any one of better sequel, I thought best to commit the matter to GOD by prayer, and with silence to look for help in season at his hands. Yet in this mean space I thought it my part, not to neglect a matter of so great weight, but after examination had of the chief points of this controversy, to bolt out what was truth, and what not; and then to determine upon a sure grounded opinion, both by authority of holy Scripture, and by the undoubted testimonies of the Fathers, aswell to satisfy myself, as to yield a reason thereof to any that should perhaps demand it of me: that the mind should not waver continually to & fro, tossed as it were with the contrary violence of winds.  
While I take this work in hand, & diligently tread the steps of the old Interpreters, me thinketh I perceive (unless my opinion deceive me) that this controversy is not so entangled, nor dark, as most men suppose, and that these sharp contentions have come rather by men's fault, then by the nature of the matter; and that the way of Reconciliation shall not be so hard with men, desirous rather of the truth then of quarreling.  
Wherefore albeit I took in hand this work, whatsoever it be, privately to myself, yet because among my friends certain good men and well given were so desirous, I did not greatly pass to have it come to the ears & eyes of other, that if there be herein any profit, it may also do them good. The cause I have thought good so to divide, that briefly it may be brought to three especial points: First will I show the truth of the body of CHRIST in the Sacrament to be given to the faithful, and that these terms Nature and Substance are not to be shunned, but that they of old time disputing of the Sacrament used them: Then will I declare the difference between the Lords proper body, and that which is in the Sacrament, and that the old Fathers were of that opinion: And lastly I will set forth at large, what manner of Body that is which is received in the mystery, & why it is called by that name, after the opinion of the self same Fathers. Which things once expounded, a man may easily judge of the whole controversy. First, it is manifest enough by the declaration of the Evangelists Matthew, 
Matth. 26. c. Matth. 14. c. Luke 22. c.  Mark and Luke, that our Lord JESUS CHRIST, when he should departed out of this world, and leaving the earth, should go up to the Father, did ordain the Sacrament of his Body and Blood in the presence of his disciples at Supper; and so when he had taken the bread, he blessed, broke it and gave it to them, saying, This is my body: After the like manner the Cup also, saying, This Cup is the new Testament in my Blood, 
1. Corinth. 11.  Do this in remembrance of me. Paul also writeth to the same effect to the Corinthians, in his first Epistle the 11. chapter, rehearsing in a manner the very same words, 
Et cap. 10.  & in the tenth chapter, The Cup (saith he) of blessing which we bless, is it not the partaking of the Blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the partaking of the Body of Christ? By these words of the Evangelists, and the Apostle, they of old time were of that opinion that CHRIST our Lord, which is Truth itself, spoke these things truly, and did in deed perform those things that he spoke, so that no place of doubt might any more be left, concerning the truth of the matter.  
Moreover those words which in the sixth chapter of john, 
john 6. c.  the Lord spoke, My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed, etc. The bread which I will give you is my flesh. And unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his Blood, etc. The Fathers with great accord, as well Grecians as Latins, do apply to the Sacrament of Thanksgiving; And that they have interpreted those places so, both in john, and the rest of the Evangelists and Paul to the Corinthians, the testimonies that follow taken out of the authors themselves, 
justin Martyr Apol. 2.  shall happily prove.  
First, justin Martyr in his second Apology writeth thus, And this meat is called with us, that is, Thanksgiving, etc. whereof none other may be partaker but he, which both believeth those things to be true which we say, & also hath been purified with the washing, which is given for the remission of sins, and regeneration, and also so liveth as CHRIST hath appointed. For we take not these things to be common and wont bread, and accustomed drink, but even as the word of God JESUS CHRIST our Saviour was made man, and had both flesh and blood for our salvation: Even so in like manner we have been taught, that the meat which is hallowed by the prayers of the word that we received of him, and by which our blood and flesh, by a change made are nourished, is both the flesh & blood of the same CHRIST which was made man. For the Apostles in their Commentaries, which be called the Gospels, have left in writing, that CHRIST did so command them, and that he said, when he had taken bread and given thanks, Do this in remembrance of me, This is my body. And that when he had taken the cup and given thanks he said, This is my Blood. Partly the other words of this testimonial do affirm the truth of his body: and chief because by a similitude taken of the two natures in CHRIST, he declareth that there be also two natures in the Sacrament, namely of the outward sign, and of the flesh & Blood of JESUS CHRIST.  
Alike unto this is spoken in Irenaeus in his 4. book: For how say they again that the flesh cometh into corruption, & doth not receive life which is nourished of the body and Blood of the Lord? Therefore let them either change their opinion, or else abstain to offer the things which are aforesaid: but our opinion is agreeing to the Sacrament of thanksgiving, and this Sacrament again confirmeth our opinion: For we offer those things that be his, preaching agreeably the partaking and truth of Flesh and Spirit. For even as the bread which is of the earth receiving the calling upon God, is now no more common bread, but a Sacrament of thanksgiving, made of two things, earthly and Heavenly: so also our bodies receiving the Sacrament of thanksgiving, be not now corruptible, because they have the hope of resurrection. The same man in his fift book; and because we be his members, and are nourished by the creature, & he giveth us the creature, making his Son to arise, and raining as he listeth, the same Cup which is a creature, he confirmed to be his Body, by which he increaseth our bodies. When therefore both the Cup mixed, and the bread made, receiveth the word of God, it is made the Sacrament of the blood and body of CHRIST, whereof both the substance of our flesh is increased, & consisteth: how then doth he deny, that the flesh is able to receive the gift of God which is life Everlasting, seeing it is nourished with the blood and body of CHRIST?  
These words of Irenaeus albeit not very dark, yet will they be more plain if we add certain things to them out of S. Augustine. 
August. tit. de consecrat. dist. 2.  He in his book of the Sentences of Prosperus, and is found De consecratione distinct. 2. writeth thus, This is it that we say, and that by all means we labour to prove, that the Sacrifice of the Church is made two manner aways, that it consisteth of two things, Of the visible form of Sacraments, and the invisible flesh and blood of our Lord JESUS CHRIST: of the Sacrament, and of the substance of the Sacrament, that is the body of CHRIST. As the person of CHRIST consisteth of God and man, since CHRIST himself is very God and very man, because every thing containeth in itself the nature and truth of those things whereof it is made; But the sacrifice of the Church is made of two things, of the Sacrament, and of the substance of the Sacrament, that is, the body of CHRIST. There is therefore the Sacrament, and the substance of the Sacrament the body of CHRIST. S. Augustine repeateth that comparison between the person of CHRIST, and the Sacrament of thanksgiving, and therein he saith plainly, that the truth and nature of the body is contained. The same man De consecrat. distinct. 2. 
Idem ibidem.  Whether is this mystical Sacrament of the Cup made in figure or in truth? The truth saith, My flesh is verily meat, and my blood is verily drink; Else how can it be a great matter, The bread that I shall give, is my flesh for the life of the world, unless it be very flesh? But because it is not godly that CHRIST should be devoured with teeth, the Lords will was to have this bread and wine in mystery to be by his power made his flesh and blood, in verity by the consecration of the holy Ghost, and to be daily offered mystically for the life of the world. That like as his true flesh is created of the Virgin by the holy Ghost without the company of man, so by this same Spirit the same body mystically, is consecrated of the substance of bread and wine. The body of CHRIST is both truth and figure; Truth, in that the body and blood of CHRIST by the power of the holy Ghost, is made by the strength thereof of the substance of bread and wine: And the figure is that which outwardly is perceived.  
The same man in the same title: 
Idem ibidem.  They that eat and drink CHRIST, eat and drink life. To eat him is to be refreshed; to drink him is to live. That which is visibly taken in the Sacrament, is eaten and drunk spiritually in very truth. 
Idem ibidem.  The same man in his book of the Sentences of Prosperus in the same title saith: But we in the form of bread and wine, which we see, do honour invisible things, namely, flesh and blood. Neither do we alike take these two forms, as we did take them before the consecration, seeing that we faithfully confess that before the consecration, they be bread and wine which nature hath framed, but after the consecration, they be the flesh & blood of CHRIST which the blessing hath hallowed. He again upon the 54. Psalm, Until the world come to an end the Lord is above, yet for all that the Lords truth is also here with us: For it is fit that the body in the which he rose again, should be in one place, but his truth is spread every where. He also in his Epistle to Irenaeus: CHRIST is bread of the which he who so eateth, liveth for ever; whereof he himself saith thus, And the bread which I will give is my flesh for the life of the world. And he expoundeth it how it is bread, not only according to the word whereby all things live, but according to the flesh that he took for the life of the world. For man's flesh which was dead through sin being knit to pure flesh incorporate, made one with it, doth live by his spirit even as one body by his own spirit: But he that is not of the body of CHRIST, liveth not of the Spirit of CHRIST. Hitherto Augustine hath plainly enough proved the truth and nature of the body of CHRIST in this Sacrament.  

Hilar. de tri. lib. 8.  Hilary in his 8. book of the Trinity: I would know now of them that allege unity of will between the Father and the Son, whether CHRIST nowadays be in us by truth of nature, or by agreement of will. For if the Word be verily made flesh, and we receive the word, verily flesh in the Lord's meat: how should a man not suppose him to remain naturally in us, which being borne man, took to himself an unseparable nature, now of our flesh, and hath mixed the nature of his own flesh with the nature of eternity under the Sacrament of his flesh to be partaked among us? And a little after: Therefore whosoever will deny the Father to be naturally in CHRIST, let him first deny either himself to be naturally in CHRIST, or CHRIST to be in him, because the Father in CHRIST, and CHRIST in us, do make us to be one thing in them. If CHRIST therefore did verily take the flesh of our body, & if the same man which was borne of the Virgin Mary be verily CHRIST; and we verily take under a mystery the flesh of his body, and thereby shall become one, because the Father is in him, and he in us: How is the unity of will alleged, seeing the natural property (by means of the Sacrament,) is a Sacrament of perfect unity? Also a little after; For those things which we speak of the natural truth of CHRIST in us, unless we learn of him, we speak foolishly and wickedly. For he saith, My flesh is meat in deed, and my Blood is drink in deed: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, remaineth in me, and I in him. There is no place left of doubting of the truth of Flesh and Blood: For now it is verily Flesh, and verily Blood, both by the confession of our Lord himself, and also by our Faith; and these things being received by eating and drinking, do work that effect, that both we be in CHRIST, and CHRIST is in us. Is not this truth? Let it happen unto them not to be true, which deny JESUS CHRIST to be very God. And soon after: And so by a Mediator, the perfect Unity should be taught, when as we abiding in him he should abide in the Father, and he abiding in the Father should abide in us, and so should we climb to the unity of the Father, when he is naturally according to his birth in him, we also should be naturally in him, so long as he abideth naturally in us. And that this natural unity is in us, he hath thus witnessed, He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me and I in him. And by and by he addeth, This is truly the cause of our life: for that we have CHRIST remaining in us carnal men according to the flesh, whereas we shall live hereafter by him, after the same sort as he liveth by the Father. If we therefore live naturally by him after the flesh, namely having taken upon us the nature of his flesh, how hath he not the Father after the spirit naturally in him, since he liveth by the Father? And he concludeth: To this end be these things rehearsed by us, because the heretics affirming falsely the unity of will only between the Father and the Son, used for the example of our unity with the Lord, as though we were united to the Son, and by the Son to the Father, only by obedience and will of Religion, and no property of natural fellowship were granted to us by the Sacrament of his flesh and blood: whereas in deed the mystery of the true and natural unity should be taught, both for the honour of the Son of God that is given us, and for the Son carnally abiding in us, and we knit corporally, and unseparably in him.  
Hilarius doth manifestly teach the true and natural partaking of the flesh of CHRIST in the Sacrament; And as plainly doth Cyrillus witness the same in the 10. 
Cyrillus lib. 10. cap. 13.  book chap. 13. when he saith, Yet we deny not that we be joined spiritually in CHRIST by a right faith, and sincere love: but that we have no manner of joining with him according to the flesh, that truly we utterly deny. And soon after; But doth he happily think that the virtue of the mystical blessing is unknown to us? which when it is wrought in us, doth it not also make CHRIST to dwell corporally in us, by the partaking of the flesh of CHRIST? For why be the members of the faithful the members of CHRIST? Know ye not (saith he) that your members be the members of Christ? Shall I therefore make the members of Christ the members of an harlot? Our Saviour also saith, He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, remaineth in me and I in him; whereby it ought to be considered, that CHRIST is in us, not only by that accustomed quality which is perceived by love, but also further by a natural partaking. For even as if a man shall melt wax by the fire, and mingle it with other wax which is likewise melted, so that one lump may seem to be made of both; So by the communion of the body and blood of CHRIST he is in us, and we in him. For this corruptible nature of the body could not otherwise be brought to uncorruption and life, unless the body of natural life should be joined thereto. The same man also in his 4. 
Idem in Io. lib. 4. cap. 14.  book upon john the 14. chapter doth witness: For truly it behoveth that not only the soul should ascend into blessed life by the holy Ghost, but also that this rude and earthly body should be brought again to immortality, by a taste, feeling, and meat like unto it. The same man in his 11. book upon john cap. 27. The Son, 
Idem in Io. lib. 11. cap. 27.  as man, is made one with us corporally by the mystical blessings, but spiritually as God. And a little after; For we receiving corporally and substantially, (as it hath been said) the Son of God which is made one by nature with the Father, be made pure and glorified, being partakers of the nature that is from above. The same man in the same book upon the 26. chapter: 
Idem eodem lib. cap. 26.  For to the end therefore ye might knit every one of us among ourselves and God, although we differ both in body and soul, yet hath he found a mean agreeable to the determination of his Father, and his own wisdom. For he blessing with his own body (through the mystical communion) them that believe, doth make us one body, both with himself, and also among ourselves. For who will think those distant from this natural union, which be united in one CHRIST by the union of one CHRIST'S body? For if all we eat one bread, we be made all one body. And within few words after: But that this bodily uniting to CHRIST is attained by the partaking of his flesh, Paul himself again doth witness, disputing of the mystery of godliness: the which (saith he) hath not been known to the sons of men in other generations, as it hath been revealed now to his holy Apostles and Prophets in the Spirit, that the Gentiles be coheirs and joined in body, and equal partakers of the promise in Christ. The same man to Calosyrius: 
Idem ad Calosyrium.  For that we should not be afraid of the flesh and blood set upon the holy Altars, God submitting himself to our frailty, putteth a force of life into those things that be offered, turning them into the truth of his own flesh, that the body of life as it were a certain quickening seed, may be found in us: whereupon he addeth, Do this in a remembrance of me. Hitherto Cyrillus.  

Cyprianus de coena Domini.  Cyprian of the Supper of the Lord; This bread not in outward appearance, but in nature changed by the mighty power of the Word, is made flesh, which the Lord did reach to his disciples. And in the same place; Who even to this day createth, and sanctifieth, & blesseth, and divideth, to those that take it godly, this his most true and holy body. 
Hieron. in Matth. de consecrat. dist. 2.  Hierom upon Matthew, De consecrat. dist. 2. He took bread, which is the comforter of man, and passed to the true Sacrament of Passeover. That as Melchisedec for a figure thereof before had done when he offered bread and wine, he should represent it in the truth of his body and blood. 
Chrysost. in Io. Hom. 45.   
Chrysostom upon john, Hom. 45. But that not only by love, but even in very deed we should be turned into that flesh, he worketh the same by the meat which he hath given us. For when he meant to bring his love upon us, he joined himself to us by his body, and made himself one with us, that the body might be knit with the head. The same man Homil. 61. 
Idem Hom. 61.  Therefore that we should be this not only by charity, but in very deed should be mingled with that flesh, this is brought to pass by the meat which he hath given us. Chrysostom hath also many other sayings to the same meaning.  
Those things that S. Ambrose writeth in his 6. 
Ambros. lib. 6. de sacra. cap. 1.  book the first chapter of the Sacraments, do agree with these: Even as our Lord JESUS CHRIST is the true Son of God, not as men be by grace, but as a Son of the substance of the Father; so is that which we take, the very flesh of CHRIST, and they drink his very blood as he himself said. And a little after; Then when his disciples could not away with the talk of CHRIST, but hearing that he would give them his flesh to eat, and his blood to drink, they went away: But Peter alone said, Thou hast the words of eternal life, and whither should I go from thee? Lest therefore any more should say this, as though there should be a kind of loathsomeness of blood, but that the grace of redemption might remain, therefore receivest thou the Sacrament in a similitude, but thou obteinest the grace and virtue of the true nature. The same man in his 4. book the 4. 
Idem lib. 4. cap. 4.  cap. Thou seest therefore how effectual in operation the word of CHRIST is. If then there be so great efficacy in the word of our Lord JESUS CHRIST, that that should begin to be, which was not; How much more is it of effect, to make those things to be that were before, and to be changed into another thing? And so that which was bread before the consecration, the same is become the body of CHRIST after the consecration, because the word of CHRIST doth change the creature; And so of bread is made the body of CHRIST, and the wine mixed with water in the cup, is made blood by the consecration of the heavenly word. But perhaps thou wilt say, I see not the form of blood, But it hath a likeness. For even as thou hast taken the likeness of his death, so also dost thou drink the similitude of his blood, that there should be no abhorring of blood, and yet the price of our redemption wrought. Also before the words of CHRIST the cup is full of wine & water: after the words of CHRIST have wrought, there is the blood made which hath redeemed the people. Therefore mark how the word of CHRIST is able to make alteration in all things. Beside, CHRIST himself doth testify, that we do receive his body and blood, of whose fullness and testimony we ought not to doubt. Likewise peradventure thou sayest, I see another thing, How provest thou that I do receive the body of CHRIST? This remaineth yet for us to prove, that this is not it which nature hath fashioned, but it, that blessing hath hallowed; and that there is greater force of the blessing, then of nature: because nature itself is also changed by the blessing. Also: But if the blessing of man was of such force that it could turn nature; What do we say of the very heavenly consecration, whereas the very words of the Lord our Saviour do work? For this Sacrament which thou receivest, is wrought by the words of CHRIST. But if the word of Elias was of such force that it could bring fire from heaven; Shall not the word of CHRIST be of power to change the kinds of elements?  

Eusebius Emyssenus de consecrat. dist. 2.  Eusebius Emyssenus likewise, who was in years before Ambrose, doth witness in these words, the opinion which was then had of the Sacrament, and it is had De consecrat. dist. 2. Whereupon the heavenly authority confirmeth, That my flesh is verily meat, and my blood is verily drink. Let therefore all doubt of misbelief be laid aside, because he that is author of the gift is likewise witness of the truth. For the invisible priest doth turn with his word, by a secret power, the visible creatures into the substance of his body and blood, saying thus, Take ye, eat ye, this is my body, and the hallowing being repeated, Take ye, drink ye, this is my blood. Therefore even as the height of the heavens, the depth of waters, and largeness of earth had their being of nothing, suddenly at the beck of the Lord that commanded: so with the like power in the spiritual Sacraments when power commandeth, effect obeyeth. How great therefore and wonderful benefits the force of the heavenly blessing doth work. How it ought not to seem a new & unpossible matter to thee, that earthly and mortal things be turned into the substance of Christ, ask thyself that art borne anew in Christ. He again in his oration of the body of the Lord: Let not man doubt but that the chief creatures at the beck of power by the presence of Majesty, may be turned into the nature of the Lords body. 
Leo & Syn. Rom. de consec. dist. 2.  Leo the bishop and the Synod of Rome as is there declared; In what darkness of ignorance, in what body of slothfulness have they hitherto lain, that they would neither learn by hearing, nor know by reading that which is so agreeable in the congregation with the confession of all persons, that the truth of the body and blood of Christ, among the Sacraments of the communion cannot be kept in silence, no not of the tongues of Infants, because in that mystical distribution of the spiritual food, this is given, and this is received, that we receiving the strength of this heavenly meat, do become his flesh, which was made our flesh.  

Gregor. hom. Pasch. ibidem.  Gregory homilia paschali, and it is there rehearsed. For he is daily eaten and drunk in truth, but yet he remaineth whole and one, and unspotted. And it is therefore a great mystery, and to be reverenced with fear, because there is one thing to the sight, and another to the understanding. 
Euthym. in Matth. cap. 64.  Euthymius upon Matthew cap. 64. Therefore even as the old Testament had sacrifices and blood, so also hath the New, namely the body and blood of the Lord. For he said not, These be signs of my body, but he said, These be my body & my blood Therefore we must not take heed to the nature of those things that be set before us, but to the virtue of them. For even as above nature he did deify the flesh that was taken of the Virgin (if it be lawful to use this phrase) so also doth he unspeakably change these things into his very lively body, and into his very precious blood, and into the grace of them.  

Theophil. in Matth. cap. 26.  Theophilactus upon Matt. 26. In saying This is my body, he declareth that the bread which is sanctified upon the Altar, is the very body of the Lord, and not a figure answering unto it; for he said not, This is a figure, but This is my body. The bread is transformed by an unspeakable working into the body of Christ; albeit it seems bread to us that be weak, and abhor to eat raw flesh, especially the flesh of man. For that cause truly bread appeareth, but it is flesh. The same man upon Mark cap. 14. 
Idem in Marc. cap. 14.  When he had blessed it, that is, when he had given thanks, he broke the bread, which thing also we do, adding thereto prayers, This is my body: this I say which you take. For the bread is not a figure and example only of the Lords body, but it is turned into the very body of Christ. Damascenus doth also write almost the very same things lib. 4. cap. 14. 
Damas'. de fide. Orth. lib. 4. cap. 14.  The bread and wine is not a figure of the body and blood of Christ to the right faith; for God forbidden we should believe so: but it is the very deified body of the Lord by his own saying, This is my body; not a figure of my body, but my body, This is my blood, not a figure of my blood.  
Many other places also may be brought forth here, taken out of the Fathers, which agree with the rehearsed, by all the which we may easily perceive, what was the opinion of them all, as much as appertaineth to this part of our division, namely, that the Sacrament of Thanksgiving is not only a figure of the Lords body, but also comprehendeth in it the truth, nature & substance of the same. For it cannot be a doubt to any man that will read their writings, that they oftentimes used these terms, Truly, Naturally, & Substantially, & the coniugates of them. And although our faith dependeth not upon men, but upon the word of God: yet since they defend their opinion with the authority of the Scripture, it is very profitable for godly minds & desirous of the truth, to consider how so many notable men both for godliness and learning, have understood the words of the Scripture, and with great agreement left their interpretations to their succession; neither shall he avoid the blame of rashness (whosoever he be) that dare despise so great authority.  
Now let us take in hand our second part. Whether they of ancient time have thought that there is any difference between the body of our Lord, which is distributed in the Sacrament, and that which was taken of the Virgin mother, which ascended into heaven, and from thence shall come at his time to judgement. That is, whether the body of Christ be in the Sacrament of Thanksgiving, according to the proper signification of a man's body, or otherwise, differing somewhat from a proper body. When I speak of a proper body, I mean a body properly understand, which shall suffice to have once admonished. Then whether these terms, Truth, Nature, Substance ought to be understand after the common sort in this matter, or after a more peculiar manner, and more fit for the Sacraments.  
Finally, whether there be any equivocation in these terms or no. For there is not only heed to be taken with what words the fathers have spoken in old time, but also what they meant when they so spoke. And that is not to be proved by our own or other men's inventions, or light conjectures, but by the assured testimonies of the Fathers themselves. But that we may have the easier entry to this matter, we must perceive that the body of Christ is called not after one manner wise in the Scriptures, but sundry ways. First, as that body as was taken upon him, and borne of the Virgin, which also rose again, and ascended into heaven, of the which this was spoken, Me truly shall ye not have alway. And this, I leave the world, and go to my Father And this, Feel and behold, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as you see me have. Secondarily, as the Church is called the body of Christ, according to this saying, You are Christ's body. And this, And he gave him to be a head over all things to the Church which is his body. Thirdly, as the Sacrament of the body of Christ is called the body of Christ, whereof Christ himself said, This is my body. And Paul, The bread which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of Christ? And this, Making no difference of the Lords body. Which places be understood of the Sacrament of his body, whereby it cometh to pass, that the body of Christ is called properly and unproperly. Properly that body taken of the Virgin; Unproperly, the Sacrament and the Church. That the Church is not properly the body of Christ, no man doubteth. It remaineth that we prove the same of the Sacrament. This is especially to be marked, as oft as they of old time treat of the Sacrament, they all apply to the Sacrament the words of our Lord, which are spoken in the sixth chapter of john, My flesh is verily meat, & my blood is verily drink. The bread which I will give is my flesh, and unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, etc. Which things shallbe proved by their own sayings before alleged, and also by those that shall follow. Neither are they to be allowed, that deny this chapter of john to be referred to this Sacrament, seeing so great a troop of witnesses be against them. But the opinion of them seemed more probable, who as they judge this Evangelist to set forth the humanity of Christ less than the rest, and his divinity more amply: so do declare that these things which are rehearsed by the other Evangelists concerning the institution, and outward ceremony of this Sacrament, are not at all mentioned of john; but that he openeth & expoundeth more plainly unto us the true and right understanding of them. And it is plain that the minds of the Capernaites when the Lord said, My flesh is verily meat; And unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, etc. were much offended and troubled, and therefore leaving him departed, for they understood him too grossly, and after the common sort. But his twelve Apostles that tarried by him being admonished, and lift up to a more higher meaning, and of more Majesty, heard of him, The words which I have spoken be spirit and life. Upon this it cometh to pass, that all the old writers do fly the common judgement and usual understanding in those words, This is my body, and which the Lord spoke of eating his flesh, and follow a more divine way of understanding them, and more agreeable to the Sacraments, as they themselves affirm.  

Chrysost. in Matth. cap. 26. Hom. 83.  Chrysostom upon Matthew 26. hom. 83. expounding the words of the Supper, Take ye, eat ye, this is my body, etc. doth ask this question, Why were they not troubled when they heard this? And he answereth, Because he had taught them already many and great things concerning this point before: Wherefore also he did not confirm that which they had often before perceived. And not long after he addeth, He himself did also drink of it, least at the hearing of those words, they should say, What? do we then drink blood, and eat flesh? and upon that might be troubled; For at the first also when he spoke of these matters, many were offended only for the words. Lest therefore this should then also have happened, he did this first himself, that he might bring them to the partaking of these mysteries with a quiet mind. We be taught here by Chrysostom, that the Apostles were not troubled when they heard the Lord say, Take ye, eat ye, this is my body; Because they had been already taught before, how that which was spoken aught to be understood, namely where others were offended, as it is in john, & said, This is a hard saying, they abode and had learned, It is the Spirit that giveth life, the flesh profiteth nothing; The words that I have spoken unto you, are spirit & life: that is to say, as the same Chrysostom in the same place expounded it, they are spiritually to be understood: which self thing the Lord himself confirmeth by his own deed, when he did eat the same bread, & drink the wine with them, lest they should think upon any base or common matter, but should be brought to the partaking of the mysteries with quiet minds. It is no hard matter to perceive by this that Chrysostom writeth in this place, that it is one way a body, that Christ himself called his body when he said, Take ye, eat ye, this is my body, the which he also receiveth himself together with his disciples; and another way to be his proper body which was fed with the other. The one did eat, the other was eaten, & after a divers sort either of them is called his body.  
To this purpose maketh also that which Clemens Alexandrinus schoolmaster to Origen, 
Clemens Alexand. lib. inscrip. Paedagogus.  teacheth in his book, entitled Paedagogus, when he saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The blood of Christ is two manner of ways: the one fleshy whereby we are washed, the other spiritual wherewith we have been anointed. 
Hierom. in Epi. ad Ephes. ca 1.  Whom Hierom following upon the Epistle to the Ephesians the first chapter saith, The blood and flesh of Christ (saith he) is understood two manner of ways: that is, either that spiritual and heavenly, whereof he himself spoke, My flesh is verily meat, and my blood is verily drink; And unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you shall not have everlasting life: Or else the flesh and blood that was crucified, that was shed with the spear of the soldier. There be two things that Hierom teacheth in this place, That those words in the 6. chap. of john, do appertain to the Sacrament, even as Chrysostom doth: and that the flesh that was crucified, doth differ from that which is in the Sacrament, which he calleth Spiritual & Divine. The same man upon Leviticus, and is to be seen De consecrat. 
Idem. in Leuit. de consecrat. dist. 2.  dist. 2. Of this sacrifice which is by miracle wrought for the remembrance of Christ it is lawful to eat: but of that which Christ offered upon the Altar of the Cross, it is of itself lawful for no man to eat. A plain and manifest distinction.  
Augustin in lib. senten. Prosperi. 
August. in lib. Sent. Prosperi.  It is his flesh which covered with the form of bread, we receive in the Sacrament, and his blood which under the form and taste of wine we drink, that is to say, the flesh is the sacrament of flesh, and blood is the sacrament of blood. By flesh and blood being both invisible, spiritual, intelligible, is betokened the visible & sensible body of our Lord jesus Christ, full of the grace of all virtues & divine Majesty. Who seethe not how plainly Augustine putteth a difference between the proper body of Christ which he termeth visible and sensible, and that flesh which we receive in the sacrament, which he affirmeth to be invisible, spiritual, intelligible, and a sign of the other body? 
Idem in Epist. ad Iren.  The same man in his Epistle to Irenaeus, You shall not eat this body which you see, and drink that blood which they that shall crucify me shall shed. The same truly, and not the same; The same invisibly, and not the same visibly. He putteth a difference when he saith, Not this body: and again, The same, & not the same. The manner of the difference is, the same invisibly which he termeth before the invisible body, namely the Sacrament of the body: and not the same visibly, or the visible body, which is referred to the proper body: for this body wheresoever it be, is visible. The same man in his book Sent. Prosperi: 
Idem in lib. Sent. Prosperi.  Christ was once offered in himself, yet is he daily offered in the Sacrament, which is thus to be understood. That, in the outward showing forth of his body, in the distinction of all his members, very God, and very man, did but once hang upon the Cross, offering himself a lively sacrifice to the Father. The body which is in the Sacrament, hath neither outward showing forth of the body, nor distinction of members, but his proper body never wanteth his distinction of members.  

Idem in Ps. 33.  The same man upon the 33. Psalm: And he was carried in his own hands. But my brethren, who can understand how this might be done in a man? For who can be carried in his own hands? A man may well be carried in other men's hands, in his own hands no man is carried. How it may be understand in David himself, according to the letter, we shall not find, but in Christ we shall find it. For Christ was carried in his own hands when he commending his own body, said, This is my body; for that body was carried in his hands, and afterward expounding himself better he saith, And he was carried in his own hands. How was he carried in his own hands? Because when he meant to commend that body and blood of his, he took into his hands, that which the faithful knew, and he carried himself after a sort, when he said, This is my body. In saying that body was carried in his hands, and he took into his hands that which the faithful knew, and he bore himself after a sort; he doth declare that this saying is not to be understand simply of one self body, but that body that did carry was one, namely his proper body, and that which was carried another, to say, the Sacrament of his body.  
The same man upon the 98. Psalm, 
Idem in Psal. 98.  It seemed a hard saying to them, when he said, Unless a man do eat my flesh, he shall never have everlasting life. They took it foolishly, imagined of it fleshly, and thought that the Lord would have cut certain pieces out of his body to give them, and they said, This is a hard saying. They themselves were hard, not the saying: for if they had not been hard, but humble spirited, they would have said within themselves; He speaketh not this without a cause, there is may hap a certain hid Sacrament in it; They would have tarried with him meek spirited, not hardened, and have learned of him that which those that remained did learn when they were gone. For when his Twelve disciples abode with him after their departure, they seemed to bewail to him the death of them, because they were offended at his words, and gone back. But he instructed them & said unto them, It is the Spirit that quickeneth, for the flesh profiteth nothing; The words that I have spoken to you, are Spirit and life, Understand you that spiritually which I have spoken to you. You shall not eat this body which you see, neither shall you drink the blood which they shall shed that crucify me. I have commended to you a certain Sacrament. If it be spiritually understood, it will give you life. Although of necessity it must be ministered visibly, yet must it be unuisibly understood, where he saith, Not this body which you see, etc. And I have commended a certain Sacrament unto you; he maketh a plain distinction between the two bodies, whereof one is properly his body, the other the Sacrament of his body.  

Idem de doct. Christ. lib. 3.  The same man, De doctrina Christiana lib 3. Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye shall have no life in you. He seemeth to command a heinous and wicked thing; therefore it is a figure commanding that we must communicate with the passion of the Lord, & sweetly and profitably lay up in remembrance that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us. If we following the letter do understand it, as the words do properly sound, He seemeth (saith he) to command a heinous thing: therefore (he saith) it is a figurative speech, and ought not to be understood of the eating of his proper body, but of the Sacrament of his body, which is after a spiritual sort the body of Christ.  

Idem ad Bonifac. Epist. 23.  The same man to Boniface in the 23. Epistle; For so we speak, as when Easter draweth nigh, we say, To morrow, or the day after is the passion of Christ, whereas indeed he suffered so many years before, and that passion hath not at all been made but once. For upon very Easter day we say, This day the Lord rose again. whereas so many years are past since he rose again, Why is none so foolish to reprove us, & say we lie in so saying? but because we call these days according to the similitude of those in which these things were done, so that it is called the same day, which is not the same, but by the course of time is like that, and it is said to be done that day for the ministering of the Sacrament, which was not done that day, but long before. Was not Christ once offered in himself? and yet in the Sacrament not only at all the solemnities of Easter, but every day he is offered to the people. And he lieth not, that being asked the question, doth answer that he is offered: For if the Sacraments should not have a certain likeness of those things whereof they be Sacraments, they should be no Sacraments at all. And of this likeness, they take the names oftentimes also of the things themselves. Even as therefore after a certain sort, the Sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ, and the sacrament of the blood of Christ, is the blood of Christ: so also the sacrament of faith is faith. We see also in this place, that the proper body of Christ which was once offered, is discerned from that sacrament which is daily offered, and after a sort is the body.  
The same S. Augustin, 
Idem de consecrat. dist. 2.  as it is to be found De consecrat. dist. 2. Whether is this mystical sacrament of the cup under a figure, or under the truth? The truth saith, My flesh is verily meat, and my blood is verily drink, else how shall it be a great matter; The bread which I will give is my flesh for the life of the world, unless it be very flesh in deed? But because it is not lawful to devour Christ with teeth, the Lords will was that this bread and wine should be made potentially in a mystery, his flesh and blood verily by the consecration of the holy Ghost, and should be daily offered mystically for the life of the world: That even as very flesh was made of the Virgin by the holy Ghost, without the company of man; so also by the same through the substance of bread and wine, the same body is mystically consecrated. The body of Christ is both truth and a figure; Truth, while the body and blood of Christ, by the power of the holy Ghost in power of the same, is made of the substance of bread and wine: but the figure is that which is outwardly seen.  
Here also Augustin doth put a difference between the very flesh taken of the Virgin, and the truth of the flesh that is made of the substance of bread and wine: for this (saith he) is daily created his very flesh, and offered in mystery, which thing is not lawful to be spoken of the very proper body of Christ. The same author in the same book, Until the end of the world the Lord is above: but yet the truth of the Lord is for all that here with us. For it is fit that the body wherein he rose again should be in one place, but the truth thereof is spread every where. Doth he not plainly teach, that the body wherein he rose again is one, which necessarily must be contained in one place, and that the truth of his body is another, which is so far spread abroad, as the sacrament is rightly ministered?  
Here is moreover to be noted, that the truth of the Lords body is spoken two ways, and aught two manner ways to be understood; for one manner of truth of his body is required in mystery, another simply and without mystery.  
Those words also of Augustin in the same place, 
Idem ibidem.  De consecrat. dist. 2. Vtrum sub figura, etc. do make for this purpose; That because we do now take the similitude of his death in our Baptism, so also we may take the similitude of his flesh and blood, so that the truth should not be wanting in the sacrament, and yet be no laughing stock to the Infidels for drinking the blood of a man slain. He affirmeth the likeness of flesh and blood to be coupled with the truth in the sacrament: yet so as if one would understand it properly to be the blood of a man slain, we drink it not: for so might the infidels laugh us to scorn.  
He again in the same title, Hoc est quod etc. 
Idem ibidem.  Even as therefore the heavenly bread, which is the flesh of Christ after his sort, is called the body of Christ, whereas indeed it is the sacrament of Christ's body, namely of that which was to be seen, handled, mortal, set upon the Cross; and the sacrifice of the flesh which is made by the hands of the Priest, is called the passion of Christ's death and crucifying, not in very deed, but by the signification of the mystery: so the sacrament of faith which is meant Baptism, is faith. Again he teacheth plainly, that the body of Christ which is to be seen and felt is one thing, and that another, which after his sort is called the body of Christ, whereas indeed it is a sacrament of that body of his which is to be seen and felt. 
Glossa ibidem.  Whereupon the Gloss upon the same place hath thus, The heavenly bread (that is to say) the heavenly sacrament which doth truly represent the flesh of Christ, is called the body of Christ, but unproperly; and therefore it is called after a peculiar manner, not in the truth of the matter, but by the signification of the mystery. And a little before, 
Idem ibidem.  the same Gloss saith in the same place; The heavenly sacrament which is upon the Altar is unproperly called the body of Christ, even as Baptism is unproperly called faith.  

August. ad Dard.  To this agree those words that the same Augustin writeth to Dardanus in this wise: Keep faithfully the Christian profession, That he rose again from the dead, He ascended into heaven, Sitteth on the Right-hand of the Father: Neither shall he come from any other place then from thence to judge the quick and the dead; And so shall he come, (the voice of the Angel being witness) as he was seen to go into heaven, namely in the same form and substance of flesh: unto the which flesh he hath assuredly given immortality, and not taken away the nature. After this form he is not to be thought that he is every where spread abroad: For we must take heed that we affirm not so the divinity of his manhood, that we take away the truth of his body.  

Idem ibidem.  Afterward in the end of the same Epistle; Doubt not that Christ our Lord the only begotten Son of God, equal to the Father, even that Son of man which is less than the Father, is both altogether present every where as God, and also in some certain place of heaven, for the measure of his true body. The truth of Christ's body, which in another place he said is every where spread abroad when he speaketh of the sacrament of his body, here where he entreateth of his true body indeed properly understood, he denieth that according to that manner of body it is every where spread abroad, but that so the truth of his body is clean taken away.  
Augustin is not contrary to himself, but showeth plainly enough that the body, and the truth of the body is to be taken two ways. Peradventure I seem to have rehearsed over many places out of Austin, but yet this one place do I think not to be overpassed, which he hath left in writing upon the Gospel of john tract. 50. The poor have ye always with you, 
Idem in joan. tract. 50.  but me shall you not have always. Let good men receive this also, and not be troubled: for he spoke of the presence of his body. For according to his Majesty, according to his providence, according to his unspeakable and invisible grace, that is fulfilled which was said by him, Behold I am with you every day, even to the end of the world. But according to the flesh, which the Word took upon him, according to that that he was borne of the Virgin, according to that, that he was taken of the jews, that he was nailed to a tree, that he was taken down from the Cross, that he was wrapped in linen clothes, that he was laid in the grave, that he appeared in his resurrection, ye shall not always have him with you. Why? Because according to the presence of his body, he was conversant with his disciples forty days, and they being in company with him, by seeing him and not following him, he ascended into heaven, and is not here, for he is there, he sitteth on the Right-hand of the Father: and here he is also, for the presence of his Majesty did not departed. After another sort according to the presence of his Majesty, we have Christ always. According to the presence of his flesh it was rightly said to the disciples, but me shall you not have always: for the Church had him a few days according to the presence of his flesh, and now keepeth him by faith, and seethe him not with eyes. Thus much out of Augustin.  
Where Augustin speaketh of that which is properly called Christ's body, he denieth that it is simply present here, and doth refuse such a presence of his body: but when he speaketh of the Sacrament, he doth affirm that his body is verily present, and a true presence of his body, yet not properly, but, as he himself doth instruct us, according to his Majesty, according to his unspeakable & invisible grace, whereof we will speak more at large hereafter. It is plain therefore, that the body of Christ in the sacrament is to be understood one way, and that an other way which of necessity must be in some place of heaven, for the forms sake of a true body, as he saith. Now let us go forward to other.  

Gregor. Nazianz. oratione de Pasch.  Gregory Nazianzene in his Oration of the feast of Easter, saith thus, But let us be made partakers of the Passeover, but yet still figuratively, albeit this Passeover be more manifest than the old. For truly the Passeover of the Law (I speak boldly) was a more dark figure of a figure: but within a while we shall enjoy it more perfect and manifest, when the Son the Word itself, shall drink it new with us in the kingdom of his Father, opening and teaching us those things which he hath now showed sparingly. Here Nazianzene called the sacrament of Thanksgiving a more manifest Passeover then the Passeover of the Law: yet still for all that a figure, namely of that which we shall enjoy more perfect and manifest in the kingdom of his Father. This Passeover therefore which is performed in mystery, doth differ from that which remaineth for ever, wherewith we shall be satisfied in the world to come.  

Gregor. in hom. Pasch.  The other Gregory in his Homily of the Passeover: This wholesome sacrifice doth renew to us by a mystery the death of the only begotten Son: which although he rising again from death dieth no more, nor death shall have any more dominion over him, yet he living immortally, and uncorruptibly in himself, dieth again in this mystery, and his body is also received every where, and his flesh for the health of the people, his blood is not now shed into the hands of the unfaithful, but is powered out in the mouth of the faithful. By this therefore we may judge what manner of sacrament this is, which for our absolution doth always represent the Passion of the only begotten Son. For what faithful man can doubt, that in the very hour of the sacrifice, at the voice of the Priest, the heavens open, and the company of Angels be present in the mystery of jesus Christ? This Gregory maketh a difference between this sacrifice, and the other, and doth also show that this death, this passion, this body, which things be done in this mystery, do represent and imitate those things which were done long ago. For if you follow the letter, his body is not spread out every where, nor his flesh suffereth, nor dieth any more, although these things be said to be done in mystery.  
The same opinion had Eusebius Emissenus, 
Euseb. Emis. de consecrat. dist. 2.  whose words are rehearsed De consecrat. Dist. 2. as followeth. Forasmuch as he would take away from the eyes the body taken of the Virgin, and would place it above the stars; it was necessary that in the day of his Supper, the sacrament of his body and blood should be consecrated unto us, to the end that that might be worshipped continually by a mystery, which was once offered for a ransom: that seeing a daily and unceasing redemption did run for the salvation of all men, there might be a continual oblation of redemption, and that continual sacrifice might live in memory, and might ever be present in grace, a true, perfect, and only sacrifice to be esteemed in faith, not to be judged by form nor by outward sight, but by the inward affection. Whereupon the heavenly authority confirmeth, that My flesh is verily meat; and my blood is verily drink.  
Let all doubt therefore of unfaithfulness departed, seeing he that is the author of the gift, the same is witness of the truth: for the invisible Priest by his word and secret power, turneth the visible creature, into the substance of his body and blood, saying, Take, eat, this is my body, and after the blessing being repeated, Take and drink (saith he) this is my blood. Therefore even as at the beck of the Lord commanding it, suddenly, and of nothing the high heavens, the depth of the waters, and largeness of the earth was made: so by the like power in spiritual sacraments, where power doth command, effect doth obey. By plain words doth Eusebius teach us, that the proper body which he termeth taken upon him, is not in the sacrament, but withdrawn from the earth, placed above the stars: and therefore is ordained the sacrament of the body, wherein is contained the substance of the body, yet in a mystery and by grace, not that substance which he said before was taken away, which if it were present, the sacrament were not needful; but a spiritual substance, and fit for the sacraments, whereupon he also calleth the sacraments spiritual. And lest we should imagine it a more gross substance than is fit, he allegeth forthwith the example of regeneration, saying, How great benefit therefore, and worthy to be praised, the force of the heavenly blessing doth work, and how it ought not to be a new and unpossible matter to thee, that earthly & mortal things be changed into the substance of Christ, ask thyself that art new borne again in Christ. Lately far from life, a stranger from mercy, and inwardly a dead man, from the way of health thou wast banished; and suddenly professing the Laws of Christ, and by wholesome mysteries renewed, thou hast leapt into the body of the Church, not by sight, but by belief, and of the child of perdition wast thought worthy by a secret pureness, to be the Son of God by adoption, abiding still in the visible measure, and made invisibly greater than thyself, without increase of quantity. For although thou wast the very self-same man before, yet by augmentation of faith, thou art become much otherwise: for in the outward man nothing is added, and all in the inward man is clean changed, and so man was made the son of God, and Christ was form in the mind of man. Even as therefore without corporal feeling (the former baseness set apart) thou hast suddenly put on a new dignity; and as in this point that God hath healed those things that were amiss in thee, put away thine infections, wiped away thy spots, thy eyes are not trusted withal, but thy inward senses: so when thou goest up to the holy Altar, to be fed with the spiritual meat, behold in thy faith the holy body and blood of Christ, honour it, marvel at it, touch it with thy mind, take it in the hand of thy heart, and especially receive it, whole Christ, with the thirsty draft of the inward man.  
Eusebius declareth by this similitude, what manner of change is made in the sacrament, how earthly things be turned into the substance of Christ, and what manner of substance that is: without doubt, like unto that change wherewith we be altered in our Baptism, and such a substance as we put on in the bath of Regeneration, when we be borne the children of God, and made a new creature, and new men, when we pass into the body of the Church, where in our outward part nothing is changed, but all inwardly, and for that cause calleth he it spiritual food, which we behold in faith, touch with mind, take with the hand of our heart, and receive with the thirsty draft of the inward man.  

Ambros. in Epist. ad Hebr. de consecrat. dist. 2.  With this agreeth that that Ambrose writeth upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, and is repeated De consecrat dist. 2. In Christ was once a mighty sacrifice offered for an everlasting Redemption: what do we then? do we not daily offer him? yes, but in remembrance of his death: and it is but one sacrifice, not many: for Christ was once offered, and this sacrifice is a pattern of that. Ambrose saith plainly, that that true sacrifice was once offered, but this sacrifice is offered every day: and he declareth in what sort it is one sacrifice, and not one, when he saith that this is a pattern of that. The same man in his book of Mysteries saith, 
Idem in lib. de Myst.  In that sacrament is Christ, because it is the body of Christ: it is not then a corporal, but a spiritual food, whereupon the Apostle also saith of the figure of it, That our fathers did eat the same spiritual food, for the body of God is a spiritual body, the body of Christ is the body of the divine spirit. These things cannot be said of Christ's true and proper body, namely, that it is a spirit: for a spirit hath not flesh and blood, which that body hath, as the Lord himself did witness before his disciples, Feel ye, and see you (saith he) for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as you see me have. 
Idem de Sacr. lib. 4.  Wherefore the same author De sacramentis lib. 4. saith thus: Thou seest therefore how mighty in operation the word of Christ is. If then there be so great force in the word of the Lord jesus, that those things should begin to be which were not: how much more is it of force, to make those things remain which were, and yet to change them into another thing? The heaven was not, the sea was not, the earth was not. But hearken to him that saith, He spoke the word and they were made, he commanded and they were created. Therefore that I may answer thee, it was not the body of Christ before the consecration, but after the consecration I tell thee it is now the body of Christ. He spoke the word and it was made, he commanded and it was created Thou wast thyself, but thou wast an old creature; after thou wast consecrated, thou didst begin to be a new creature. Wilt thou know how new a creature? Every one is (saith he) a new creature in Christ. Ambrose taketh his argument à maiore, By the word of God new things are made: then is it no marvel, if things which now be, and remain, are changed into another thing by his word, which thing is done in Sacraments. Examples of the first are Heaven, the Sea, the Earth: of the later, man, which before he be regenerate is an old creature, but after regeneration, by force of the word, albeit he be the very same he was before, namely a man still, yet he receiveth an inward change, and of an old, is made a new creature.  
Like unto this he affirmeth the change in the sacrament to be, when as both bread remaineth, and yet getteth to itself a new substance (that is to say) a new dignity. That same thing doth he yet more fully expound in his sixth book, writing thus: 
Idem de sacrament. lib. 6.  Peradventure thou mayest say, How is it very flesh? for I see a similitude, I see not the truth of blood in deed. First of all, I told thee of the word of Christ, that it worketh as of force, to change and alter the appointed kinds of nature. Moreover, when the disciples of Christ could not away with his talk, but hearing that he would give them his flesh to eat, and his blood to drink, went their way; yet Peter alone said, Thou hast the words of eternal life, whither shall I go from thee? Lest therefore any more should so say, but the grace of Redemption should remain; Therefore thou takest the sacrament in a similitude, but thou dost attain the grace and virtue of the true nature. At the last he addeth to make up the matter; And thou which receivest bread, art made partaker in that spiritual food, of the divine substance.  
We learn by the authority of this so great a man, that that which we take in the sacrament, is a spiritual, not a corporal food; neither that that flesh is to be taken after the manner of his proper flesh, as the Capernaits did, and with offence went back, but together with the outward sign we obtain the grace and virtue of the true nature, and receiving the bread are partakers of his divine substance. And here also we see that Ambrose was of the same opinion that Emissenus was, and far otherwise understandeth both the alteration which is made in the sacraments, and also the very term of substance, than it is either taken in proper speech, or as Philosophers do naturally speak.  

Idem de office lib. 4. cap. 48.  To the same purpose serveth also that which he writeth in his book De officijs lib. 4. cap. 48. Here is the shadow, here is the image; there is the truth: the shadow in the Law, the image in the Gospel: but the truth in heaven. In time past the Lamb was offered, the calf was offered; Now is Christ offered: but he is offered as man, as taking his Passion, but he as a Priest doth offer himself here as in an image, but there in truth, where he maketh intercession for us, as an advocate with his Father. He putteth a difference in the one oblation from the other. And albeit both (after their manner) be done in deed, yet this which is solemnized in the Church, is done in an Image, but the truth itself remaineth as an Advocate for us with the Father.  
And this place of Ambrose doth seem to be like to that place of Origen upon the 38. 
Origen in Psal. 38.  Psalm, where he entreateth of that saying of Paul, For the Law having a shadow of those good things to come, hath not the very Image of the things etc. And thus he writeth: But if any man can pass from this shadow, let him come to the Image of the things, and see the coming of Christ made in the flesh; Let him behold that high Priest, both now offering sacrifices to the Father, & that shall hereafter offer; And let him understand all these things to be the Images of spiritual things, and that heavenly things be noted by corporal Offices. It is therefore called an Image which is received for the present time, and may be discerned by the nature of man. If thou canst with thought and mind pierce the heavens, and follow JESUS who hath pierced the heavens, and is now present before the face of God for us, there shalt thou find those good things of which the Law had a shadow, and Christ showed the Image in the flesh, which are prepared for the blessed, which neither eye hath seen, nor ear heard, nor ascended into the heart of man: which things when thou shalt see, thou shalt understand that he that walketh in them, and continueth in desire and earnest affection after them, such a one walketh not now in an Image, but in the very truth itself. Origen writeth to the learned and practised, and therefore not easy to be understood of all men. Notwithstanding, he showeth plainly that the sacrifices which be here offered, be Images of that truth which pierced to heavens, and abiding before the face of God is intercessor for us: And therefore that the Images of the truth be one thing, and the very truth another. And that although these Images have also their truth, yet this differeth from that proper truth which we shall there indeed attain to, when we following Christ, shall pierce the heavens where he abideth; the which after a sort we also enjoy here, while in our devout meditations our minds being lift up to heaven, we behold those secret good things. He also upon Matthew cap. 15. 
Idem in Mat. cap. 15.  saith: Neither is it the material bread, but the word that is spoken over it, that profiteth to him that eateth not unworthily of the Lord. And these things are spoken of the figurative and mystical body.  
Many things beside may be said of the Word which was made flesh. Here Origen doth declare, that the true flesh, (that is to say) the true nature of man, which Christ being the Word took unto him, to be one manner of flesh, and an other thing to be his figurative and symbolical body, with which words he calleth the Sacrament. To this purpose serve the words that he writeth Contra Celsum lib. 8. 
Idem contra Celsum lib. 8.  We obeying the Maker of all things for his great benefits bestowed upon us, when we have given Thanks, are fed with the loaves set before us, which by intercession and prayers are made a certain more holy body. These words, A certain more holy body, do not agree to the proper body of Christ, but they agree to the sacrament of Thanksgiving, which after a certain manner is his body. The same man upon Leviticus Homil. 7. 
Idem in Levit. Homil. 7.  expoundeth the same matter more plainly, saying: But you if ye be the children of the Church, if you be endued with the mysteries of the Gospel, if the Word made flesh dwelleth in you; acknowledge you these things which we speak, that they be the Lords, lest peradventure he that is ignorant, be ignorant still: Acknowledge that they be figures which be written in the holy Volumes, & therefore examine them as spiritual, & not carnal men, and understand those things which be spoken: For if you take those things as carnal men, they hurt you, and do not nourish you. For there is also in the Gospel a letter that killeth: The kill letter is not only found in the old Testament. There is also a letter in the new Testament that can kill him which will not spiritually mark those things that be spoken. For if thou follow this that hath been spoken, according to the letter, Unless ye eat my flesh and drink my blood, this letter slayeth. Seeing then the Authors every where refer these words to the sacrament; and Origen commandeth so much to flee the letter, as to say that it killeth: Who seethe not, that Christ's flesh is in the sacrament one way to be understood, and another according to the letter, and in proper speech?  
Epiphanius in Anchor●to is of the same opinion, 
Epiphanius in Anchorato.  where he saith: For we see that our Saviour took into his hands, as the Gospel containeth, that he rose in the Supper, and took these things, and when he had given Thanks, he said, This is mine, etc. And we see that it is not equal, nor like, neither to the Image that is in flesh, nor to his invisible Godhead, nor to the features of his members: for this is of a round fashion and without sense, as much as to the power of itself appertaineth. And therefore his will was to speak by grace, This is mine, etc. And every man believeth his saying: for he that believeth not that he is true as he hath said, he is fallen from grace and health. But that which we have heard we believe that it is his: for we know that our Lord is altogether sense, all endued with sense, all God, all moving, all working, all light, all incomprehensible; but yet he, that hath given us this with grace. Epiphanius doth in this place endeavour himself to prove, that man being made after the Image of God, hath in deed the Image of God, not according to the proper nature of divinity, but after grace; and useth the similitude taken of the Sacrament of Thanksgiving, the which according to the proper nature of a body, he denieth it to be the body of Christ, since it hath neither the form of a true body, and lacketh feeling and moving, and yet it is verily believed to be his body by grace.  

Cyprian de Coena D mini.  Cyprian also in his sermon of the Supper of the Lord, doth very godly and plentifully reason to the same effect, out of the which I have thought sufficient to touch these few places. For none of the Fathers have more extolled the dignity of the Sacrament, and shutting out all carnal sense, more plainly declared the true understanding of so great a mystery. An unconsuming meat (saith he) the Master did set before his disciples: neither were the people bidden to a sumptuous and cunningly dressed Banquet, but there is given an immortal food differing from common meats, retaining the shape of bodily substance, but proving by invisible working, that the divine virtue is present. Again, There did sometime arise a question (as it is read in the Gospel of john) of the novelty of this word, and at the doctrine of this Mystery were the hearers amazed, when the Lord said, Unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you: Because certain, for that they did not yet believe, nor could understand, went back, for that it seemed to them an horrible and heinous thing to feed upon man's flesh, thinking he had spoken this after that sort, as though they should have been taught to have eaten his flesh sod, or roasted, and cut in pieces: whereas the flesh of his person, if it should be divided into morsels, could not have been sufficient for all mankind, which being once spent, Religion should seem to perish, which should not have afterwards a sacrifice remaining any longer. But in such like thoughts flesh and blood profiteth nothing, because as the Master himself hath expounded, These words be Spirit and life: neither doth the carnal sense pierce the understanding of so great a depth, unless Faith be added too. The Bread is food, the Blood is life, the Flesh substance, the Body the Church. A body, because of the agreeing of members in one; Bread, for the conformity of nourishment; Blood, for the effect of life given; Flesh, for the property of the humanity taken. Also he saith, This common bread being changed into flesh and blood, doth procure life and increase to the bodies, and therefore by the accustomed effect of things, the weakness of our faith is aided, and taught by a sensible argument, that the effect of eternal life is in the visible Sacraments, and that we be knit to Christ not so much by corporal, as by spiritual passage. Also this bread which he reached to his disciples, being changed, not in form but in nature, by the omnipotency of the Word is made flesh; and even as in the person of Christ the humanity was seen and the divinity hid, so into the visible Sacrament unspeakably doth the divine substance power itself. Also the Master truly of this Institution said, that Unless we should eat and drink his blood, we should not have life in us: instructing us by a spiritual lesson, and opening our understanding to so hidden a matter, that we should know that our eating is an abiding in him, and our drink as it were a certain incorporation, by submitting our service, and joining our wills, and uniting our affections. Also he saith, Among the guests of the Lords table the natural man is not admitted; whatsoever flesh and blood doth appoint is shut out from this company, it savoureth nothing, it profiteth nothing, whatsoever the fineness of the sense of man doth go about. Cyprian hath these and many other places to the same purpose. The very words of Cyprian do sufficiently declare that which belongeth to our purpose: How the Letter is not to be followed in these things which be spoken of this mystery; how the understanding of the Flesh is utterly to be shunned, and all things to be referred to a spiritual sense: That there is the presence of the divine power in this Bread, the effect of everlasting life, and that the divine substance is powered thereinto; that the words are spirit and life, that a spiritual lesson is given; that this Body, this Blood and Flesh, this substance of body, ought not to be taken after a common sort, nor as man's reason doth appoint, but to be named, thought of, believed for certain excellent effects, powers and properties joined thereto, which be even within the body and blood of Christ by nature; namely, that it doth both feed and revive our souls, and prepareth our bodies to resurrection and immortality.  

Cyrill. in joan. lib. 4. cap. 14.  The same opinion hath also Cyrillus, who though he affirm in many places, the truth and nature of the body of Christ to be in the Sacrament; yet he is in opinion, that it is a spiritual and divine matter, and not to be understood after the manner of men. For first he declareth, that the same manner of eating is set forth in the words of the Lords Supper, which the Lord himself signified when he said, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, etc. For so he writeth in his 4. book upon the 14. Chap. of john: Where after he had spoken somewhat of them that did say, How can this man give his flesh to be eaten? he addeth these words; Therefore they ought first to have set the roots of faith in their mind, and then to seek for those things that are to be sought for of man: but they, before they would believe, did seek importunately. For this cause therefore, the Lord did not open, how it might be, but exhorteth to seek it by faith. So to his disciples that believed, he gave the pieces of bread, saying, Take ye, and eat ye, this is my body. The cup also in like manner he carried about, saying, Drink ye all of this: This is the cup of my blood, which shall be shed for many for the remission of sins. Thou seest manifestly, that by no means he would declare the manner of the mystery to them that sought it without faith: but to them that did believe, and did not seek it, he plainly declared it. Likewise in cap. 21. 
Idem in cap. 21  upon these words, This is a hardsaying, thus he saith: And such as want sharpness of wit, are wont to abhor knowledge, which should be sought with great study, and much labour: but yet the spiritual man accustomed to the Lords doctrine, as to great dainties, doth continually sing, How sweet be thy words unto my throat! yea above honey to my mouth. But the natural jew doth think this spiritual mystery full of foolishness; and where by the Lords words he is stirred to an higher understanding of things, yet he falleth still to his accustomed madness. Likewise in his cap. 22. expounding these words, Doth this offend you? 
Idem in cap. 22  etc. he writeth on this sort. For ignorance, many which followed Christ, not understanding his words, were troubled: for when they heard him say, Verily, verily, I say unto you, unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you, they thought Christ had called them to the cruel manners of beasts, and stirred them to eat the raw flesh of a man, and to drink blood, which be even horrible to hear. For they had not yet known the manner of this mystery, and the godly ministration thereof. Also in the 24. chapter. 
Idem cap. 24.  The words therefore that I have spoken to you be spirit, that is spiritual, and of the spirit, and life, that is to say, they be of the lively and natural life. 
Idem ad Calosyrium.  The same man's words are rehearsed to Calosyrius, which follow. For lest we should abhor flesh and blood set upon the holy Altars, God favouring our frailty, powered into the things offered the power of life, turning them into the truth of his own flesh, that a body of life, as it were a certain seed that giveth life, might be found in us.  
By these and many other places in Cyrillus, we be lift up from the letter to the spirit, from the sense of the natural man, to a more high understanding of a spiritual mystery. It must not be thought here, that we eat the raw flesh of a man, or drink his blood, but that the words be spiritual, and spiritually to be understood, that they be termed flesh and blood, but aught to be understood of spirit and life, that is to say, of the virtue of the Lords flesh that giveth life: And therefore said he that the power of life was put into the outward signs, 
Idem in joan. lib. 11. cap. 26.  and called it by an apt signification the body of life. The same man upon john lib. 11. cap. 26. doth expound somewhat more plainly, how we be coupled corporally both with Christ and with ourselves, and that by the partaking of the sacrament, although we be severed both in body and soul. It must be considered, saith he, whether to the unity of consent and will we may also find a natural unity, by which we shall be linked among ourselves, and we all unto God. For peradventure we are joined also with corporal union, although we be severed one from another, that each one apart hath his being and distance of place. For although Peter and Paul be one by unity in Christ, yet Peter is not Paul. Afterward within few words he thus concludeth; The original therefore, and the way whereby we be partakers of the holy Ghost, and united to God, is the mystery of Christ, for we be all sanctified in him. Therefore, that he might unite us one to another, and every one to God, although we be severed both in body and soul, yet hath he found a way agreeable to the counsel of his Father, and to his own wisdom. For he blessing those as believe, with his body, through the mystical communion doth make us both with himself, and also among ourselves, one body. It is plain that Cyrillus spoke not of the same kind of body, when he saith, Although they be severed in body and soul, yet they which believe, through the body of Christ, and by the mystical communion be made one body with Christ, and between themselves. For even as the faithful, being joined in that spiritual body, are one body, although their proper bodies remain severed: Even so also we being joined with Christ in that spiritual body, are made one body with him, although his own proper body be far distant from our bodies. Let us add one place more taken out of this Father, 
Idem in lib. ad Euop. Anat. 11  which is in his book Ad Euoptium Anath. 11. where he speaketh thus of Nestorius. Doth not he pronounce this mystery to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is a devouring of man's flesh, and violently drive the minds of the faithful, without conscience, into false interpretations, and with man's inventions take those things in hand, which are received by an only pure, and unsearchable faith? Cyrillus doth in this place object against Nestorius, That to maintain this error, he did speak too grossly of the Sacrament, as though the faithful do properly therein eat man's flesh, which by the Greek word he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: But such kind of thoughts he termeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, as Budaeus doth interpret it, counterfeit, not right, not sincere: For so much as here is no place for such kind of worldly and common imaginations.  
We ought to think the like of Theophylactus, who although in some place he may seem to have followed a more gross opinion, as upon Matthew the 26. Chapter, whose words we have above rehearsed, wherein he seemeth to deny, that the bread of the Sacrament of thanksgiving, is a figure of the Lords body, but the very body indeed; yet when he saith, It is no figure, he meaneth that it is not only a figure, as in another place, where upon Mark and john it is read: for else he should have repugned against all the old Writers (and that is not likely) who throughout, term this Sacrament a figure, an image, a sign and pattern. Besides, in that he said it was the body in very deed, his meaning was not to have it taken after a worldly and common sort, as it shall manifestly appear by those things that follow: for he writing upon these words in the sixth Chapter of john, 
Theophylac. in joan. cap. 6.  The jews therefore did strive among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? saith thus: It behoveth us therefore, after that we hear, unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, ye shall have no life, in taking the heavenly mysteries to keep steadfast and unwavering faith, and not to be inquisitive how. For the natural man, that is, he that followeth man's carnal and natural thoughts, is not apt to conceive such matters as be above nature and spiritual, and even so he doth not understand the spiritual eating of the Lords flesh, whereof who so be not partakers, shall not be partakers of everlasting life. And by and by he expoundeth thus these words, He that eateth my flesh, etc. In this place we learn the Sacrament of the communion. For he that eateth and drinketh the Lord's flesh and blood, abideth in the Lord himself, and the Lord in him: for there is a new mixture made, and above reason, so that God is in us, and we in God. Here the Author teacheth, that faith must be had in the mysteries, and not to be inquisitive how: and therewithal he removeth apart man's carnal or natural thoughts, and requireth only a spiritual meaning, and commendeth a more high manner of eating. For he addeth not long after upon these words, This is a hard saying, who can hear him? etc. But see their folly; For their duty had been, to have asked, and learned those things whereof they were ignorant. But they drew back, and did expound nothing spiritually, but all things as they outwardly appeared. For in as much as they heard of flesh, they thought he would compel them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, devourers of flesh and blood. But because we understand it spiritually, neither we be devourers of flesh, and yet be we sanctified by such meat. By and by also expounding this, It is spirit that quickeneth, thus he writeth: Because, as we have often said, they that carnally expounded such things as Christ spoke, were offended: he saith, When those things that I speak are spiritually understood, that only bringeth profit: but the flesh, that is to say, to expound them carnally, profiteth nothing, but is occasion of offence. So therefore such as heard carnally those things that Christ spoke, were offended. He addeth therefore, The words which I speak are spirit, that is to say, they be spiritual, and life, (having nothing that is carnal) and bringing everlasting life. Let us add hereunto those things which he writeth upon Mark 14. cap. 1. For the bread is not only a figure, and a certain pattern of the Lords body, but it is turned into the very body of Christ. For the Lord saith, The bread which I will give, is my flesh. And again, Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, etc. And how, saith he, is not the flesh seen? O man, this is done for our infirmity. For since the bread and wine be of those things which we be acquainted withal, we abhor them not: but if we should see blood and flesh set before us, we could not abide it, but should utterly abhor it. Therefore God of his mercy favouring our frailty, retaineth still the form of bread and wine, but he altereth the element into the power of flesh and blood. By all these places it is most certain, that Theophylactus followed the steps of the ancient fathers, set aside all carnal imaginations in this Sacrament, & called us to such as be high and spiritual, that it is not only a figure of the Lords body, but rather is verily his body, & yet they that be partakers are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, flesh eaters: And he addeth the cause, for that we understand it not carnally but spiritually, that is to say, that they remain the forms of bread and wine, but yet do pass into the power of the Lords flesh and blood, and, as he termed it, be transelemented, in which term there is no cause why we should feign to ourself any Popish Transubstantiation as they call it. 
Idem in joan. cap. 6.  For writing upon the 6. Chapter of john, he useth the same term, saying thus: Therefore even as I, saith he, live for the Father, that is, as I am borne of the Father, which is life: even so also, he that eateth me, liveth by the means of me, while he is after a sort mixed with me, and is transelemented into me that can quicken. By this term of transelementation he meant to signify nothing else, but the same change that is fit for the Sacraments: whereof Ambrose, Emissenus and others make mention, as before we have repeated: for otherways we cannot be transelemented into Christ. And no marvel that Theophylactus so termed it, since Chrysostom himself upon the sixth chap. of john, homilia 45. useth these words: 
Chrysost. in joan. cap. 6. homil. 45.  But that we should not only by love, but also in very deed be turned into that flesh, he hath wrought it by the meat which he hath given us. Behold, Chrysostome saith, we are turned into the flesh of Christ really, as I may so term it: But yet who seethe not that turning to be spiritual, not carnal? Even so is bread turned in very deed, and transelemented into Christ's flesh, but by a spiritual and no carnal turning, because the bread doth get to it the power of the flesh. And these things which have been thus cited out of Theophylactus, albeit he be not so ancient an author, yet because he is chief alleged of such as follow the carnal sense in the sacrament of thanksgiving, though he doth very manifestly expound himself, and teacheth nothing repugnant to holy Scriptures and writings of old Authors, I meant to show the true opinion of so learned a man, and not to discredit his authority as a late writer.  
Damascenus is yet unspoken of, whom the adversaries use as it were a chief champion: but in case they would not snatchingly pick out such sentences as serve the humour of their affections, but mark well the through drift of his writing; he helpeth not so much their cause as he doth overthrow it. Albeit (that I may frankly admonish the reader and utter mine opinion) he is but a very slippery and an uncertain author in expounding of this mystery, and none, I dare say, among the old writers, shall be found, that hath reasoned of this matter so obscurely and doubtfully. Truly I gather by him, that when he had determined to write a breviat of the true faith, he would neither leave this sacrament unspoken of, nor yet witted how to entreat of it plainly enough: The which of his own words the indifferent reader shall easily judge. 
Damas'. De fide Orthod. lib. 4. cap. 14.  He writeth De fide orthod. lib. 4. cap. 14. of Christ in this wise: It behoved, not only that the first fruits of our nature should come into the partaking of a better, but that all persons, as many as would, should both be borne by a second nativity, and nourished with a new meat, meet for that nativity, and so prevent the measure of perfection. And a little after: And because he is a spiritual Adam, it behoved the nativity also to be spiritual, and likewise the meat. For since we have a double and compound nature, it is fit that the nativity be also double, and the food likewise compound. The nativity therefore is given us by water and spirit, I mean by holy Baptism: but the meat is our Lord himself jesus Christ, which came down from heaven. Then after alleging the words of the Lords Supper, and proofs of what force the word is, he addeth: Even as all things whatsoever God had made, he hath made them by the working of the holy Ghost: so now also the same force of the holy Ghost bringeth to pass those things that be above nature, the which no thing can comprehend but only faith. And a little after: But bread and wine be taken: For God knoweth man's weakness: For commonly those things which it is not acquainted with, it shuneth with loathsomeness. Therefore he humbled himself after his wont manner, and bringeth to pass by the accustomed things of nature, such things as be above nature. And even as in Baptism, because it is the manner of men to be washed with water, and anointed with oil, he coupled with oil and water the grace of the holy Ghost, and made it to be the washing of regeneration: After the same sort, because men are want to eat bread and drink wine and water, he coupled therewithal his Divinity, and made them his body and blood, that by matters usual and agreeable to nature, we may be carried to those things which pass nature. Hitherto he seemed to agree with the rest; for such as the second nativity is, such, saith he, is the meat: He termeth the nativity spiritual, likewise also the meat: The nativity to be double, through water and the holy Ghost, the meat also double: but how it is double he allegeth not forthwith, as he did in the nativity, but the meat, saith he, is the very bread of life which came down from heaven: yet after a few words he declareth how it is done, saying, As the water is coupled with the grace of the holy Ghost, and is made the washing of regeneration: so is the divinity coupled with the bread, and is made the body & blood of the Lord. And this he affirmeth to be the working of the holy Ghost, and that the bread and wine be taken for man's infirmity, and by matters usual to nature, those things be wrought that pass nature, which only faith can comprehend. None of these things be contrary to the opinion of the other Fathers: but those things that follow be not so. It is verily his body, saith he, that is knit with the divinity, that body taken of the holy Virgin. This before him no man had said. If his meaning be of the proper body, the authority of the Fathers that were before him crieth out against him, which plainly affirm that body to be taken from the earth, carried above the stars, and not to be here: who also with manifest difference do separate that body from the sacrament of the body, unless peradventure we may so interpret it, as that saying of Augustine, The same body, and not the same body: the same by grace and power, and not the same according to the proper manner of a body: the which it may seem that this Author's meaning was when he writ this. For by and by there followeth: Not that the body that was taken of the Virgin, should come down from heaven, but that the very bread and wine is changed into the body and blood of the Lord. By which words he himself testifieth, that this body which is received in the Sacrament, is to be understood one way, and that body which was taken, which he denieth to come down from heaven, another way. For if it abide in heaven without coming down hither; and if bread be made of the very same body that was taken; sure the bread must be in heaven, and the faithful shall here receive neither the bread nor yet the body, which thing no man in his right wits can affirm. But if we leave the body that was taken in his place in heaven, as our faith doth require, and say notwithstanding that the same is present in the sacrament by grace and power, as the rest of the Fathers do pronounce, and therefore this bread may be called and believed for the natural property of a body that is coupled with it, to be the body of Christ, not properly as that body that he took upon him, but after a spiritual sort, as the sacrament of that body; the matter is not intricate, but plainly opened, neither shall there be any need to frame crooked mazes that be clean contrary to our faith, or to knit vain ropes of sand, or to shun the similitudes that the former Fathers used, and to invent other similitudes gross and strange from mysteries, as Damascenus doth in this place. For even as (saith he) the bread in eating, and the wine and water in drinking, are naturally turned into the body and blood of him that eateth and drinketh them, and be made another body, then that they had before: so the Show bread, and the wine and water by invocation and coming of the holy Ghost, be changed above the law of nature, into the body and blood of Christ, and be not two but one and the same. What other thing doth he by this similitude, but open a way to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: that is, the eating of man's flesh, which thing Cyrillus, Theophylactus and other Fathers do detest? How much better have Cyprian, Ambrose, Epiphanius, Emissenus, and other said, which affirm a like change in the sacrament of thanksgiving, as that which is made in Baptism? whereby it cometh to pass, that the signs do remain the same, and by grace they get to themselves a new substance in like manner, as one self man being not yet regenerate doth belong to the old Adam, and after regeneration becometh a new man, and a new creature, not by a fleshly mean, which agreeth not to sacraments, but after a spiritual sort.  
But Damascenus forgetting himself, who had before affirmed this meat to be spiritual, as the regeneration in Baptism; now teacheth it to be carnal, if this bread must pass into the body of Christ, as common bread doth into the bodies of those that eat it: whereby it happeneth, that he falleth also into another error: for he denieth this bread and wine to be a figure. This bread and wine (saith he) is not a figure of the body and blood of Christ, God forbidden, but the very deified body of the Lord. And no marvel it is that he denieth this, if he be in opinion that this bread is so changed as common bread is into the body of the feeder. But all they of old time throughout be repugnant: and surely he jarreth with himself: for after those words cited out of the sixth Chapter of john, Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, etc. And My flesh verily, etc. by and by he bringeth another similitude of a coal, far diverse from the former. A coal (saith he) is not simple wood, but coupled with fire: so the bread of communion is not simple bread, but coupled with the divinity. How divers is the manner of these two similitudes? before he said, that the showbread was turned into the body of Christ, beyond nature, as the common bread is naturally changed into the body of him that eateth it, but that is not done while there remaineth bread: here he saith, that the bread of communion is not simple bread, but bread coupled with the divinity. The bread therefore remaineth: to what is it coupled? to the divinity. Where is then that gross transmutation? Again a little after: This is that pure sacrifice without blood, which God hath commanded by the Prophet should be offered to himself, from the rising of the Sun, to the going down of the same. If he speak of the body that he took upon him, how is it without blood? if he speak of his spiritual body and blood, he saith truth. Again he saith: This body is not consumed, it is not corrupted, nor cast into the draft. If his meaning be of his spiritual and better substance of the sacrament, we confess it: if of the outward sign, Origen far better learned than Damascenus saith, As touching to that material part that it hath, it goeth into the belly, and is cast into the draft. Damascenus goeth yet further and saith, The bread is the first fruits of the bread to come, which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but epiousios doth signify either the bread to come, that is of the world to come, or else that which is taken for the consecration of our substance. But whether it be this way or that way, it is aptly called the body of Christ. For the Lords flesh is a spirit giving life, because it was conceived of a quickening spirit. For that which is borne of spirit, is spirit. But this I speak not, to take away the nature of a body, but willing to show his quickening and divinity. How changeable is this speech? sometime one and the self bread is one and self body, another time it is the first fruits of the bread to come: otherwhile flesh: at another time spirit: At last, about the end he saith, For albeit some named the bread and wine patterns of Christ's body and blood, as that holy man Basill; yet after the sanctifying they called it not so, but before the sacrifice was sanctified. But in that which is commonly called the liturgy of Basill, it is plain otherwise, and the rest of the Fathers do oftentimes the like. And Damascenus himself shutteth up his oration with this conclusion: And they be called the patterns of things to come, not because they be not verily the body and blood of Christ, but because now by them we be made partakers of the divinity of Christ, and then shall be by understanding, by sight only. What shall we do with this man, who a little before denied that they were called patterns after sanctification, and now he himself doth plainly call them patterns after sanctification? what manner inconstancy is this? This is not a teaching of mysteries, but in saying somewhile one thing, and another while another, it is to wrap all things in blind darkness. Truly I think in my mind, that Damascenus knew not how to determine this matter certainly, but did heap together hastily and confusedly those things which he had read, and which were written wisely of the old Fathers, and when he could not wind himself out, he floateth to and fro, and as the Grecians term it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say, wafteth with his wings. For that he was persuaded that there should be a carnal (as they term it) transubstantiation, that is not likely, since that the very Greek Church unto this present day hath not admitted that opinion. And indeed no marvel, if in this mystery he saw the less, or had no sound opinion, if those things be true which be reported of him in his life, that after he was made a Monk he fond became a basketseller in the market place, that he feigned foolish miracles, that he was a superstitious worshipper of Images, and a most earnest maintainer of the same.  
The authority of them of old time ought to be of more credit with us, whose judgement commended to us with learning and unfeigned godliness, is of much more weight: who for the understanding of this so great a mystery, exclude all sense of the flesh, and call us back to a spiritual manner of understanding. Wherefore wisely and learnedly doth Bertram, which was no long time after, seem to have observed this distinction in the ancient Fathers, and agreeable also to the scriptures, and to have set forth in a work of his, though not long, yet clearly and truly, what ought to be thought of this controversy: and if we gather thereout a few places fit for our purpose, it shall not be amiss; for he is neither a very new Author, seeing he lived about seven hundredth years past, and beside, he was no less famous for his life then for his learning. With many arguments he proveth this proposition, That the flesh of Christ taken of the Virgin, and that which is taken in the sacrament, differ one from another. For he writeth in this manner, expounding these words of Ambrose: That is the undoubtedly true flesh of Christ, that was crucified, that was buried. Therefore it is verily a sacrament of that flesh. The Lord jesus himself crieth, 
Bertramus de corp. & sang. Christi.  This is my body. How diligently, saith Bertram, how wisely is this distinction made? Of the flesh of Christ which was crucified, which was buried, that is, by the which Christ was both crucified and buried, he saith, It is his very flesh indeed: but of that which is received in the sacrament, he saith, It is therefore verily the sacrament of that flesh: making a distinction between the sacrament of his flesh, and the truth of his flesh, in that he said, That in the truth of his flesh which he took of the Virgin, he was both crucified and buried, and therefore said that the mystery that is now ministered in the Church, is verily a sacrament of that flesh wherein he was crucified: manifestly instructing the faithful, that that flesh in which Christ was crucified and buried, is not a mystery, but the truth of nature. But this flesh which now containeth in a mystery the similitude of that other, is not flesh in form, but in Sacrament: so that in form it is bread, in sacrament the true body of Christ, as the Lord JESUS himself crieth, This is my body. Whose mind that we may the better understand, it is to be marked (the which we did also note before) that as he meaneth the body of Christ two manner of ways, so doth he allege also two manner of truths of the same, namely the one truth properly, which he termeth the truth in form, and the truth of nature, which he doth attribute to the flesh that was crucified and buried; the other a spiritual truth, which he termeth the true body in the sacrament.  
The same man repeating the saying of Ambrose, The food than is not corporal but spiritual, saith: Thou mayest not therefore bring the sense of the flesh: for according to that, there is nothing here determined. It is indeed the body of Christ, but not corporal, but spiritual: It is the blood of Christ, but not corporal, but spiritual. There is nothing therefore to be understood corporally, but spiritually. It is the body of Christ, but not corporally: and it is the blood of Christ, but not corporally. Note when he saith, Not corporally, he meaneth not properly corporally, (for by the spiritual eating also in the sacrament we are corporally annexed with Christ, as Cyrillus and Hilarius do witness,) but mystically, not properly. The same man saith of the same Ambrose a little after: He hath taught us very plainly, how we ought to understand the mystery of the Body and Blood of Christ. For after he had said that our Fathers did eat spiritual food, and drink spiritual drink, when as for all that there is no man that doubteth, but the Manna which they did eat, and the water which they did drink, were corporal; he apply it to the mystery which now is ministered in the Church, defining after what sort it is the body of Christ. For in that he saith, The body of God is a spiritual body, Christ undoubtedly is God, and that body which he took of the Virgin Mary, which suffered, which was buried, which rose again, was undoubtedly a true body, the same that continued visible, and able to be felt: but that body which is called the mystery of God, is not corporal but spiritual. But if it be spiritual, then is it not visible, nor able to be felt: and therefore S. Ambrose addeth, saying, The body of Christ is the body of a divine Spirit. But a divine spirit is nothing that is corporal, nothing that is corruptible, nothing able to be felt. But this body which is solemnized in the Church, as touching the visible form, is both corruptible and to be felt. Soon after also he concludeth upon the words of Ambrose, in this wise: By the authority of this great learned man, we be well taught, that there is a great difference between the body wherein Christ suffered, and the blood which he shed hanging upon the Cross out of his side, and this body which in the mystery of Christ's passion is daily solemnized of the faithful, and that blood also which is received in the mouth of the faithful, is a mystery of that blood wherewith the whole world was redeemed. He confirmeth that also by the authority of Hierom, and after rehearsal of this place, The blood and flesh of Christ is understood two manner of ways; either that spiritual, etc. thus he concludeth: With no small difference hath this doctor made a distinction of the body and blood of Christ. For in that he saith, that the flesh or blood which are daily received of the faithful are spiritual, and yet that the flesh that was crucified, and the blood which was shed with the soldiers spear, are not said to be spiritual nor divine; he doth manifestly signify, that they differ as much one from another, as do spiritual things and corporal, visible and invisible, divine and human, and that those things which differ from themselves, are not all one. But the spiritual flesh which is received in the mouth of the faithful, and the spiritual blood which is daily given to the faithful to drink, do differ from the flesh that was crucified, and from the blood that was shed with the soldiers spear, as the authority of this man doth witness. Therefore they be not all one: For that flesh which was crucified, was made of the flesh of the Virgin, framed together of bones and sinews, and severed with the features of the members of a man, quickened with the spirit, of a reasonable soul, endued with reason into a life proper to itself, and motions agreeable to the same. But on the other side, the spiritual flesh which feedeth spiritually the people that do believe, after the form that it beareth outwardly, is made of the grains of corn, by the hands of the workman, framed together of no sinews and bones, severed with no variety of members, quickened with no reasonable substance, nor can exercise any proper motions. For whatsoever giveth the substance of life, it is of a spiritual force, and of an invisible working, and of a divine power. Again, of the words of Augustine he concludeth in this manner: By authority of this doctor entreating of the Lords words of the sacrament of his body & blood we be manifestly taught, that those words of the Lord be to be understood spiritually, and not carnally, as he himself sayeth, The words which I speak to you, be spirit and life, Namely the words of eating his flesh and drinking his blood: for he spoke it upon that occasion, whereat his disciples were offended. Therefore that they should not be offended, the heavenly Master calleth them back from the flesh to the Spirit, and from a corporal sight to invisible understanding. We see therefore the food of the Lords body, and the drink of his blood, are after a sort his very body, and his very blood, namely in that they be Spirit and life. He addeth again after the matter proved: Therefore we see, that there is a great difference between the mystery of the body & blood of Christ which is now received of the faithful in the Congregation, and that body which was borne of the Virgin Mary, which suffered, which was buried, which rose again, which ascended into heaven, which sitteth at the right hand of the Father. For this that is ministered in the way, is to be taken spiritually: For Faith believeth that which it seethe not, and spiritually feedeth the soul, and doth rejoice the heart, and giveth everlasting life, and incorruption, while that is not minded which feedeth the body, which is crushed with teeth, which is broken in pieces, but that which by faith is spiritually received. But that body wherein Christ suffered and rose again, is his own proper body taken of the Virgin Maries body, able to be felt and seen, even after his resurrection, as he himself said to his disciples, Behold my hands and my feet: for I am even he, handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.  
Bertram writeth many things to this purpose: but let it suffice that we have touched thus much. Which man's exposition, and manner of disputing upon the Sacrament, is (in mine opinion) diligently to be weighed and embraced, for two respects: First, because he sticketh to the authority and testimony not only of those fathers of whom he hath repeated a few, but also many more, I might say of all the most ancient: Secondarily, because that where the credit of the man was so much that he was provoked to write by a most famous Prince, and his writing published abroad, and in sight of all men, he was praised of many, reprehended of none, or noted of any one spot of erroneous doctrine, whereby it came to pass that before these new gross and natural transubstantiation makers sprung up, the doctrine of Bertram touching the Sacrament, was allowed by the judgement of every man that was best learned: Albeit this term of transubstantiation being indeed new & not necessary, yet perhaps might have some place, as the word Trans-elementation, if they had not brought in another change of the substances than a sacramental, and that which the ancient fathers did understand, which is brought to pass the former substance remaining still. But they not satisfied with the novelty of the term, have invented a monstrous interpretation. For they appoint the very proper body of Christ to be in the Sacrament, and pluck from it the true properties of a man's body, whereas it should seem that Aquinas himself was not ignorant of the distinction above mentioned. 
Aquin. 3. part. Sum. q. 76. art. 3.  For he writeth 3. part. Sum. q. 76. art 3. on this manner: Christ is whole under each piece of the forms of Bread and Wine, not only when the host is broken, but also when it remaineth whole: neither is there distance of parts one from another, as the eye from the eye, or the eye from the ear, or the head from the feet, as there is in other bodies organical: for such manner of distance is in the true body of Christ, but not as it is in this Sacrament. He affirmeth the true body of Christ to be one, which is organical, and hath difference of members, which also he denieth to be in the Sacrament; and that to be another, which is in the Sacrament, and wanteth variety of members: which thing if he meant of the spiritual body as the old writers did speak, he judged right; but if he meant to signify any mass of flesh without form, it is a great absurdity, and contrary to the opinion of all the old writers.  

Lombardus.  Lombardus also Author of the sentences, concerning the very and proper flesh of Christ lib 3. Sentent. Dist. 3. saith thus: Christ's flesh that was taken, is neither heavenly, nor of the air, nor of any other nature then of such as all men's flesh is. Since therefore the manner and nature of the flesh of Christ is common with the flesh of other men, as Lombardus saith, and such flesh as Aquinas affirmeth cometh not into the Sacrament; it followeth by their testimony, that these two kinds of flesh differ much. And that this may the better appear, and be laid up in memory, I thought it not without profit to add, of such things as we have spoken of before, a certain distinction which the Greeks' call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by comparison.  
1 The proper body of Christ, hath the natural form of a man's body: The mystical body hath not.  
2 The proper body hath a head, breast, members severed: The mystical hath not.  
3 The proper body hath bones, veins, & sinews: The mystical hath not.  
4 That may be seen and touched: This can neither be seen nor touched.  
5 That is endued with the true senses of a body: This is without sense, as Epiphanius saith.  
6 That is organical: This is not.  
7 That is no figure: This is a figure of his proper body.  
8 That is not in mystery: This is in mystery.  
9 That, of his own nature, is human and bodily: This is heavenly, divine, and spiritual.  
10 The matter of that is not subject to corruption: The material part of this is bread, and is corrupted.  
11 No man may eat that by itself: This, both a man may and aught to eat.  
12 That is contained in one place: This, wheresoever the Sacrament is ministered, is present; but not as in a place.  
13 That is not a Sacrament of another body: This is a Sacrament of another body.  
14 That being taken of the virgin Maries body, was once create: This is not taken of the Virgin, but daily by the mystical benediction is create potentially, by the testimony of Augustin and Cyprian.  
15 That is a natural body: This is above nature.  
16 Finally, that is simply: This is after a sort.  
17 That properly & perfectly: This is a body unproperly.  
Hitherto we have spoken of the difference which the ancient Fathers have godly and diligently observed, between Christ's proper body, and the Sacrament of the same body. In the which although many things have been spoken, which do not only declare that there is a difference (which in this place we meant to do) but also do admonish us withal, what manner of body that is in the sacrament: Yet because we have not hitherto so fully expressed this point, as the weightiness of the matter requireth, We have thought good from henceforward to entreat of this part more fully; Namely, in what sort this Sacrament is the Lords body, and wherefore our Lord himself at the first, as the Evangelists make mention, afterwards Paul the Apostle, lastly all they of old time, following the authority of them, have left in writing that it is so called, and is so indeed; not that this manner which is a spiritual and hid thing, can be found out by man's reason, or that we go about to search out curiously such things as be forbidden and denied, but that all man's inventions set apart, we may follow those things that have been left us by the authority of Scriptures, and ancient Fathers that agree with them, and that manner which the Lord himself would we should know, and the Church instructed by him and his Apostles, hath received, not to departed from that. This is to be holden fast which we proved before, that not only the lords words, which be spoken in the 6. Chapter of john, Unless ye eat the flesh etc. And My flesh is verily meat, and the rest that followeth in the same place, but also these words of the Lords supper, Take ye, eat ye, this is my body, and This is my blood, are to be understood spiritually, not carnally, and that one manner of eating is meant in both places. When I say, Not carnally, I mean, Not according to the letter, nor as the words do properly sound: for this is to understand carnally, as Chrysostome witnesseth upon john, of these words, The flesh profiteth nothing. What is it, 
Chrysostom. in joan. Hom. 46.  saith he, to understand carnally? To understand the things simply as they be spoken, and nothing else. For those things that be seen, are not so to be judged, but all mysteries are to be considered with inward eyes, that is to say, spiritually. Let not this rule of Chrysostome go out of our minds. But these two, Carnally, and Spiritually, are contrary; when the one is forbidden, the other is commanded, and contrariwise. And that carnal sense hath no place in this mystery, not only Chrysostome is the Author, as we recited even now, and Cyprian, where he saith, Neither doth carnal sense pierce the understanding of so great a depth, and Theophylactus writing thus, But because we understand it spiritually, we be neither devourers of flesh, and yet be sanctified by that meat. But to be short, I may in manner say, that all the ancient Fathers with one voice do forbidden us to understand the words of the Lords Supper carnally, and command a spiritual meaning: The which by many testimonies repeated in this piece of work, every man may readily perceive. Neither is this sufficient, if we avoid one manner of understanding carnally, and fall into another. For he that doth understand the eating of Christ's flesh after the letter, and as it were a proper kind of speech, he is a carnal Capernaite, whether he suppose it to be done properly one way or another. That is plain by these words of Augustin upon the 98. Psalm: 
Augustine in Psal. 98.  It seemed a hard matter to them that he said, Unless a man eat, etc. They took it fond, and imagined of it carnally, and thought that the Lord would have cut out pieces of his body, and have given to them. And a little after: That which I have spoken, understand ye spiritually. You shall not eat this body which you see, I have commended to you a certain sacrament, if it be spiritually understood, it will give you life. Here Augustine calleth carnal understanding foolishness, and appointeth spiritual understanding as necessary. And his meaning is not that this is only a carnal sense, if a man should imagine of the cut pieces of the Lords body, albeit he rehearseth but this one carnal way of understanding, but also of all other the like. For it is a likely matter, that even all the Capernaites did understand it carnally, and yet not all after one way. 
Cyprian.  For one manner is rehearsed of Cyprian writing thus: It seemed to them a horrible and wicked matter to feed of the flesh of man, imagining that this had been so spoken, as though they should have been taught to eat his flesh either sodden, or roasted, or cut in gobbets. 
Cyrillus.  And Cyrillus doth impute to them another kind of carnal understanding: for he saith, For after they had heard, Verily verily I say to you, unless ye eat the flesh, etc. they thought Christ had called them to the cruel manner of wild beasts, and that they were provoked to an appetite to eat the raw flesh of man, and drink blood, which things be horrible even to be heard. Wherefore if we believe that the flesh of Christ properly so called is there present, whether we think it raw, roast, or sodden, either whole or cut in gobbets, open or covert, the sense is utterly carnal, & the words be carnally understood. For it is not therefore to be thought a spiritual sense, because they say the flesh of Christ is present invisibly: For if their meaning be of the proper flesh, we cannot say that we eat him not therefore carnally, because we see him not. The blind see not those things which they eat, and men many times in pottage and broths eat eggs and flesh, which neither they see, nor otherwhile feel in taste. But none of all these is a spiritual sense, or doth contain a more high meaning, but as the words simply do signify, eat eggs and flesh, which Chrysostome termeth carnal understanding.  
Since therefore, all carnal meaning of the words set apart, a spiritual must be had and retained therein; we ought godly to seek, and reverently to search out, what manner of understanding that is, that hath been set forth and commended unto us; the which we also will endeavour ourselves to do, not departing from the footsteps of the very same Fathers. Even as there be two parts, whereof the sacrament doth consist, that is, the outward sign, and inward virtue: so is that spiritual sense which is here required, taken of both these parts. The carnal understanding doth follow the letter, as Nicodemus when he had heard, Unless a man be borne again of water and the spirit, etc. he asketh this question: How can a man be borne again? Can he return again into his mother's womb? The spiritual man departeth from the letter, and so are we borne again in Baptism. And the washing is of two sorts: Outward and inward; carnal and spiritual: the one according to the letter, and is made by water; the other doth shun the letter, and is performed in spirit. Either of them is said to be truly done, but after a divers manner. The first manner of speaking is proper, the other figurative; and the figure hath otherwhile relation to the outward similitude, otherwhile to the virtue inwardly hid. It is figuratively spoken, All flesh is grass. For the withering grass hath a certain similitude of a man that soon perisheth. Beware of the leaven of the pharisees. This is taken of the proper strength of leaven, which spreadeth the taste thereof throughout the whole lump; very like whereunto is the infection of ill doctrine. Now in this sacrament the Fathers of old time have noted two things, for either of the which it may well be called and accounted the body of Christ, but especially when it comprehendeth them both. For both because the Bread is a figure of the true body, it is justly called his body, and much more because it hath the lively force of the same joined thereto, but in especial, because it comprehendeth both. And that the figure of any thing hath by good reason the name of the same, and is called the thing itself, indeed Esay showeth where he saith, The people be verily hay, and He verily hath borne our iniquities. By a similitude is the people called hay, and the Lord upon the Cross had in him a similitude of a sinful man, although he himself was without sin: after which manner also Christ is said to be the true Vine. I am the true Vine, saith he: and other places which a man shall often find in the Scriptures. john Baptist spoke the truth when he said, Behold the Lamb of God. The Lord himself said the truth when he said of Nathaniel, Behold an Israelite in deed in whom is no deceit. That word Verily, or Indeed, is not to be referred to the outward, but to the inward circumcision: for the people of God also which is gathered of the Gentiles is now more truly called Israel, than the jew themselves, according to the saying of Paul, We be the Circumcision which worship God in spirit. And this, He is not a jew which in outward appearance is a jew, but he is a jew which is a jew in secret. Yet be we not for all that properly jews, but we are called so by a figure, & all these figurative speeches for the outward similitude of the things. Wherefore it ought to seem neither a new thing, nor yet a marvel, if the Lords bread be said to be verily the body, where it is a figure of the body. 
August. ad Bonif. epist. 23.   
Hereupon Augustin to Boniface in his 23. Epistle saith: For thus we speak oftentimes: As when Easter is at hand, we say, The Lords passion shall be to morrow, or the next day, where he suffered so many years ago, and that passion hath never been done but once. Likewise upon the very Easter day we say, To day the Lord rose again, when since he rose again so many years are past. Why is none so foolish to reprove us, and say we lie in so saying, But because we use to call these days according to the similitude of them in which these things were done? So that it is called the same day which is not the same, but by course of time is like unto it, and it is said to be done that day for the ministering of the Sacrament, which was not done that day but long ago. Was not Christ once offered in himself? yet in the Sacrament, not only in all the solemnities of Easter, but every day he is offered to the people. Again he lieth not, that being asked the question, doth answer that he is offered: for if the Sacraments should not have a certain likeness of those things whereof they be Sacraments, they should be no Sacraments at all: and of this likeness also many times they take the names of the things themselves. Even as therefore after a certain manner, the Sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ, and the Sacrament of the blood of Christ is the blood of Christ: so also the Sacrament of faith is faith. By this place of Augustin, and many other both of his & other fathers, we see that the figures and similitudes of things be often called by the name of the things themselves, and that this is one cause, though not the only, why this sacrament is called verily Christ's body.  
To this agree those things that we commonly find amongst old writers, who term this Sacrament otherwhile a figure, as Tertull. count Mart. lib. 4. 
Tertull.  This is my body, saith he, that is to say, a figure of my body. And Nazianzene, 
Nazianzene.  which said the old Passover was a figure of a figure. 
Augustin.  And Augustin, The body, saith he, of Christ is the truth, and a figure. Sometime a sign, as Augustin contra Adimant cap. 12. The Lord put no doubt to say, This is my body, when he gave the sign of his body. 
Chrisostome.  And Chrysostome upon the 26. of Matthew Homilia 83. For if Christ be not dead, whose figure & sign is this sacrifice? Finally, of some it is called a figure, and a badge, as of Origen and Chrysostom; of some other, an example, pattern, and image, as of Ambrose, Basill, and Origen: wherefore not without cause, it hath also the name of that thing, whose figure, badge, and pattern it is. Wherefore it is the more to be marveled what cometh into their minds, that cannot abide to have it called a figure, nor do acknowledge any figure in the words of the Supper, but do reproachfully call them that do acknowledge it, figure framers: whereas it is plain for all that, that all old writers did so call it, and that by those words of the Lords supper, the Lord did consecrate the Sacrament of his body: this being manifest also, that after the letter & proper manner of speech, the body of Christ signifieth one thing, and the Sacrament of his body another. And if it shall not be a figure, it shall neither be a sign nor a sacrament, And so such as be ready to call other men sacramentaries, they themselves do take away the sacraments altogether. Therefore let no man doubt but this sacrament is both a figure, and therefore doth also take the name of that thing whereof it is a figure.  
We said there was another thing which the ancient Fathers acknowledging in this sacrament, would have it verily to be the Lords body, and that is the virtue of the body itself that is of force, and giveth life, which virtue by grace and mystical blessing is joined with the Bread and Wine, and is called by sundry names, where the matter itself is all one. Of Augustin an intelligible, invisible & spiritual body: Of Hierom, divine & spiritual flesh: Of Irenaeus, a heavenly thing: Of Ambrose a spiritual food, and body of a divine spirit: Of other, some such like thing. And this also doth make much the more, that the sacrament is most worthy to have the name of the true body and blood, seeing not only outwardly it showeth forth a figure and image of it, but also inwardly it draweth with it a hid and secret natural property of the same body, that is to say, a virtue that giveth life: so that it cannot now be thought a vain figure, or the sign of a thing clean absent, but the very body of the Lord, divine indeed and spiritual, but present in grace, full of virtue, mighty in operation. And it happeneth often, that the names of the things themselves be given to their virtue and strength. We say leaven is in the whole lump, whereas a small quantity of leaven cannot spread so far abroad, but the strength and sharpness of the leaven. We say that the fire doth warm us, when the heat of the fire doth it, we being a good way off from the fire. Likewise that the Sun is present, doth lighten, burneth, nourisheth, when indeed the heat of the Sun doth it, and the Sun himself cannot go out of his sphere. So is a King said to be in all his realm, because of the power of his dominon. Neither doth the scripture want these examples: for we often meet with them. We will at this time be content with one of them, but very manifest. Christ spoke of john, saying, He is Helias, because he was endued with the virtue or power of Helias, the angel unto Zacharie witnessing the same and saying, He shall go before him in the spirit and power of Helias. Likewise therefore as john was Helias, because he had the spirit and power of Helias; So the Lords bread is the body of Christ, because it hath his grace and lively power joined therewithal.  
But that this is not a feigned or a lately sprung opinion, but was received, and allowed of the ancient writers, we will confirm it by their open testimonies, partly reciting some of the forenamed places, and partly adding other. Augustin upon john tract. 27. If therefore ye shall see the Son of man where he was before: What meaneth this? by this he answereth that which had troubled them: by this he openeth the cause why they were offended: by this plainly, if they would understand. For they thought that he would have given among them his body: but he said that he would ascend into heaven even whole. When ye shall see the son of man ascend where he was before, surely even then shall ye see, that he giveth not his body in such sort as ye imagine; surely even then shall ye understand that his grace is not consumed by biting, nor perisheth by eating. The same man out of the sermon of the words of the Lord, and it is rehearsed de consecrat. Dist. 2. The faithful do know how they do eat the flesh of Christ: Every man taketh his part, whereupon the parts be called the grace itself: by parts he is eaten, and he remaineth all whole: by parts he is eaten in the sacrament, and remaineth all whole in thy heart. The same man upon john, tract. 50. Thou hast Christ both at this present, and in time to come; presently by sign, presently by the sacrament of Baptism, presently by the meat and drink of the Altar. Thou hast Christ presently, but thou shalt have him alway: for when thou shalt go from hence, thou shalt come to him that said to the thief, This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise. And soon after: The poor shall ye alway have with you, but me shall ye not always have. Let good men receive this also, and not be troubled: for he spoke of the presence of his body. For according to his majesty, according to his providence, according to his unspeakable and invisible grace, that is fulfilled which he hath spoken, Behold I am with you daily, even unto the end of the world. But according to the flesh which the word took upon him, according to that that he was borne of the Virgin, according to that that he was taken of the jews, that he was fastened to the tree, that he was taken down from the Cross, that he was wrapped in linen clothes, that he was laid in the grave, that he appeared in his resurrection, ye shall not have him always with you. Why? Because according to the presence of his body he was conversant with his Disciples forty days, and they being in his company, and seeing him, and not following him, he ascended into heaven, and is not here: for he is there, he sitteth on the right hand of the Father. These be Augustins words. Whereas he said before that Christ is present with us by faith, and by the sacraments; afterward he said that he is present with us by Majesty, by unspeakable and invisible grace, and so that is fulfilled by him which he spoke, Behold I am with you to etc. But according to the proper presence of the flesh, that he is not here, which proper nature of the flesh also he hath dilated plentifully by a Periphrasis, to exclude altogether such a manner of presence, & to establish his presence in the sacraments by grace & power. Augustin teacheth us by the Lords words, that his true and proper body is ascended into heaven even whole, but the grace of that body we receive by the sacraments, which is neither consumed by biting, nor perished by eating.  

Idem in Psal. 65.  To this agreeth that the same Author writeth upon the 65. Psal. The murderers drank the same blood by grace, 
Idem in joan. tract. 26.  which they shed through madness. The same man upon the Gospel of john tract 26. Give ear to the Apostle: I would not (saith he) have you ignorant, brethren, that our Fathers were all under a cloud, and all did eat one manner spiritual food: Spiritual truly all one, but corporal, another: for they did eat Manna, we another thing, but the same spiritual meat that we do. And they all drank the same spiritual drink: yet they one thing, we another in outward appearance, which notwithstanding did signify all one in spiritual power. He calleth the sacrament spiritual food, for the spiritual power joined therewith, which power also was in the sacraments of the old testament, albeit our outward signs and theirs were diverse. The spiritual power was all one in both: That of a body to be borne at his time; This of a body already borne, suffered and raised again. So Manna was to them the body of Christ, as the sacrament of thanksgiving is now to us. For this spiritual power, Augustin also called it, as we said before, a spiritual, invisible, and intelligible body, whereby is signified the visible body of the Lord, and able to be felt. Hereunto also belongeth that saying of the same Author: The body of Christ is both truth, and a figure: Truth, while the body & blood of Christ, by the power of the holy Ghost, in power of the same is made of the substance of bread & wine: but a figure is that which is outwardly seen. The meaning of these words be, that the substance of bread & wine be made the body of Christ, for the power of his body given to them by the holy Ghost. The same man in Psalm 77. 
Idem in Psal. 77.  Their meat and drink therefore in mystery was all one with ours; yet in signification, not in outward appearance: for the self same Christ was figured to them in the rock, but to us he was made manifest in flesh. But he saith, That God was not well pleased with them all. In that he saith, not with all, there were some then there in whom God was pleased. And albeit the sacraments were common to all, yet his grace, which is the power of the sacraments, was not common to all. This place of Augustin if it be well weighed, doth much help to understand how Christ is present in the sacraments. For he joineth together these two, Signification and Grace, which he affirmeth to be the strength of the sacrament.  
To these agree those things which Ambrose writeth lib. 6. de Sacramentis: Afterward, 
Ambros. de Sacra. lib. 6.  when the Disciples of Christ could not away with his talk, but hearing that he would give them his flesh to eat, and his blood to drink, went their way; yet Peter alone said, Thou hast the words of eternal life, whither shall I go from thee? Lest therefore any more should so say, as though there should be a kind of loathsomeness of blood, but that the grace of redemption might remain, thou therefore takest the sacrament in a similitude, but thou dost obtain the grace and virtue of his true nature. Ambrose doth plainly teach, how it is true flesh. For he hath noted both: The figure, where he saith, thou takest it in a similitude; and the inward strength, because undoubtedly it giveth the grace and virtue of the true nature. Which place being diligently marked, the residue which be found of his, may easily be expounded. The same man in his book De ijs qui initiantur mysterijs: 
Idem de ijs qui initiantur mysterijs.  Christ is in that sacrament, because it is the body of Christ. Therefore it is not a corporal, but a spiritual food: whereupon the Apostle speaketh of the figure of it, that our fathers have eaten spiritual meat, & have drunk spiritual drink; For the body of God is a spiritual body. The body of Christ is the body of a divine spirit. By these words of Ambrose we be admonished, what manner of body this is, and why it is so called, because it hath the spiritual virtue of the true body. For these terms, Not a corporal but a spiritual food, and The body of the heavenly spirit, be most aptly applied to the grace and virtue of his true body. Which thing also Eusebius Emissenus confirmeth de consecrat. Dist. 2. 
Eusebius Emissenus.  Seeing he meant to take from our eyes the body taken of the virgin, and would place it above the stars; it was necessary, that in the day of his supper the sacrament of his body & blood should be consecrated unto us, to the end that that might be worshipped continually in mystery, which was once offered for a ransom for us; that seeing a daily and unceasing redemption did run for the salvation of all men, it might be a continual oblation of redemption, and that continual sacrifice might live in memory, and might ever be present in grace, a true, perfect, and only sacrifice, to be esteemed in faith, not to be judged by form nor outward sight, but by the inward affection. It is manifest by the words of Emissenus, that the body that was taken of the Virgin was taken from us, and was placed above the stars, and therefore that the sacrament of the same was necessarily ordained, that that true, perfect, and only sacrifice which was once offered upon the Cross, might live continually in memory, and might always be present in grace, that we should not cease to remember continually the benefit of our perpetual redemption, neither have any cause why we should require the presence of his flesh, seeing we feel the presence of the same by grace to be of no less efficacy, which is to be esteemed by faith, not to be judged in form, or outward appearance, but n the inward affection. 
Idem ibidem.  And that which he writeth immediately after in the same place: For the invisible priest doth turn with his word, by a secret power, the visible creatures into the substance of his body & blood, saying thus: Take ye, eat ye, this is my body etc. And lest we should imagine it a more gross substance, or that called again which he said before was taken away, he allegeth forthwith the example of Regeneration, saying, How great benefit therefore the force of the heavenly blessing doth work, and how it ought not to be a new and unpossible matter to thee, that earthly and mortal things be changed into the substance of Christ, ask thyself, that art new borne again in Christ. Lately thou wast far from life, a stranger from mercy, and being inwardly dead, banished from the way of health: and suddenly professing the Laws of Christ, and by wholesome mysteries renewed, didst pass into the body of the Church, not by sight, but by belief, and of the child of perdition wast thought worthy by a secret pureness to be made son of God by adoption, abiding still in thy visible measure, and invisibly made greater than thyself, without increase of quantity. For although thou wast the very self-same man before, yet by augmentation of Faith thou art become far another; in the outward man nothing is added, and all is changed in the inward man, and so man was made the Son of Christ, and Christ was form in the mind of man. Even as therefore the former baseness set apart, thou hast suddenly put on a new dignity; and as in that God hath healed those things that were amiss in thee, put away thy imperfections, wiped away thy spots, thy eyes are not trusted withal, but thy senses: so when thou goest up to the reverend Altar to be fed with the spiritual meat, behold in thy faith the holy Body and Blood of thy God, honour it, marvel at it, touch it with thy mind, take it in the hand of thy heart, and especially receive it whole, with the thirsty draft of the inward man.  
Eusebius Emissenus declareth by this similitude, what manner of change is made in the sacrament; how earthly things, namely bread and wine, be turned into the substance of Christ, and what manner of substance that is: surely like unto that change wherewith we be changed in Baptism, and such a substance as we put on in the washing of regeneration, when we pass into the body of the Church, where nothing is changed in our outward part, but all in our inward man, which is called a new man and a new creature: and for that cause doth Emissenus term this substance, A secret pureness, and new dignity. In like manner also he calleth the bread of the Lord, which hath gotten a new substance, that is to say, a secret power and new dignity, Spiritual food, which we behold with faith, touch in mind, take in the hands of our heart, and receive with the thirsty draft of our inward man. If it be well and diligently weighed, how Emissenus, Ambrose, and the other fathers have used the terms of Nature and Substance, it may easily be understood how vainly they trouble themselves, which appoint a carnal eating of the flesh, and do not apply the words to the matter entreated of. For that which we see done in other disciplines, that the words do change their significations, according to the matter that every kind of learning treateth of, as Genus, Species, Figura, and other such like, do signify one thing with the Grammarians, another with the Logicians, and another thing with other writers; the same also ought we to observe in divinity, when they entreat of the Sacraments. The fathers make mention of Nature and Substance, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, not as natural Philosophers speak, but men disputing of divine matters, do apply the term of Nature and Substance, to grace, virtue, and efficacy, forasmuch as the nature of the Sacrament so requireth.  
The like manner of speaking doth Chrysostome use when he saith: But that not only by love, 
Chrysostome.  but even in very deed, we should be turned into that flesh, that is wrought by the meat which he hath given us. We be turned in very deed into the flesh of Christ: but that conversion is spiritual, not carnal. And thus much by the way of the signification of the words. 
Epiphan. in Ancho.  Epiphanius in Anchorato: For we see that our Saviour took into his hands, as the Gospel containeth, that he rose in the Supper and took this, and when he had given thanks, he said, This is mine etc. And we see that it is not equal, nor like, neither to the image that is in the flesh, nor to his invisible Godhead, nor to the features of his members. For this is of a round shape, and without sense, as far as pertaineth to power; and therefore his will was to speak by grace, This is mine etc. and every man believeth his word: for he that doth not believe that he is true as he said, he is fallen from grace and health. But we believe that we have heard, that it is his: for we know that the Lord is all sense, all endued with sense, all God, all moving, all working, all light, all incomprehensible, but yet as one which hath given us this with grace. We admonished you before, that Epiphanius doth in this place go about to prove, that man being made after the Image of God, hath verily the Image of God, not according to the proper nature of divinity, but after grace, and useth the similitude taken of the sacrament of Thanksgiving, the which, according to the proper manner of a body, he denieth to be the body of Christ, since it hath neither the form of a true body, neither can feel, or move, and yet is believed by grace to be verily his body.  

Idem lib. 3. cont. Haer. To. 2.  He is of the same opinion Lib. 3. against Heresies To. 2. where he speaketh thus of the sacraments: Christ went down into the waters, rather giving then receiving, rather offering then needing, giving them light, making them mighty for a figure of those things that were to be wrought in them; whereby they that believe on him in truth, and have the faith of truth, might learn that he was verily made man, and was verily baptized, and that so by his ascension they also might come and receive the virtue of his coming down, and might be made lightsome by his giving light, that the saying of the Prophet may here be fulfilled, in the change of power that was given for salvation, the virtue I mean of the bread that was received from jerusalem, and of the strength of the water: so that here the virtue of the bread and strength of the water may be made of force in Christ, that the bread should not be the strength in us, but the virtue of that bread. And the meat surely is bread, but the virtue in it is it that quickeneth; And not that water alone should cleanse us, but that in the strength of water, by faith and efficacy, and hope, and perfection of mysteries, and calling upon the sanctification, might be wrought for us the perfection of salvation. This place doth make the other somewhat more plain. There he said, that the bread of the sacrament of Thanksgiving is the body by grace: here he attributeth virtue to the bread, as strength to the water in Baptism, often repeating this term Virtue, and confirming that this virtue and strength doth sanctify. The meat (saith he) is bread, but the virtue in it doth quicken: and he declareth that this virtue of the bread doth sanctify, and strength of the water is made by grace, not naming it with one word, but describing it more fully with many words, saying, That these things be done by faith, and hope, and the perfection of the mysteries, 
Idem in Anacephaleosi.  and calling upon of the sanctification for the perfection of salvation. The same Author rehearseth almost the same words in Anacephaleosis. 
Cyprian. de Coena Dom.   
The same was also Cyprians opinion. There is given (saith he) an immortal food differing from common meats, retaining the shape of bodily substance, but proving by invisible working, that the presence of a divine power is there. Thou hearest the presence of a divine power, thou hearest an invisible working (that is to say) the grace of God. Again, By the wont effect of things the weakness of our faith being aided, is taught by a sensible argument, that the effect of eternal life is in the visible sacraments. And again, Even as in the person of Christ humanity was seen, and divinity hid: so into the visible sacraments, unspeakably doth the divine substance power itself. Again, These words be spirit and life, neither doth the carnal sense pierce the understanding of so great a depth, unless faith be added. The bread is food, the blood is life, the flesh substance, the body the Church. A body, for the agreeing of members in one; bread, for the conformity of nourishment; blood, for the working of quickening; flesh, for the property of the humanity taken. In this place Cyprian witnesseth, that this sacrament is called flesh and blood, for the working of the quickening, and for the property of the humanity which Christ took (that is) the proper virtue thereof, namely spirit and life. And forthwith he addeth; Christ doth otherwhile call this sacrament his body, otherwhile flesh and blood, otherwhile bread, with the corporal nature whereof, according to these visible things, he hath communicate the portion of everlasting life. And again, The sacraments, as much as in them is, cannot be without their proper virtue, neither by any means doth the divine Majesty absent itself from the mysteries. These terms which Cyprian commonly useth, The divine power, The working of quickening, The effect of eternal life, The portion of life, The divine substance, The divine Majesty, what other thing do they set out to us, then that which Augustine said, that according to his Majesty, according to his unspeakable and invisible grace, Christ is with us even unto the end of the world, especially since that he shutteth out the carnal sense, and requireth a spiritual, as we have in another place more fully expounded?  
Neither thought Cyrillus any otherwise, writing in this sort to Calosyrius: 
Cyril. ad Calos.  For that we should not abhor flesh and blood being set upon the holy Altars, God favouring our frailty, putteth a force of life into those things that be offered, turning them into the truth of his proper flesh, that a body of life, as it were a certain quickening seed, may be found in us. That truth of body which Cyprian calleth The working of quickening, The effect of eternal life, The portion of life, the same doth Cyrillus term the force of life, a body of life, a quickening seed, meaning the spiritual power & grace, as he expoundeth himself upon john lib 4 ca 17. 
Idem in joan. lib. 4. cap. 17.  saying thus: Even as a little leaven (as Paul saith) doth sour the whole lump, so a little blessing of God doth draw the whole man into himself, and doth fill him with his grace, and in this sort doth Christ abide in us, and we in Christ. By this means he rejecteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say, the eating of man's flesh, and withdraweth the minds of the faithful from untrue meanings & worldly thoughts, and affirmeth to Euoptius, 
Idem ad Euopt.  that this mystery is received in an only pure and exquisite faith, as we have mentioned before. For it is necessary that such an eating be spiritual and made by grace.  
Athanasius was of this opinion. 
Athanas. de Pecca. in Spiri. Sanct.  In his book of the sin against the holy Ghost he writeth in this sort: For this cause made he mention of the Ascension of the Son of man into Heaven, that he might withdraw them from a corporal imagination, & that they might afterward learn, that the heavenly meat that cometh from above, and the spiritual food which he giveth, is called the flesh of Christ. For, the words that I have spoken to you (saith he) be Spirit and life. Which is as much as if he should say, The body which is showed and slain, shallbe given for the food of the world, that it may be spiritually distributed in every one, and be made a preservation for all to the resurrection of eternal life. For this cause (sayeth Athanasius) mention was made of the Ascension of the Son of man, that he might call us away from corporal imagining of his presence, and might afterwards learn that the grace, or spiritual power which he termeth the heavenly meat coming from above, and spiritual food, and affirmeth that it is spiritually distributed, is called the flesh of Christ.  
To these agreeth Chrysostome upon Matthew cap. 26. 
Chrysost. in Matth. cap. 26. Homil. 83.  Hom. 83. Will ye not see (saith he) with what a cheerfulness of mind Infants do snatch the breast, with what appressing do they fasten their lips to the nipples? Let us with no less desire come also to this Table, and spiritual nipple of this cup, yea rather with a greater coveting let us (like sucking babes) suck the grace of the Spirit: 
Idem ibidem.  Let us have one grief and heaviness of heart, if we be deprived of this spiritual food. The same man in the same Homily saith, That it is an insensible thing which is given us in this sacrament, but by things sensible, even as in Baptism. These be the words: Since therefore he saith, This is my body, let us have no doubt, but believe, and behold it with our understanding. For no sensible thing is delivered us from Christ, but by sensible things, and yet all things which he delivered be insensible. So also in Baptism, by water which is a sensible thing, that gift is granted: but that which is wrought in it, (namely regeneration and renewing) is a certain intelligible thing. For if thou hadst been without a body, he would have given thee the gifts barely without body: but because thy soul is joined to a body, in sensible, things to be understood are given thee. O how many do now a days say, I would I might see his form and shape, I would I might see his garments, also his shoes I would I might see. Thou dost therefore see him, touch him, eat him; thou desirest but to see his garments, but he giveth thee himself, not only that thou mayest see him, but mayest touch him and have him in thee. Chrysostom doth here command us to believe Christ, when he saith, This is my body, but to behold it with the eyes of understanding: For he saith, that neither any sensible or bodily thing is given in the sacraments, but by those things that be sensible, the very gifts to be understood, and incorporal are given us; and that not only in Baptism, but also in the Supper of the Lord. But if Christ do give us himself in his Supper, and yet no bodily thing is given, (for he saith that the gifts be incorporal) It is manifest that Chrysostome doth agree with the rest of the Fathers, that Christ is present in the use of the sacrament by grace and virtue of his body. And although this Author do use in some places devout Hyperbolical speeches disputing of this sacrament, which thing he hath also done here, when he affirmeth that Christ is set before us, not only to be seen, but also to be touched: yet an indifferent reader may easily perceive by this place and some other, 
Theodoritus Dial. 1.  what was his right opinion of this matter. The very same thing doth Theodoritus plainly teach in his first Dialogue, in this wise;  
Ortho. Our Saviour himself changed the names, and gave the name of the figure to his body, and the name of his body to the figure.  
Sodal. Thou sayest true: but I would learn the cause of this change of names.  
Ortho. The cause is plain to them that be instructed in the heavenly mysteries: for his will was, that they which partake the heavenly mysteries, should give no heed to the nature of the things which be seen, but by the change of names they should believe the alteration that is made by grace: for he which before had called his natural body meat and bread, and again calleth himself a Vine, the same hath honoured the figures which be seen, with the title of his body and blood, not altering the nature, but joining grace to the nature. Nothing can be spoken more plainly than Theodoritus doth here expound, how bread is the body of Christ, that is to say, because the nature of bread remaineth, and yet by grace is made his body, in that grace is joined to the nature of the bread. The same man Dial. 2. 
Idem Dial. 2.  For neither do the mystical signs, after the sanctification, depart from their proper nature, for they tarry in their former substance, shape and form, and may be seen and touched even as before: but they be understood to be the things that they be made, and so believed and worshipped, as though they were the same which they be believed. He said before, that the nature of the signs did remain, but that there was a change made by grace; that the nature was not changed, but that grace was joined. Here doth he plainly say, that the substance, fashion and form of the outward figures be the same after sanctification, that they were: but yet they be made other things to our understanding and faith, that is to say, by grace as he taught us before, singing all one song with Chrisostome, That no sensible or corporate thing is here given, but that they be things intelligible, and incorporate, which be given by grace and with virtue.  

Euthymius in Matth. cap. 64.  Hereunto appertain the words of Euthymius upon Matthew chap. 64. Therefore even as the old Testament had sacrifices and blood, so hath the new also, namely the body and blood of the Lord: for he said not, These be signs of my body, but, These be my body & my blood. Therefore we must not take heed to the nature of those things which be set before us, but to the virtue of them. For even as above nature, he deified the flesh that was taken of the Virgin, if it be lawful to use this phrase; so also doth he unspeakably change these things into his very lively body, and into his very precious blood, and into the grace of them. In that he saith, We may not regard the nature of those things that be set before us, he teacheth that the nature of the bread remaineth: and in that he addeth, But to the virtue of them, he showeth that by virtue they be the body of Christ, and not by any carnal means. Finally he addeth by interpretation, And into the grace of them, that he might exclude carnal imaginations. 
Leo & Synod. Ro. de con. dist. 2.  Leo and the Synod of Rome de consecrat. Dist. 2. do not differ from these: for thus be the words: Because in that mystical distribution of spiritual food, this is given, and this is received, that we receiving the virtue of this heavenly meat, may become his flesh which was made our flesh. You have almost the very words which Emissenus and Chrysostome used, as we rehearsed before, The distribution of the heavenly food, the virtue of the heavenly meat received, and that so we become his flesh. What other thing is this, then that we be joined with his flesh by grace and virtue? For how can we otherwise be channed into his flesh?  
To this tendeth also the saying of Hilary there brought in among other: 
Hilarius.  For the visible quantity is not to be esteemed in this mystery, but the virtue of the spiritual sacrament. Moreover Theophylactus, which is counted as it were a certain follower and interpreter of Chrysostome, doth affirm this most plainly, as we have above more fully set forth: out of the which I will repeat a few things here; the rest, Reader, thou mayst thyself take out of him. For both he taketh utterly away carnal imaginations, and affirmeth that the words of this mystery are spiritually to be understood, as those which have no things carnal, but bring everlasting life: and he showeth the manner and way how to understand them writing in this wise. And how (saith he) is not flesh seen? O man, 
Thoph. in Mar. cap. 14.  this is done for our infirmity: for insomuch as the bread and wine be of those things which we be acquainted withal, we abhor them not: but if we should see blood and flesh set before us, we could not abide it, but should abhor it. Therefore God of his mercy favouring our frailty, retaineth still the form of bread & wine, but he changeth the creatures into the power of flesh and blood. The same man in joan. cap 6. upon these words, 
Idem in joan. cap. 6.  This is a hard saying, who can away withal? etc. See their folly: for their duty had been to have asked & learned those things whereof they were ignorant: but they started back, and did construe nothing spiritually, but all things as they outwardly appeared: For when they heard of flesh, they thought he would compel them to be devourers of flesh and blood. But because we understand it spiritually, neither we be devourers of flesh, and yet we be sanctified by such meat. The opinion of Theophylactus is certain, that the faithful be not in the sacrament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, devourers of flesh, as I may so term it, as the letter properly soundeth: but that spiritual sense is required, that is, the form of bread & wine being retained, the virtue of his flesh and blood is received of the faithful, as it is manifest by his own words both here and those before rehearsed. 
Bertram.  Wherefore Bertram following the opinion of the old Fathers, hath thus written: For according to the substance of the creatures, they be the same also after, that they were before the consecration. They were before bread and wine, in which form being now consecrated they seem to remain. Therefore is there a thing changed inwardly by the mighty power of the holy Ghost, which faith beholdeth, and feedeth the soul, and ministereth substance of eternal life. Likewise: But now, because faith doth behold that whole, whatsoever that whole is, and the eye of the flesh perceiveth nothing, ye shall understand that those things which be seen, be the body and blood Christ, not in form but in strength. The same Bertram when he had rehearsed this saying of Isidore: Which things for that cause be called sacraments, because under the cover of corporal things, the divine power doth work more secret salvation, whereupon they be called sacraments also, of their secret and holy virtues, and in Greek it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it hath a secret & hid dispensation. And after he addeth of his own this saying: What be we taught thereby, but that the body & blood of the Lord be for that cause called Mysteries, because they have a secret and hid dispensation, that is, they be one thing which they outwardly betoken, and another which inwardly they invisibly work? Of this also they be called sacraments, because under the cover of corporal things, the divine power doth more secretly minister the salvation of those that receive them faithfully. By all these things which have hitherto been spoken it hath been made manifest, that the body and blood of Christ which in the Church be received by the mouth of the faithful, be figures, according to their visible form; but according to their invisible substance, that is, the power of the heavenly Word, they verily be the body and blood of Christ. Whereupon, according to the visible creature they feed the body, but according to the virtue of their better substance, they both feed and sanctify the minds of the faithful. These Bee bertram's words.  
Hitherto have we declared, what hath been the opinion of the old true divines of the Supper of the Lord, aswell Grecians as Latins, even unto bertram's time, who in the year after Christ's birth 840. was a famous man both in life & learning, noted by no man of Heresy, nor found fault with as having ill written, but greatly praised by the judgement of learned and good men. Wherefore that john, called Abbas Trithemius, 
Abbas Trithem.  doubted not to reckon him in the roll of divine & famous writers, and to praise him by this his testimony that followeth: Bertram an Elder and Monk very expert in holy Scripture, and notably well learned in humanity, quick of wit, eloquent of speech, no less famous in life then learning, writ many notable little treatises, whereof a few have come to my knowledge. He writ one book of Predestination, a commendable work: To Charles the king, brother to Lotharius the Emperor, of the body and blood of the Lord, another book. These things have I the more willingly rehearsed, to this intent, to reprove that railing boldness of tongue that some man hath used, who in a book newly set forth of this controversy, when he had nothing wherewith he could answer Bertram, thought it sufficient to despise this so famous a man, & to note him with the name of an heretic. Bertram, saith he, or what other soever was author of that work set forth in his name, was a crafty and an impudent Heretic. O shameless face and meet to be bridled! Barnard also which lived 300. year after Bertram, doth reject all carnal understanding in the words of the Lords Supper, and acknowledgeth only a spiritual; whose words, taken out of his Sermon in the day of the Lords Supper, I have here added: A sacrament is called a holy sign, or holy secret. Many things certainly be done only for themselves: some other also for other things betokened: and they be called signs, and be so. As for example of usual matters, a ring is given absolutely for a ring, & there is no signification: It is given to set a man in possession of any estate of inheritance, and it is a token: so that now he that receiveth it, may say, the ring is of small value, but it is the inheritance that I seek. After this sort therefore our Lord drawing near his Passion, was careful to set his disciples in possession of his grace, that his invisible grace might be given by some visible sign. To this intent he ordained the sacraments. 
Idem de S. Mart.  To this end is the partaking of the sacrament of Thanksgiving. The same man of S. Martin: Without fail even unto this day is the same flesh given us, but spiritually, not carnally: neither have we to find fault that there is denied to this our time, the appearing which was showed to the Fathers of the old Testament, or that presence of his flesh which was declared to the Apostles: For certainly, neither of both can be proved to be wanting to those that consider it faithfully. For the true substance of his flesh is also now present with us no doubt, but in a sacrament, and there be revelations, but yet in spirit and power: so that no part of grace can be proved to be wanting in the time of grace that now is. In conclusion, neither the eye hath seen, nor the ear hath heard, neither have they ascended into the heart of man, which God hath prepared for them that love him. Notwithstanding, he hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit. Neither marvel thou, that he gave carnal appearances unto them which looked for his carnal coming: for it is necessary that we have the grace so much more of force, & the revelation of more dignity, as those things undoubtedly be more excellent that we look for. It cannot be hid by these things that we have spoken, what was Bernard's opinion of the presence of the flesh in the Lord's Supper. First, following the old writers, he appointeth two parts of the sacrament: the outward sign, and the inward matter, which he defineth to be invisible grace. Again, the flesh is given to us, but spiritually, not carnally. Finally, that the very substance of his flesh is present, but yet as it is fit for the time of grace, in grace, spirit and power. As for that other Sermon of the Supper of the Lord, since it is not reckoned among Bernard's own works, albeit it be not contrary to these things that we have now spoken, (if so be the author be thought to agree with himself) yet since it is counted another man's work, & to have a false title, it ought not to take place in a controversy of so great a matter. Therefore in this third part of this work I meant to show, & I think I have so done, how Christ our Lord ought to be believed to be present in the administration of his holy Supper, according to common & agreeable interpretations of the ancient Fathers. First I taught, that a spiritual understanding of eating the flesh of Christ was required by them, and all carnal imagination abolished. Then, that it was no spiritual manner of understanding, if a man follow the letter, and proper signification of the words, such as they feigned which brought in Transubstantiation, or do appoint a gross presence of flesh with the bread, but that all such imaginations be carnal and human, & not spiritual. Lastly, what those Fathers deemed spiritual understanding, namely that the body of Christ in the sacrament of Thanksgiving, is given to the faithful by grace and effectual power, in a certain holy sign.  
But here a doubt riseth. If we believe that the grace and virtue of his true body be joined with the bread and wine, we shall seem to attribute too much to the Elements, & thereof should come a double evil: for so it shall come to pass, that the worshipping of the sacrament will follow, & the peril of idolatry; & evil men when they receive the sacrament should also eat his body, & be partakers of his grace. But that cannot be. He that eateth me (saith Christ) he shall live for me, and he that eateth this bread shall live for ever: which cannot be understood of ill men. As concerning the worshipping of the sacrament, I answer, that the ancient fathers received the sacrament of thanksgiving with reverence and great honour, & yet for all that, were safe from idolatry; which thing might also happen to us, if the ancient discipline were revoked, 
August. in Psal. 98.  & the manner of Catechism restored. For Augustin doth evidently teach in Psal. 98. when he saith, That the ancient fathers worshipped when they did receive. He gave you his very flesh to be eaten for salvation: but none eateth that flesh unless he have first worshipped. And we do not only not offend in worshipping, but we offend in not worshipping. The same man in Sent. Prosperi: 
Idem in Sent. Prosp.  But we in the form of bread and wine which we see, do honour invisible things, namely flesh and blood. Likewise Eusebius Emissenus: 
Euseb. Emiss.  When thou goest up to the holy Altar to be fed with the spiritual food, behold in thy faith the holy body and blood of thy God, honour it, esteem it greatly. And Chrysostome 1 Cor. 10. Homilia 24: 
Chrysost. 1. Cor. 10. Hom. 24.  For I will show thee that on earth, which is worthy of greatest honour. For even as in King's palaces, not the walls, not the golden roof, but the body of a King sitting in his throne, is the excellentest of all: so is also in heaven, the body of the king, which is now set before thee to be seen in earth: I show thee neither Angels, nor Archangels, nor the high heavens, but the Lord of all them. Ambrose upon the 1. Cor. 11. 
Ambros. 1. Cor. 11.  The sacrament of thanksgiving is a spiritual medicine, which being tasted with reverence doth purify a devout mind. And by and by he teacheth, that we must come with a devout mind, and with fear to the holy Communion, that the mind may know, that it oweth a reverence to him whose body it cometh to receive. Theodorit also dial. 2. 
Theodoritus Dial. 2.  For neither do the mystical signs after the sanctification depart from their proper nature; for they remain in their former substance, shape & fashion, and may be both seen and touched even as before: but the things which they be made, be understood, and believed, & worshipped, as if they were the self things which they be believed.  
By this and other places, it is easy to perceive, with what honour, & with what reverence the ancient fathers came to the holy Communion. Neither is it any marvel, since they believed that they received in that bread, the true nature, and virtue of our Lords true body, and were far off from idolatry, being instructed and diligently taught, not to worship the outward sign, but the inward virtue. Which thing Augustin declareth by these words, 
August. de doct. Christ. lib. 3. cap. 9  De doctrina Christiana lib. 3. cap. 9 For he serveth under a sign, which worketh or reverenceth any thing that signifieth, not knowing what it signifieth: but he that either worketh or reverenceth a profitable sign ordained of God, whose force and signification he understandeth, doth not honour this that is seen and passeth away, but rather that whereunto all such things be referred. And soon after: But in this time, after that by the resurrection of our Lord jesus Christ the most manifest judgement of our liberty appeared, we have not been laden with the weighty operation of those signs which we now understand: but the Lord himself, & the doctrine of the Apostles hath delivered unto us a few in steed of many, and those very easy to be done, & most pure to be kept; namely the sacrament of Baptism, and the celebration of the body & blood of our Lord, which every man when he receiveth, being instructed, he knoweth whereto they be applied, so that he doth reverence them not with a carnal servitude, but rather with a spiritual liberty. Here we see with what learning the Christian men in time past were seasoned, before they should come to the use of the sacraments; and how, albeit they honoured or worshipped aswell in Baptism as in the celebration of the Supper, yet that was done without peril or offence. Peril, as here it is evident, when as they had no respect to that which is seen and doth decay, but to the virtue and signification thereof: Offence, because they had a conscience in time past, I will not say to receive the sacraments before Infidels, and such as were ignorant of the mysteries, but not so much as to talk of so secret matters before them. Of the which thing there be many testimonies: but we will for this time be content with this one, taken out of the 2. Dial. of Theodoritus. For Orthodoxus, 
Dial. 2. Theod.  being asked how he before the consecration called that which was offered by the Priest, answered, We must not speak frankly: for it is likely that there be some here present which be not instructed in the mysteries of Christ. Eran. Answer me therefore softly. By this place it is evident, how warily, and soberly they in time past spoke of the mysteries. And this is worth the labour to note, That the ancient writers, when they spoke of the sacraments, did use divers terms of honouring, reverencing, or worshipping: By the which notwithstanding either they meant to signify some other honour and reverence meet for holy matters, then that which is commanded of God when he saith, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. So that worshipping may be defined to be of two sorts: the one, wherewith we worship God himself: The other, wherewith we worship the prescribed signs & divine mysteries, according to that saying, Worship ye his footstool: which thing most men understand to be spoken of the ark of covenant: other interpret it to be of the humanity of Christ. Or admit that there is one manner of worshipping in both places, we might say, that the flesh of Christ is to be worshipped, though it be a creature, for the divinity joined therewith; that the ark of covenant was to be worshipped, for the presence of the divine majesty, which God himself promised should be there present. After the which sort also we may worship the sacrament of Thanksgiving for the unspeakable and invisible grace of Christ joined therewith, as Augustin saith, not honouring that which is seen and passeth away, but that which is believed and understood. This also is worthy to be marked, that the worship in old time, was not done by the idle lookers on, but by them which did receive the mysteries, and were made partakers of their grace. For he that worshippeth & receiveth, to him it is the body of Christ; not to him that worshippeth & receiveth not. For to this intent was that meat ordained, that we worshipping should eat, and not that we should worship it when others eat. Thus much be said concerning the worshipping. But in that it is denied that evil men can eat the body of Christ, which thing should necessarily be done, if the spiritual virtue & grace be joined with the bread; it may be answered, That there is a distinction to be used. For if we have regard to the very nature of the sacrament, the divine power can by no means be absent from the sign, in that it is a sacrament, & serveth to that use: but if we regard the manners & inclination of the receiver, it is not life & grace to him, which otherwise of the own nature is both, because the wickedness of evil men cannot be partaker of so great a goodness, & suffereth it not to bring forth fruit, but contrariwise to them is it death & damnation. For even as divers kinds of meats be of their own nature wholesome, but if they be put into diseased bodies, they increase the evil, and oftentimes shorten their time, not through their nature, but through the fault of the receiver: so also cometh it to pass in the sacrament, whose proper virtue is always present till it hath performed the office thereof, although an evil man when he receiveth it, cannot be partaker of so great goodness, nor perceive any fruit thereof.  
Cyprian de Coena Domini confirmeth the very same. 
Cyprian. de Coena Dom.  The sacraments truly, saith he, as much as in them is, cannot be without their proper virtue, neither by any means doth the divine Majesty absent itself from the mysteries. But albeit the sacraments permit themselves to be received or touched of unworthy persons; yet for all that they cannot be partakers of the Spirit, whose infidelity or unworthiness doth resist to so great an holiness. And therefore these gifts to some be a savour of life to life, and to some a savour of death unto death: For it is altogether right, that the despisers of grace be deprived of so great a benefit, that the purity of so great grace should have no dwelling in the unworthy. Augustin against the letters of Petiliane lib. 2. 
August. count literas Petill. lib. 2. cap. 47.  ca 47. Therefore remember that the manners of ill men do nothing hurt the sacraments of God, to make that either they be not sacraments at all, or be less holy: but the hurt is to the ill men themselves, that they should have them for a testimony of damnation, and not for a help to salvation. The same man in his fift book of Baptism Contra Donatistas' cap. 8. 
Idem de Bapt. lib. 5.  For even as judas to whom the Lord gave a sop, made place for the devil in himself, not by receiving that which was evil, but by ill receiving it; So every man that receiveth unworthily the sacrament of the Lord, maketh it not evil because he is evil, or that he receive nothing, because he receiveth it not to his salvation. For it was the body of the Lord, & the blood of the Lord also to them, to whom the Apostle said, He that eateth unworthily, 
Idem contra Crescen. lib. 1. cap. 25.  eateth & drinketh his own judgement. The same man contra Crescen. lib. 1. cap. 25. Albeit the Lord himself say, Unless a man eat my flesh, and drink my blood, he shall have no life in him, doth not the same Apostle teach, that this becometh destruction to them that use it ill? For he saith, He that eateth the bread, and drinketh of the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Behold, how divine and holy mysteries do hurt those that use them ill. Why not Baptism in like manner? By these & many other places it is evident, that the sacrament of Thanksgiving, as much as pertaineth to the nature of the sacrament, is verily the body and blood of Christ, and is verily a divine and holy thing, albeit it be received of the unworthy: where notwithstanding they be not made partakers of the grace, & holiness thereof, but they draw thereout death and damnation. For neither doth so great a goodness remain in them, or enter into them, to the intent to remain, but to condemn them. Neither doth the touching of the Lords body any more profit them, than it did the jews that crucified Christ, to touch his body that was hallowed, & always endued with his grace. Wherefore let this be certain, that the sacraments, as long as they be sacraments, do retain their virtue, neither can they be separated from it. For they always consist of their parts, heavenly and earthly, visible and invisible, inward & outward, whether good men or evil, worthy or unworthy receive them. And also that change of signs and passage of elements into the inward substance, which we often find in the old writers, can by no means stand, if we separate the virtue from the sign, or would have the one received apart from the other. But this is so to be understood, as long as the sign serveth to that use, and is applied to that end for the which it was ordained, according to God's word. For if we apply it to other uses, and abuse it contrary to Christ's institution; either it is no sacrament at all, or else it ceaseth from being a sacrament. Therefore they commit no light offence, which do not direct the signs of bread and wine to that end which Christ ordained them for, but do consecrat them for a pomp, far off from God's word, and yet notwithstanding do thrust them to the simple people in stead of sacraments. For although they be ministered orderly, and according to their lawful use; yet when that use and doing of their proper office doth cease, they retain no longer neither the name, nor virtue of sacraments, which thing the old custom of the church doth prove. For when the Communion was ended, men did eat their common supper, and spent together in the Church those things that remained of the sacraments, as Hierom doth witness upon the 1. Cor. cap. 11. 
Hlerom in 1. Cor. cap. 11.  And partly those things that remained unspent, were straightway cast in the fire, 
Hesych. in Levi. lib. 2. cap. 8.  as Hesychius teacheth In Leuit. lib. 2. cap. 8. whereof neither was lawful to be done, unless they had ceased to be sacraments. Wherefore, neither is that doubt of them that receive it unworthily, of any force to subvert this opinion which we have set forth, but that nevertheless remaineth safe, and unhurt, and worthily to be embraced of men desirous of truth and concord. First, because the dignity & due honour of the sacraments is not hurt, but remaineth whole and unblemished, whilst we confess both the truth of his body, and the nature and substance of the same, to be received of the faithful together with outward signs, which thing the ancient Fathers do testify to be done. Again if we receive that distinction which the same Fathers diligently observed, between that proper assumpt body of the Lord, or that he took upon him, and this figurative body, or sacrament of his body, there is no offence committed against the rule of our faith, which by no means is to be wronged, since that we attribute to either body their due. For we say, that his proper and assumpt body is in a place, and limited within the space of a place, for the manner of his true body, as Augustine saith: As the true manner of human nature requireth, and the true believing fathers against Martion, Eutyches, and other heretics do stoutly affirm; Which thing they that deny, and appoint that body to be every where, do by that means deny the true nature of his body, and fall into the errors and heresies of them. And yet there is no let, but the truth of his mystical body, because it is a spiritual and divine matter, is as largely spread & present, as the celebration of the sacrament is spread, according to the opinion of the same true believing Fathers. Furthermore, no absurdities follow this doctrine, as very many do ensue both that gross Transubstantiation, & also that carnal coupling with the bread; namely, that mice, beasts, desperate men do gnaw, chew, or swallow that precious body of the Lord which was taken of the Virgin, whereas it is lawful for no man to eat of that body, no not for a godly man, as Hierom witnesseth. Beside, this is no doubtful doctrine, nor hard to be perceived, but open, and very clear, as far as the nature of the mysteries do permit. And albeit this controversy doth otherwise seem to many, intricate, and like a maze; this exposition is easy, no darkness in it, no words of the Scriptures, nor testimony of the Fathers be against it, but all they do agree & friendly accord. Add hereunto, that this manner of handling this matter, is old, & constantly delivered to us from the ancient Fathers, not new sprung, nor at this time first invented, as the matter itself declareth; & therefore it maketh them more friendly to obtain the peace and tranquillity of the Church, since that all men may understand that it is no new opinion, made out of our own heads, but the ancient opinion of the true believing Fathers called to memory again: especially since it is of such sort as can justly offend no part, but move & exhort all men to be content. There be some that take in ill part, that the sacrament of Thanksgiving is called a sign or figure, as though it were a bare sign or vain figure. Here they hear that it is not only a sign, but the thing itself, not only a figure, but also the truth. Not being contented herewith, they urge the Fathers, they require the nature of his body in the sacrament. Here also they do hear, that the presence of his nature is taught, and that there is a natural participation. Yet they go further, and command us to confess a substance of his body. They see also that the substance is by us affirmed to be present, and that our communion with Christ naturally and (if I may so say) substantially, is here set out: but yet that these terms ought to be understood, not as Philosophers, but as Divines use to speak. Neither would we strive so much about that term of Transubstantiation, albeit it be barbarous & nothing necessary, if so be they would interpret it to be such a change of substance as the ancient Fathers acknowledged, that is to say, a sacramental alteration; such also as is made in a creature that is regenerate by Baptism, which is made a new man, and a new creature; and such also as is made when we be turned into the flesh of Christ, which examples the ancient Fathers used. We do not so much eschew the terms themselves, although there is also respect to be had of them; but we require the signification of them, which the Fathers themselves taught and earnestly demand; And only that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say, the devouring of flesh, which by no means they allow, but condemn as foolish and wicked, we reject, as far off from the Scriptures, and far from the interpretation of the Fathers, and finally directly striving with the true faith: and we judge, that a spiritual meaning is necessary in the eating of this flesh, following therein Christ himself the Author, and the consent of the best allowed interpreters that we have. Surely it is a marvelous matter to see, how in other controversies we be Aristotle men, and oftentimes take hold of distinctions more curious than necessary: and in this disputation of Sacraments we admit no difference, we allow no equivocation, although both the nature of the thing requireth it, and the authority of the old writers do as it were point us to it with a finger; and seeing that neither the Scriptures, nor the holy Fathers do speak of the divine mysteries after a natural sort, but after an high and divine manner, as becometh men that treat of divine matters, and inspired with God, comparing spiritual things with spiritual things. Again, if there be any man that thinketh that there is here too much attributed to the elements, it is not so: but their due reverence is given to the outward signs for the holy use of them. But the inward power which cometh by the force of the word of God, is only that which the mind of the faithful doth respect, which sanctifieth the body and the mind of him that useth it. But if there be any that require a miracle, (for some of the Fathers called the sacrament of Thanksgiving, a notable miracle) surely it is no less to be marveled at, that the bread and wine being earthly creatures, and ordained to feed the body only, do possess that force in them, and so mighty an efficacy by the virtue of the mystical benediction, that they cleanse, nourish, sanctify, and prepare to immortality both minds and bodies, so that they make us members of Christ, and one body with him. Yea this miracle hath more weight, more dignity, greater profit, and more agreeable to the manner of the mysteries, than any gross Transubstantiation, or natural and human flesh-eating can comprehend. Wherefore, the seeds of contention and discord be now taken away, and there remaineth no cause why, but the Churches of Christ, especially those that profess the desire of the Gospel, may agree in one with quiet minds and coupled affections, which now disagree among themselves with bitter hatred.  
These things, my brethren, I have thought meet to gather together touching this controversy full of thorns, as it seemed to many: surely at the first not with this intent to set it abroad in print, but to have some certainty whereto I may lean, in a matter so full of controversy, and yield a reason of my opinion. But now, that me thinketh I have taken some fruit of this work, whatever it be, I am not unwilling if it may bring any profit to others also. This I know in my own conscience, that I have sought for no other thing in this Treaty, but godly and modestly to profit myself and others.  
I beseech the GOD and Father of our Lord JESUS CHRIST to remove from the minds of Pastors, Doctors and Ministers of the Church, the greatest confusion of the Church, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, desire to strive and rule, and dispose their minds to peace and brotherly concord in Christ, that they may not abuse this notable bond of love, delivered and commended by the Lord himself to his Church, wresting it to the nourishing of contentions and factions: And vouchsafe to inspire with his Spirit the hearts of Princes and Magistrates, that they may above all things regard what doth most become the rule committed to their charge, and advance God's glory, and not respect what may grow to their coffers by this troublesome time, with the cruel vexation of their Subjects, and common calamity of their Commonweals.