YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

A
DEFENCE
, or THE
TRUE AND CATHOLICK DOCTRINE
OF THE
SACRAMENT OF THE BODY AND BLOOD
OF OUR SAVIOUR CHRIST :
WITH A
CONFUTATION OF SUNDRY ERRORS CONCERNING THE SAME.
BY THE
MOST REV. THOMAS CRANMER,
LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY.

TO WHICH IS PREFIXED
AN INTRODUCTION, HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL, IN ILLUSTRATION
OF THE WORK; AND IN VINDICATION OF THE CHARACTER
OF THE AUTHOR, AND THEREWITH OF
THE REFORMATION IN ENGLAND,
AGAINST SOME OF THE ALLEGATIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN RECENTLY MADE BY
the Rey. Db- LINGARD, the Uev. Dk- MILNER,
and CHARLES BUTLER, Esq.

BY THE REV. HENRY JOHN TODD, M.A. F.S.A.
CHAPLAIN IN ORDINARY TO HIS MAJESTY, AND RECTOR OP 8ETTRIN0T0N, YORKSHIRE.

LONDON:
SOLD BY C. AND J. RIVINGTON ; PAYNE AND FOSS ; LONGMAN AND
CO. ; G. B. WHITTAKER -, CADELL ; R. H. EVANS ; AND BALDWIN,
CRADOCK AND JOY ; AND BY J. AND G. TODD ; WOLSTENHOLME ;
AND BARCLAY; YORK.

1825.

LONDON:
printed by r. gilbert,
st. John's square.

PREFACE.

Where doctrine is true, it will not be over
thrown by railing accusation against the teaph-
ers of it, nor even by an exposure of their infir-,
mities or sins. The Reformation in England
is founded upon doctrines which are true. Of
these Archbishop Cranmer considered his doc--
trine of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in
contradistinction to what is maintained upon
this subject by the Church of Rome, as the
chief; and he emphatically pronounces it "the
true doctrine." Yet as endeavours have been
made to weaken this doctrine, and calumnies
against the teacher of it have been rendered subr
servient to these endeavours; any minister of
the Reformed Church of England, however hum
ble may be his power, is truly exercising his
duty, while, in calling the attention of the pub?
lick to the great doctrine -which chiefly distinr
guishes the Church of England from the Church
a 2

IV PREFACE.,
of Rome, he rescues also from reproach, where
it is not deserved, the character of the great
prelate who taught it. Such is the design of
the following pages ; in which the assertions of
eminent scholars, who are opposed to the Refor
mation and its children, are sometimes challeng
ed merely by the exercise, which seeks no lofty
name, of referring to authorities. Ingenuity in
selection, perspicuity of statement, and elegance
of style, may lead us indeed delightfully along
through a narrative, or a volume of history;
but elegance of style, perspicuity of statement,
and ingenuity in selection, without accuracy,
change at once the captivating light of any
point into a mournful gloom.
I have presumed, in citing the Strictures
upon Southey's Book of the Church by J. Mer
lin, to name Dr. Milner as the author; Mr.
Butler, in his Book of the Roman Catholic
Church, having expressly stated, and others of
the Romish communion having asserted, (while
the internal evidence in the Strictures also leads
to the same conclusion,) this learned Ro
manist as such. Yet I had rather that the in-

PREFACE.

formation was unauthorized ; as it is pitiable to
find, in two editions of the Strictures, that the
dishonesty of Bonner, in fabricating a speech
for Cranmer, (the " grievous lie," as Strype in
dignantly calls it, Eccl. Mem. iii. 238,) and
publishing it as if pronounced by the Arch
bishop, is stated as existing in Strype's Eccle
siastical Memorials "from the Lambeth Records f
when not a word is extant, or known to have
been extant, in any record at Lambeth, relating
to this matter ; and, as I have said, (Introduct.
p. cix,) no reference is made to such records
by Strype. Let it never more be supposed, by
the reference of Dr. Milner, that the Lambeth
Records sustain the wicked fabrication of Bon

ner.

"With his usual kindness, and condescension,
his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury has
¦allowed me, upon the present occasion, to exa
mine the Records in Lambeth Library. And for
admission to the State-Paper Office, and the exa
mination of some documents there preserved
respecting Cranmer, I have been greatly in
debted to the very liberal permission of the

Vi PREFACE.
Right Honourable Mr. Secretary Peel ;. and to
the obliging assistance of Robert Lemon, Esq. der
puty-keeper of the Records in that Office. Nor
may I omit this opportunity of saying, that to
the care and zeal of Mr. Lemon the country
is indebted for a most exact arrangement of
innumerable historical papers in the Office,
for the discovery of several hitherto unknown,
¦and for his interesting remarks upon many of
them. I have also gratefiilly profited by the
inspection of the Registers of the Archbishops
and of tbe Dean and Chapter of York ; and m
the Library ef "the latter I have discovered an
unknown Manuscript of the celebrated Sir John
Harrington, from which I have gathered some
important circumstances respecting the persecu
tion of the Protestants in the reign of Mary.
In this Manuscript there are also several curious
illustrations of the reign of Elizabeth ; some of
which, as well as other original materials, I hope
to copy, if health and opportunity favour me,
into a vindication of the history of that time
against some recent misrepresentations.

TABLE OE CONTENTS

OF THE

INTRODUCTION.

PAGE
Account of Archbishop
Cranmer's book i, ii, iii, xiii.
The connection of this
book with our (Church
and State - - i, ii.
Protestant Constitution
described - - iii.
The Reformation worth
maintaining * - * iii.
The Archbishop's confer
ence with Ridley upon
the subject of his book iv, v.
Character of Fox's Acts
and Monuments • iv.
Dr. Milner's censure of
Fox - - - v.
Bertram's book upon the
Sacrament of the Lord's
Supper . -, - v, vii.
The Archbishop's zeal for
publishing books in the
national language, in

PAGE
order to promote the
Reformation - - viii.-
Original letter of theArch-
bishop on the preceding
subject - - ix.
Metrical psalmody - x*
The Archbishop's book
attacked by Bp. Gar
diner and Dr. Smith xi, xiv.
The Archbishop's fine de
fence of his book and
of himself - - xii.
The Archbishop not a Lu
theran or a Zuinglian
xii, Ixxi, lxxii.
Process against the Arch
bishop fjrstprinted from
a .manuscript in the
Lambeth Library - xiv.
The Archbishop's letter
to King Edward VI. xvi.
Manuscript remains of the

VIII

CONTENTS.

PAGE
Archbishop in the State
Paper Office - xix, xx.
The Fathers and School
men appealed to by the
Archbishop - xx.
The study of them recom
mended, together with
other good writers xxi, xxii.
The Fathers, and Bibles,
the strongest arguments *
against Popery - xxii.
The sense of the Church
of England as to the
Real Presence xxii, xxiii.
The Archbishop's, and
Ridley's, and Hooper's,
assertions upon this
subject - xxiii, xxiv.
Their martyrdom in de
fence of those asser
tions - - xxiv.
Mr. Butler unfairly cites
Bp. Jeremy Taylor on
the subject of Transub-
stantiation and the Mass
xxiv, xxv.
Bp. Jeremy Taylor pro
nounces both Transub-
stantiation and theMass
as idolatrous - xxv.
Mr. Butler cites Bp. Gun
ning, but conceals what
should have been added
respecting him - xxvi.
Mr. Butler's remarks on

PAGE
the Article of our
Church respecting
Transubstantiation xxvii.
Answered - ' - xxix.
The Archbishop's senti
ments upon universal
redemption and rege
neration in baptism xxx, xxxi.
The character of the Arch
bishop - xxxi, lxi, cxiii.
The slander upon the me
mory of Anne Boleyn
considered - xxxii, et seq.
Sanders's, and Bayly's,
and Phillips's notices
of it - - xxxii.
Mr. Baddeley's notice of
the same, with his rail
ing against Cranmer xxxii.
Dr. Lingard's and Mr.
Butler's notices of Anne
Boleyn - - xxxiii.
Mr. Southey's notice of
her story as blackened
by the Romanists xxxiii.
Rastal's pretended book,
upon which the" calum
ny against Anne Bo
leyn is founded, con
sidered -" - xxxiv.
Character of Sanders xxxv,
xxxvi.
Dr. Lingard's account of

CONTENTS.

IX

PAGE
the elevation of the
Archbishop to the see
of Canterbury consi
dered - xxxvi, et seq.
Dr. Lingard's remarks
upon the Archbishop's
protestation against the
pope, together with
Mr. Butler's, answered,
• xxxix, xl, xii.
The authority of the
Archbishop's register
as to this point - xii.
Misrepresentation of San- •
ders and Phillips on the
subject - xii, et seq.
The Archbishop's own as
sertion as to this pro
test - ¦ - xliii.
Cardinal Pole's assertions
not always to be relied
upon - - xiv.
Dr. Lingard's account of
the Archbishop's con
duct, as to the divorce
of queen Catherine,
considered - xiv. et seq.
Original letter of the
Archbishop on the sub
ject - - xlvi.
Dr. Lingard and Dr. Mil-
ner ought to have seen
this letter - xlvi, xlix.
Dr. Lingard's account of

PAGE
king Henry's union
with Anne Boleyn - 1.
Bishop Gardiner's opinion
upon it the same as the
Archbishop's - 1, li, Hi.
Dr. Lingard's description
of- the marriage of the
King and Anne Boleyn
in a garret, - considered lv.
Dr Milner's observation
on the marriage, cor
rected - lvi.
The Archbishop's notice
of falsehoods, reported
of him, omitted by Dr.
Lingard in his citation
of his- Grace's letter - lvi.
Dr, Lingard's statement
as to the king's supre
macy - - lvi, Ivii.
Dr. -Lingard's notice of
the Archbishop upon
this occasion, but his
concealment of bishop
Gardiner's having writ
ten a violent book
against the pope's su
premacy - lvii.
Dr. Lingard's reflection
upon the learning or
fanaticism of the Arch- ,
bishop refuted lxi. et seq.
The title of Antichrist
applied to the pope Ixii, lxiii.

X

CONTENTS',

PAGE
Curious ' application of
¦ '¦ it -in this view by
the Romanists them
selves- - - lxiii.
•Dr. Lingard's charge
against the Archbishop,
as to the trial and pu
nishment of Lambert,
. answered - lxiv, et seq.
Dr. Milner and Mr. But
ler agree with.Dr. Lin-
..' gard, and also as to the
case «f Anne Askew lxiv, .et seq.
The. Archbishop's aver
sion to cruelty . - Ixv.
.Dr. -Lingard refers to re
cantations of Anne As
kew, which were denied :
.'. by herself- - » Lsvi.'
Bishop Gardiner the fore
most in the proceedings
both against Askew
and Lambert - Ixvii.
Dr. Milner's remark up
on the Archbishop as a
Lutheran, or Zuinglian,
¦ answered - - lxxi.
Original letter of the
Archbishop in 1540,
shewing his aversion to
the Church of Rome lxxiii.
The Archbishop's oppo
sition to the Act ofthe
Six Articles lxxvi, et seq.

PAGE
Dr. Lingard's citation of
a letter upon this sub-
ject, considered - lxxvii.
Mr. Butler's -expostula
tion with Mr. Southey
upon this subject con
sidered - lxxix, lxxx.
Dr. Lingard's mis-state
ment as to the Arch
bishop in the discussion
of this point - lxxxi.
The Archbishop's spirit
in the cause of religion lxxxi.
Dr. Lingard's charge
against the Archbishop
in the case of Joan
Bocher, answered lxxxiii.
Dr. Lingard's notice of
the case of Van Parris .-
lxxxiv.
Phillips's mis-statement
of the cases both of •
Van Parris, and of Bo
cher - lxxiii, lxxxv.
Dr. Milner alleges tie
cruelty of the Archbi
shop, to both by a re
ference to Burnet lxxxv.
The passage, referred to
in Burnet, explained lxxxv, et seq.
Dr. Lingard's account of
the' Archbishop's -beha
viour, upon the acces
sion of Mary to the

CONTENTS 2

Xi

throhe, considered Ixxxvii, et seq.
Dr. Thomden, one of the
dissembling monks, who
were enemies to the
Archbishop1 Ixxxix, et Seq.
Conspiracy of the dissem
bling monks of T3hrist
Chureh, Canterbury,
- against the Archbishop xc.
Character of severalmem-
bers of theArchbishop's
cathedral * - xci.
Dr. Lingard's partiality to
the bishops Gardiner
and- Bonner - xci, xcii.
Sir JohnHarington's raa-
• nuscript narrative- of ¦
Bp. Gardiner's cruelty xcii, et seq.
His description of Bp.
Gardiner and Bp. Bon
ner - - xciv, xcv,
Cardinal Pole's character xcv, xcvi.
Dr. Lingard's suggestions
that Bonner and Gar
diner were not quite so
guilty, as they have
been represented - xcvii
Dr. Lingard's mistaken
relation of the Protes
tants who were burned
in the reign of Mary xcvii

Bp. Bonner's character xcviii.
Dr. Lingard's relation of
the code of ecclesiasti
cal laws, compiled by .
the Archbishop and his •
associates .¦ • xcix, etseq.
The Reformatio Legum
Ecclesiasticarum 'ex
plained - xcix, et seq.
Dr. Lingard's insinuation '
as -to the Archbishop's
and his associates' in
tention in these laws - c.
Mr. Butler's belief of the
wish of the Archbishop
arid his associates - c.
The 'Archbishop and his -
• associates defended' -* ci,
The cruel persecution by
Mary and her agents ci, cii.
Dr. Lingard's exhibition
ofthe Archbishop in his
last, days - - cii.
Dr. Lingard mistakenly
adds a seventh recanta
tion to those which the
Archbishop is said to
. have made - - ciii.
Strype's account ofthe six
recantations - ciii, et seq.'
Suspicious circumstances
observable in them cv, etseq.
The order, by the Privy
Council, for the Arch-

Xll

CONTENTS,

PAGE
bishop's recantation in
the first instance to be
burnt - - cvii.
The preparation of part
of these recantations for
the Archbishop obvious cviii, et seq.
The original copy of them
dishonestly published
by Bp. Bonner cviii, cix.
And dishonourably privi
leged by queen Mairy cviii.
Dr. Lingard's observation
upon the recantations
considered - - cix.
Dr. Milner's strange re
ference to the Lambeth
Records, in confirma-

PAQE
tion of these recanta
tions, exposed - cix.
The real speech of the
Archbishop at his mar
tyrdom, instead of that
prepared for him ex, cxi.
Account of the Archbi
shop's last moments cxi, cxii.
Observations on the Re
formation in England, cxiii.
Milton's character of it cxiv.
Blackstone referred to in
behalf of it - cxiv.
Concluding remark upon
it in an Essay, honour
ed with the approbation
of the University of
Oxford - - cxv.

HISTORICAL

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION.

I. An account of the Archbishop 's work. II. The
vindication of the Archbishop's character.
I. The work of Archbishop Cranmer, which
is reprinted in the following pages, has long
ceased to be a book of frequent occurrence.
Nearly three centuries have passed since it first
appeared ; since it was also afterwards embo
died in the prelate's admirable vindication of it
against Bishop Gardiner ; and since it likewise
was published in a Latin translation. Of its
celebrity our theologians and ecclesiastical wri
ters often speak. Over the pages of it no dis
cerning reader will turn without finding abun
dant examples of irresistible argumentation, as
well as impressive eloquence. And the indisso
luble connection of it with our Church and State
every Protestant will admit, when the learned

11 HISTORICAL AND
amongst them call to mind, and the unlearned
are informed, that to the establishment of the
Reformation in England this work in the highest
degree contributed, and that it refutes the doc
trine which chiefly distinguishes the Church of
Rome from the Church of England.
That no reader may be interrupted in the pe
rusal of this important treatise, the orthography
of it in the following pages is that of our own
time ; the spelling of words in the time of Cran
mer being so unsettled, as that in the same
page, and even in the same line, a single expres
sion presents often different forms. Sometimes
an archaism, or a seeming vulgarism, which the
recollection of the time excuses, is found in this
discourse ; but the words ahd reasoning all
along are in unison with the prelate's own decla
ration of " "making more clearly appear the Ught
from the darkness? The contents of the mar
tyr's book, like the publick tables that of old
were hung up in temples and market-places,
should be in characters so " b plain, that he may
run that readeth them;" yes, and that he may
mark them too ; that he may mark them as form
ing much of the basis of that Protestant Consti
tution, " c under which we have enjoyed more
' Defence of the true Doctrine, &c. present edition, p. 35.
' Habakkuk ii. 2.
c Substance of the Speech ofthe Right Hon. Robert Peel in
the House of Commons, May 9, 181 7, on the Right Hon. Henry

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. Ill
liberty, we have acquired more glory, we pos
sess more character and powerj than hitherto
has fallen to the lot of any other country on the
globe ;" and that hence he may mark them as
proclaiming with a voice never to be silenced,
we trust > that " d the Reformation was worth
establishing," and therefore " it is worth main
taining." The treatise before us, while it principally
discusses the subject of Transubstantiation, and
the Sacrifice of the Mass, delivers some excel
lent observations upon certain doctrines adopted
by our Church, (besides that which concerns the
Sacrament of the Lord's S upper ,) agreeing also
with the primate's decision upon such points in
the publick formularies of our faith. They shall
be noticed in the present Introduction. But I
ought, in illustration of the work, first to state
the history of it, and then shew how the differ
ence in question between the Churches of Rome
and England is marked, and how the great re
former determined upon other points.
" e During the time of king Henry the eighth,
Until the entering of king Edward, it seemeth
Grattan's motion, That the House should resolve itself into a
Committee, to take into consideration the laws affecting the
Roman Catholicks of the United Kingdom. Third edition,
p. 40.
* Sermons and Charges by Bp. Barrington, p. 437> "If the
Reformation was worth establishing, it is worth maintaining."
• Fox's Acts and Monuments.
a2

IV HISTORICAL AND
that Cranmer was scarcely yet thoroughly per
suaded in the right knowledge ofthe Sacrament,
or at least was not yet fully ripened in the same ;
wherein shortly after being more groundedly
confirmed by conference with bishop Ridley, in
process of time did so profit in riper knowledge,
that at last he took upon him the defence of that
whole doctrine, that is, to refute and throw down,
first, the corporal presence; secondly, the fan
tastical transubstantiation ; thirdly, the idola
trous adoration ; fourthly, the false error of the
Papists, that wicked men do eat the natural
body of Christ; and, lastly, the blasphemous
sacrifice of the mass. Whereupon in conclusion
he wrote jive books for the publick instruction ofthe
Church of England: which instruction yet
TO THIS DAY STANDETH, AND IS RECEIVED,
IN THIS CHURCH OF ENGLAND."
Such is the f faithful statement of Fox, the
' I have great pleasure in citing the following passage from
the Preface to Dr. Wordsworth's Ecclesiastical Biography;
assuring the reader also, that in numerous researches which it
has been often my duty to make among ancient registers, and
other records, ie accuracy of Fox in such as he has ap
plied to his purpose is indisputable. " I am well aware," Dr.
Wordsworth says, " that by the extent to which I have availed
myself of Fox's Acts and Monuments, I fall within the sphere
of such censures as that of Dr. John Milner, in which he speaks
of ' the frequent publications of John Fox's lying Book of
Martyrs, with prints of men, women, and children, expiring in
flames ; the nonsense, inconsistency, and falsehoods of which,'

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. V
martyrologist, in respect to the work before us.
Cranmer himself has also informed us, in his
Profession of faith in 1555, that "shis book
was made seven years ago ;" and it was h about
the year 1546, when Ridley, by reading the
work of • Bertram concerning the Body and

he says, ' he had in part exposed in his Letters to a Preben
dary.' I am not ignorant of what has been said also by Dr.
Milner's predecessors in the same argument, by Harpsfield,
Parsons, and others, But these writings have not proved, and
it never will be proved, that John Fox is not one qf the most
faithful, and authentick of all historians. We know too much
of the strength of Fox's book, and of the weakness of those of
his adversaries, to be further moved by Dr. Milner's censures,
than to charge them with falsehood. All the many researches
and discoveries of later times, in regard to historical documents,
have only contributed to place the general fidelity and truth of
Fox's melancholy narrative on a rock which cannot be shaken."
1 Fox's Acts and Mon.
h Ridley communicated his thoughts upon Bertram's book
to Cranmer about the year 1546. Strype's Life of Cranmer,
B. 2. ch. 25.
1 Bertram, who is also called Ratramnus, asserts our doc
trine as expressly as we (Protestants) ourselves can do ; deli
vering it in the same words, and proving it by many of the
same arguments and authorities which we bring. See Bishop
Burnet on the 28th Article. He was a monk of the Abbey of
Corbey, in the ninth century. Mabillon says, that he had seen
a manuscript of his work on the Eucharist eight hundred years
old. Cave gives him the highest character as a man and a
scholar, and adds, " excepta lite Eucharistka, ab ipsis scrip-
toribus pontificiis summis elogiis ornatus." In the, London edi
tion of the Catalogus Testium Veritatis, 1686, all the objections

VI HISTORICAL AND
Blood of Christ, had been led to examine
closely the prevailing opinion of the corporal
presence ; when, having found it much opposed
in the ninth century, especially by this learned
writer, he communicated the result of his in
quiry to Cranmer. Henceforward, indeed, they
both pursued the subject with more than ordi*
nary care ; and the Archbishop brought toge
ther their observations into the present Defence
of the true doctrme, as he has justly entitled his
book. But a supposition that Ridley was the
author of this book, or rather a wish to deprive
Cranmer of the merit due to his own learning
and research, appears to have been at the time
expressed. " k How," said Secretary Bourne,
in his examination of Ridley in the Tower,
" how can you then make but a figure or a sign
of the Sacrament, as that book doth which is set
forth in my Lord of Canterbury's name ? I wm
you can tell who made it : Did not you make it ?" —
" And here," Ridley himself relates, " here was
much murmuring of the rest, as though they
would have given me the glory of writing that book :
— Master Secretary, quoth I, that book was
made of a great learned man, and one who is
able to do the like again : as for me, I assure

of the Romanists against this writer are learnedly and acutely
refuted. * Ridley's Life of bishop Ridley, (from Fox,) p. 440.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. yii
you, be not deceived, I was never able to do of
write any such like thing : he passeth me no
less than the learned master his young scholar :
— But, Sir, methinks it is not charitably done,
to bear the people in hand that any man doth
so lightly esteem the Sacrament, as to make of
it a figure only ; but that but maketh it a bare
figure without any more profit ; which that book
doth often deny, as appeareth to the reader most
plainly." It is highly probable, that soon after the con
sultation of Cranmer and Ridley upon this sub
ject, the Archbishop caused an English trans
lation of Bertram's book to be published; a
circumstance, which has been overlooked by the
historians of the English Reformation. For in
1548', and in 1549, two editions of this plain,
brief, and very useful discourse, made their ap
pearance, royally privileged, with the following
title: " The boke of Barthram, priest, intreat-
inge of the bodye and bloude of Christe, wryt-
ten to great Charles the emperoure, and set forth
seven hundred years ago." It is printed in a
small form, but in types usually given to books
of a larger size ; as if it had been intended to
gratify the eye of age, as well as youth. And
this accords with the accustomed zeal of Cran-
1 By T. Raynalde in 1548, and by A. Kitson in 1549.
Ames, Hist, of Printing, p. 220. The copy however, which
is now before me, is printed by Raynalde in 1549.

Vlll HISTORICAL AND
mer to exhibit the most valuable information in
the national language : Witness his successful
motion, almost immediately after his consecra
tion, that the Scriptures should be translated
into English, and his subsequent joy that the
translation might be used by all : Witness his
exertions also to bring into use prayer in the ver
nacular tongue, and thus to render publick de
votion intelligible to all. Of this pious diligence,
though many other instances might be given, all
contributing to promote the Reformation, I will
add only one which Burnet and Strype had
not seen, but which Collier has with a slight
alteration or two printed, and which presents
to us the great prelate, in the pursuit of his
noble object, employing the aids of metre
and of musick. It is contained in an origin
nal letter, which appears to have been written
subsequently to the " m Royal Mandate for
publishing and using the prayers in the English
tongue ;" the King having observed, in this di
rection to the Archbishop, that " the people
heretofore understood no part of such prayers
or suffrages as were used to be sung and said."
The whole of this Mandate, as Strype has well
observed, runs in such a pious strain, as though
none but Cranmer had been the suggester of it.
It is printed entire in Burnet's History of the
Reformation, and great part of it is copied by
" Burnet's Hist, ofthe Reformation, vol. i. Records, p. 264.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. ix
Strype in his Memorials of the Archbishop ;
and it is dated in June, 1544. In the succeed
ing August the Archbishop was also called upon
by the Privy Council to appoint processions in
the English tongue. The following is the Arch
bishop's letter, copied from the original now re
maining in the State-Paper Office.
" It may please your Maiestie to be aduer-
tised, that according to your Highnes' com-
mandemente, sent vnto me by your grace's
secretary Mr. Pagett, I haue translated into
the English tongue so well as I coulde, in so
shorte tyme, certeyne processions to be vsed
vpon festiuall daies, yf, after due correction and
amendemente of the same, your highnes shall
thinke it so conuenient : In whiche translation,
forasmoche as many of the processions in the
Lattyn were but barren, (as me semed,) and
litle frutefull ; I was constrayned to vse more
than the libertie of a translator : ffor in some
processions I have alterid diuers wourdes, in
some I haue added parte, in some taken parte
awaie. Some I have lefte oute hole, either for
bycause the matter apperid to me to be little to
purpose, or bycause the daies be not with vs
festiuall daies. And some procession I haue
added hole, bycause I thought I hadd better
matter for the purpose than was the procession
in Latten : the iudgemente wherof I referre

X HISTORICAL AND
holie vnto your Maiestie. And after your highnes
hath corrected yt, yf your grace comande some
devoute and solempne note to be made there-
vnto, (as is to the procession whiche your Ma
iestie hath alredie set furth in Englishe,) I truste
it woll moche excitate and stirre the hearts of all
men vnto deuotion and godlynes. But in myn
opinion the songe." that shalbe made thervnto
sholde not be full of notes, but as nere as may
be for euery sillable a note, so that it may be
songe distinctly and deuoutly, as be in the ma-
tens and euen song, Venite, the hymnes Te Deum,
Benedictus, Magnificat, Nunc Dimittis, and all the
psalmes and versicles, and the masse Gloria in
excelsis, Gloria Patri, the Crede, the Preface, the
Pater noster, and some of the Sanctus and Agnus.
As concernyng the Salve festa dies, the Latin note
(as I thinke) is sobre and distinct enoughe.
Wherefore I haue trauailed to make the verses
in Englishe, and have put the Latten note vnto
the same. Neuertheles, thei that be connyng
in syngyng can make a moche more solempne
" This passage leads us to believe, that metrical psalmody
might at this time have been thought of by Cranmer, espe
cially by what follows in the letter as to his English verses j
and, it may be added, by the imitations of the Archbishop's
endeavour, which soon followed in the stanzas of Sternhold,
Hunnis, and others. So that the psalmody in question may
seem to be of higher authority, than hitherto has been con
ceded to it.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XI
note thereto. I made them only for a profe to
see how Englishe wolde do in songe. But by-
cause inyn Englishe verses Iacke the grace and
facilitie which I wolde wishe they hadd, your
Maiestie may cause some other to make theym
againe, that can do the same in more pleasante
Englishe and phrase. As for the sentence, I
suppose, [it] will serue well enough. Thus Al-
mightie God preserue your Maiestie in longe and
prosperous helth and felicitie. ffrom Bekisborne
the vijth of October.
" Your grace's most bounden,
¦' chaplayne and bedisman,
" T. Cantuarien.
The Discourse of the Archbishop upon the
Lord's Supper, almost immediately after the
publication of it, was attacked by bishop Gar
diner, then a prisoner in the Tower, in " An
Explication and Assertion of the true Catholick
Faith touching the most blessed Sacrament of
the Altar, with confutation of a book [the Arch
bishop's] written against the same, 1551 ;" and
printed, according to Strype, in France. Ano
ther opponent also, Dr. Smith, then at Louvain,
published an answer to Cranmer. Both adver
saries brought against the Archbishop the accu
sation of inconsistency. Finding in his Defence
of the true Doctrine, that Consubstantiation, as
well as Transubstantiation, was opposed, they

xn historical and
reminded the author that formerly he had been a
Papist, then a Lutheran, and lastly a Zuinglian,
in his sacramental profession. The Archbishop
was instant in his reply" to both ; confuting as
well " the crafty and sophistical cavillation" of
Gardiner, as such places in the puny book of
Smith as " seemed any thing worthy the answer-
° It may be proper to extract, from the reply at large, the
following words. " After it had pleased God," the Archbishop
says, " to shew unto me by his word a more perfect knowledge
of his Son Jesus Christ, from time to time, as I grew in know
ledge of him, by little and little I put away my former igno
rance. And as God of his mercy gave me light, so through
his grace I opened my eyes to receive it ; and did not wilfully
repugn unto God, and remain in darkness. And I trust in
God's mercy and pardon for my former errors, because I erred
but of frailness and ignorance." Answer to Gardiner, p. 402.
He had just before ingenuously also said, after denying an al
legation made by Smith, that he was " in the error of the real
presence, and in divers other errors, &c. for lack of good in
struction from his youth ; the outrageous floods of papistical
errors at that time overflowing the world ; for the which, and
other offences of his youth he daily prayed to God for mercy
and pardon." And in the first part of his book he observes,
in the same honourable spirit, " It is lawful and commendable
for a man to leam from time to time, and to go from his igno
rance lhat he may receive and embrace the truth. As for me,
I am not, I grant, of that nature that the Papists for most
part be, who study to devise all shameful shifts, rather than
they will forsake any error, wherewith they were infected in
their youth." Answ. &c. p. 62. As to the accusation of his
being a Lutheran, or a Zuinglian, see the observation in a sub
sequent page on Dr. Lingard's similar opinion.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. Xlil
ing." This answer was eagerly expected, and
well received ; was printed in 1551 ; and again p
in 1552, according* to Ames, which Strype, how
ever, has not noticed. And as a proof not only
of the welcome which it had experienced, but
of the high character which it maintained, it
was republished in 1580. Archbishop Parker*1
indeed has said of it, that no controversy against
the Papists was ever handled more accurately ;
and succeeding writers of distinction have be
stowed their eulogy upon the language as well
as the spirit of it, upon its acuteness as well as
its zeal. Of his own confidence in the great
doctrine, which he so learnedly and copiously
maintained, he gave this solemn testimony in
his last most impressive words : "' As r for the
Sacrament," said the venerable martyr as he
approached the stake, " As for the Sacrament,
I believe as I have taught in my book against the
bishop of Winchester ; the which my book teacheth
so true a doctrine of the Sacrament, that it shall
stand at the last day before the judgement of
God, where the papistical doctrine, contrary
thereto, shall be ashamed to shew her face." It
is in this book that the Defence of the true doctrine

p Ames, Hist, of Printing, p. 227.
**¦ Strype's Life of Cranmer, B. 2. ch. 25.
r Fox's Acts and Mon.

XIV HISTORICAL AND
is incorporated ** ; the whole of which, together
with the whole of Gardiner's attack upon it, is
there reprinted, with additional observations.
And it is this Defence, against which the indigo
nation of Roman Catholicks was in vain exer
cised. In vain, as to silencing it, was it made
an article' in the charges brought against the
mighty prelate. In vain, as to weakening its
effect, was it proposed to him by his cunning
enemies as a theme for recantation. Gardiner
indeed affected to answer it in Latin under a
feigned name ; when the Archbishop, though
then in prison, vindicated his own work to a very
great extent, and intended some addition to that
vindication, if it might have beenu, " before his
life," as he said, " were taken away, which he
saw was likely to be within a very short space."
After that event, the learned Peter Martyr in^
deed appeared as his acute and elaborate de^
fender. But as Gardiner, under the assumed title of
M. A. Constantius, had so unfairly proceeded
• Now and then an amended reading may be observed in
this reprint ofthe Defence, which I have followed by enclosing
the reading in brackets.
1 See the Process against him, first printed from the manu
script in the Library at Lambeth Palace at the close of the
Oxford edition of Strype's Life of Cranmer, 1812. p. 1077,
et seq.
" Strype's Life of Cranmer, B. 2. ch. 25; The work is sup
posed to be lost.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XV
with Cranmer's book as to confound the method
of it, and to disjoin and mangle passages in
subserviency only to his own objections; the
Archbishop was of opinion, that if learned
foreigners saw his Defence of the true doc~
trine translated into the Latin tongue, (as the
second attack of Gardiner was written in that
language,) it would sufficiently vindicate him in
their judgement and esteem. Sir John Cheke,
an accomplished scholar, elegantly performed
this service for the Archbishop ; and the Defence
in Latin, with some additions x, appeared in
1553; as it also again appeared in 1557, with
observations which had been made upon a re-
view of this translation by the archbishop him
self in prison, and which had fallen into the
hands of the English exiles at Embden, who
offered in this publication their grateful sense of
duty to the memory of the martyred primate.
Prefixed to this Latin translation is an epistle
from Cranmer to King Edward VI, in which he
says, that " it was his care of the Lord's flock
committed to him, which induced him to renew
and restore the Lord's Supper according to the
institution of Christ : which was the reason that,
about three years before, he had set forth a book
in English against the principal abuses of the
papistical mass." But the whole epistle is writ-
** Strype's Life of Cranmer, B. 2. ch. 2.5,

XVI HISTORICAL A.VD
ten, as Strype observes, (who, however, has not
copied it, nor has Burnet in his History of the
Reformation,) with so much sharpness of wit,
as well as in a pure and elegant style, as to
render the insertion of it in the note below desi
rable y. Strype has mentioned a manuscript
** I copy the Letter from the edition of 1557, a book not often
to be met with.
" Illustrissimo ac nobilissimo Principi Edvardo Sexto, An
glice, Francice, et Hibernice Regi, fidei defensori, et in terris
secundum Christum Ecclesiae Anglicance et Hibernicce capiti su
premo, Thomas Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus.
" Pro cura Dominici gregis mihi commissa, in quo salutari
pastu verbi Divini erudiendo omnem curam cogitationemque
meam collocare debeo, Illustriss. Princeps, Ccenam Domini
(quae multis et magnis superstitionibus violata est, et ad quae-
stum translata,) renovandam ad Servatoris Christi instituta et
redintegrandam putavi ; et de vero ejus usu ex verbi Divini et
veteris ac sanctae Ecclesiae authoritate commonefaciendos esse
omnes judicavi, quorum cura, et instructio, ad officii mei
authoritatem aliqua ex parte pertinet.
" Itaque ante triennium Missae papisticae abusus praacipuos
(quibus non modo Ecclesia Anglica, sed etiam totus pene orbis
fcedatus atque infectus fuerat,) libello quodam Anglo confutavi,
et verum atque Christianum ejus usum restituendum docui.
Quo libro ita multi sunt ad sanam de ea re opinionem adducli, ut
veritatis vim, quanta esset, sentirem, et gratiae Servatoris
Christi beneficia intelligerem, ut ad veritatis lucem patefactam
occascati homines splendorem lucis- acciperent, et (ut Paulus
prsedicante Anania) oculorum aciem perciperent. Hoc ita
segre Stephanus Gardinerus, Wintoniensis tum Episcopus,
tulerat, ut nihil sibi prius faciendum putarit, quam ut librum
tarn utilem ct plausibilem confutaret ; ratus, nisi opera sua
aliqua impedimenta objicerentur, nullos deplorata? jam et dere-

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. xvii
written by the archbishop, preserved in the
library of Bene't College, Cambridge, entitled
lictae pene sententiae adjutores fore. Itaque eadem ipse lingua
iisdem de rebus conscribit, et firmatam jam de vero Ccenas usu
sententiam evertere conatur, et papisticam opinionem, super-
stitionibus undique diffluentem, revocare conatur. Post hunc
prodiit M. Antonius Constantius, Stephano Gardinero ita affi-
nis et germanus, ut idem ipse esse videatur ; tanta est inge-
niorum subtilitas, scriptural sophistices similitudo. Sed uter-
que idem tractat, alio tamen modo.
" Constantius enim libro Latine scripto argumenta mea per-
sequitur, ut sibi optimum videtur ; et, ut causam juvet, ssepe
truncata, saspe inversa, saepe disjecta, sic introducit, ut non
magis a me agnosci potuerint, quam Medea: liberi in multa
membra disjecti et deformati. Neque enim de hujusmodi cor
poris forma, neque de ulla re recte judicare possumus, ubi tota
species ante oculos proposita non est in quam intueri, quasi in
Phidiae Minervam, debemus ; et non particulam aliquam, sicuti
Momus crepidam Veneris, lacessere. Itaque ut melius mea de
hac controversia opinione sententia teneretur, librum meum de
Anglo in Latinum convertendum curavi, ut omnes intelligerent
nos neque obscuram nostram sententiam, neque abditam esse
velle, quam cum multis bonis et doctis viris communem habe-
mus, et cum verbo Deij et verbi defehsatrice vera Ecclesia,
consentientem. " Nemo est autem ex omnibus dignior, in cujus nomine li
bellus hie appareat quam in tuo. Es enim non modo Papista-
rum opinione Fidei defensor, (qui hoc non a seipsis protulerant,
sed Deo per illos ad ipsorum perniciem prsemonente,) sed etiam
bonorum omnium authoritate dignus, in quem tantum Ecclesiae
munus conferatur. Es hujus Ecclesiae Anglicae et Hibernicae
supremus in terris moderator, sub quo quasi sub Moyse partem
spiritus et magnam multorum curam atque administrationem
commissam habeo. Es etiam non modo legibus nostris tanti
b

XV111 HISTORICAL AND
De re sacramentaria ; and Burnet ahd Collier, as
well as Strype, have printed other dispersed
regni Rex, sed etiam natura, quae Majestatem tuam ita ad
omnem excellehtiam forfnavit, ut quae singula in aliis exqui-
sita sunt, ea in Majestate tua perfects emineanf. Video in re-
gibus mediocre aliquid esse non posse, et authoritate veteris*
proverbii in eo confirmor, et gaudeo hanc excellehtiam non
modo ad meliorem partem, sed etiam ad optimam, esse trans-
latam. Haec non Iaudahdae Majestatis tuae gratia, sed cohor-
tandae potiiis dico, ut res, in hac aetate tam illustres, uberri-*
mos postliac et excellentissimos tantae dignitatis splendores in
constanti aetate feraht. Quanta enim ornamenta ihgenii ef doC-
trinae, vel ab optima natura, vel bonis pfaeceptofibus tribui
poterant, eadem in te omnia excellentia sunt ; et quod in pri-
mis laudabilissimum est, timor Dei, et verae religionis studium,
in quibus Majestas tua ea cum laiide versatur, qua seipstnn Rex
et Propheta coriimendavit quum dixerat, Seriibus se intelligen-
tiorem esse, quia mandata Dei inquirebat.
" Hiis aliisque gravibus de causis commoveor, ut hunc librum,
jam Latinwm factum, nomini tuo offeram. Spero autem rei
ipssB satisfactum hoc libro esse, qui non modo surnmam verae
doctrinae continet, sed omnia adversariorum argumenta, (qua
quidem recitatu digna sunt) refutat. Sed quia nimis curiosi
quidam sunt, et nulla, ne diligenti quidem et plena rerum ex-
plicatione contenti, et eandem materiam argumentorum, (ne
nihil dicere videantur,) in alias formas transmutant, et ordinem
naturae pro licentia ingeniorum confundunt ; ideo nostram ad
Stephtmi Gardineri librum responsionem, Latinam factum, brevi
in Ittcemtducemus, ut nullus (ne sophistis quidem) ad contra-
dicendum locus relictus sit : qua ratione putabo non modo uni,
sed Gardinero etiam et Constantio quoque esse satisfactum;
et quod de comcediis ille dixit, hoc de personatis istis dicen
dum, Unum cognoris, ambos cognoris. Quod si quadam uno
in libro pertractata sunt, quae in altero praetcrmissa fueritit,

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XIX
observations by Cranmer upon the same sub
ject. To bring together whatever relates to the
archbishop's inquiries, and determinations, as
to this important doctrine, I may add, that in
the State-Paper Office there remain, in the pri
mate's hand-writing, a paper De Sacramento
Eucharistia, ; another, De Missa privata ; and in a
thin folio (among discussions upon ** other points)
De Eucharistia, and De Sacramentorum usu ; and
iisdem ego responsionem neam adjungam, ut adversarii, si qui
relicti sint, vel non habeant quod objiciant, vel, si objecerint,
videant quid responderi ad ilia possit. Hae sunt causae, Rex
nobilissime, quae me ad emittendum hunc librum impulerunt,
eumque sub majestatis tuae autoritate divulgandum. Te spero
ita hoc meum studium accepturum, quemadomodum et causae
sequitas fert, et officium meum postulat, et dementia tua in
. aliis honestis causis solet facere. Dominus Jesus majestatem
tuam servet. Lambethae, Idibus Martiis. M. D. LIII."
1 The book is indorsed, " a boke conteyning dyvers Articles,
&c," and contains discussions
De unitate et trinitate personarum.
De peccato origjnali.
De duabus Christi naturis.
De Justificatione,
De Ecclesia.
De Baptismo.
De Eucharistia.
De Penitentia.
De Sacramentorum usu.
De ministris Ecclesiae.
De ritibus ecclesiasticis.
De rebus civilibus.
De corporum resurrectione et extremo judicio.
b2

XX HISTORICAL A"ND
in English, What a Sacrament is. These were,
no doubt, composed before the Defence of the
true doctrine had been written ; and with other
theological observations have been preserved,
bearing an indorsement upon one of them, (the
whole having been contained in a bundle,) "Most
of a these papers Archbishop Cranmer 's hand."
The Defence of the true doctrine, as Fox has al
ready told us, and as Strype has repeated the
information, was written on purpose for the pub
lick instruction of the Church of England.
Written too as it was by Cranmer in his mature
age, after all his great reading, and all his dili
gent study of the fathers and ecclesiastical wri
ters, with whose judgments and opinions in the
doctrine he thus became intimately acquainted;
it is, as Strype has justly b concluded, the more
to be valued. And yet the use which Cranmer
made of the fathers and schoolmen, in appealing
to their authority for confutation of the Roman
ists, in his dispute with them, has been strangely
undervalued by *-" some ; as if with the Roman-
* The other separate papers, which I inspected at the State
Paper Office, are the following :
De Sacerdotum et Episcoporum ordine ac ministerio.
De potestate ac primatu Papae : indorsed 1537.
De Fide.
De veneratione sanctorum, et imaginibus : two loose books.
b Strype's Life of Cranmer, b. 2. ch. 25.
* Dr. Glocester Ridley, in his valuable life of Bishop Ridley,
censures very justly the inconsiderate observation of Mr. Gil.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XXI
ists any argument could be more effectual, than
that which laid open the weakness of pretences
under which they sheltered themselves from the
efficacy of scriptural arguments alone ; or as if
the archbishop might have been content to give
merely a rational account of his faith ; and, by
disavowing the authority of the fathers as in
sufficient, have d acknowledged that he held opi
nions contrary to the Church through all ages !
No : the archbishop knew the value of the au
thority in question ; and accordingly in Injunc
tions, given by King Edward the Sixth, in the
first year of his reign, to the Dean and Chap
ter of York, (and to the governours also of
other cathedrals,) of which Cranmer no doubt
was the author, especial attention is directed
to this point. " e Item, they shall make a li
brarie in some convenient place within their
churche, within the space of one yeare next en-
pin in his life of Latimer, that Ridley and Cranmer should have
avoided appealing to the fathers. The strongest arguments
that can be produced against Popery, as Atterbury has ob
served, are the Fathers and Bibles.
d See Ridley's Life, ut supr. p. 493.
e Register of the Dean and Chapter of York, fol. 4«5. a.
Burnet mentions this register, but I think that he had never
seen it. See his History of the Reformation, vol. 3. under the
year 1547. If he had examined it, he would surely have ex
tracted from it some of the valuable information which it con
tains, as applicable to the noble purpose in which he was en
gaged. '

XXU HISTORICAL AND
suyhg this visitation, and shall have in the same
Saynte Augustynes, Basill, Gregorie JVazianzene^
Hierome, Ambrose, Chrisostome, Cipriane, Theophi-
lact, Erasmus, and other good writers' workes."
But more powerfully, than in a mere recommen
dation of the study of the fathers, Cranmer has
illustrated the f obligations of his cause to them
in his Defence of the true doctrine; and Upon the
copiousness, as well as the accuracy, of citations
in it from their works, the reader may fix his
attention without fear of contradiction, and with
full confidence in their value.
Of Cranmer, and Ridley, and the rest of the
Protestant Clergy, who framed the Communion
Service in 1548, which the Defence before us
illustrates throughout, and which is our liturgi
cal rejection of Transubstantiation, it has how
ever been lately asserted, that they believed
somewhat equivalent to Transubstantiation in
what they taught, and asserted, ofthe s real pre-
f Just as it is said of our Established Church generally :
" She has produced the strongest arguments against Popery —
Fathers and Bibles." Atterbury, Preface to his Answer to
some Considerations on the spirit of Martin Luther, &c See
also a preceding note.
g It will be proper here to recite the words of Cranmer in
the Preface t6 his book against Gardiner, with which Arch
bishop Sharp has closed his excellent discourse upon the sense
ofthe Church of England as to the real presence in the Eucha
rist. This passage " of the most learned Archbishop Cran
mer," Dr. Sharp truly affirms, " may go further than any Other

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XX1H
sence of Christ in the Sacrament. Now the
fact is, Jjhat they positively disowned any mate
rial presence of Christ's body, or any part of it,
either by conversion, substitution, or union ; and
believed no other than a figurative presence of
Christ's body properly so called, yet affirming
the Eucharist to be a true and real communica
tion of the virtues and benefits of his body, not
merely a figurative commemoration of them.
And Cranmer, and Ridley, and Hooper, not to
man's for the ascertaining, and clearing, the sense of our Church
m tfcis rnatter, since he had the principal hand in compiling both
our -Liturgy and our Articles."*—*' When I say and repeat many
times in my book," Cranmer says, " that the body of Christ is
present in them that worthily receive the sacrament ; lest any
man should mistake my words, and think that I mean, that
although Christ be not corporally in the outward visible signs,
yet he is corporally in the persons that duly receive them : this
is rto advertise -the reader, that I mean no such thing : but my
meaning is, that the force, the grace, the virtue, and benefit, of
Christ's body that was crucified for us, and of his blood that
was shed for us, be really and effectually present with all them
that duly receive the sacraments ; but all this i understand
of his spiritual presence ; of the which he saith, / will be
with you until the world's end. And, Wheresoever two or three
be gathered together in my Name, there am I in the midst of
them. And, He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood,
dwelleth in me, and I in him. Nor no more truly is he corpo
rally or really present in the due ministration of the Lord's
Supper, than he is in the due ministration of Baptism ;" that is
"to say, in both spiritually, by grace. Abp. Sharp's Serm. vol.
7. p. 370.

XXIV HISTORICAL AND
mention other learned Protestants, have left us
their ample h assertions and their full belief in
proof of this, and in vindication of the honour of
our Reformed Church ; and with their blood
sealed the truths which they taught. But the
author, who would involve these great men in
the very error of their adversaries, betakes him
self also to other expedients, in connection with
his pretence ; and brings forward the celebrated
Jeremy Taylor, " * the bishop of Down; than
whom the whole Protestant Church boasts no fairer
name ; who had fully examined Transubstantia
tion and the Mass, and declared, after his exa
mination of them, that the doctrine of the Catho
lick Church upon them was not idolatrous.''
But was this really the full examination of bishop
Taylor upon the subject ? Not so : the few
lines from "The Liberty of Prophesying," which
are adduced, were the observation of Taylor in
his younger days, and were published in 1647 ;
but in " The Dissuasive from Popery," pub- **.**
h I have printed in the Appendix to this volume, the opi
nions and assertions of Ridley and Hooper, upon this impor
tant subject.
¦ The Book of the Roman Catholic Church, 1825, by Charles
Butler, Esq. p. 321 ; and the Enquiry as to the Declaration
against Transubstantiation, &c. published anonymously in
1822, but of which Mr. Butler avows himself the author in
the Book of the Roman Catholic Church, and copies it into the
eighteenth letter in that recent work.

CRITICA'L INTRODUCTION. XXV
lished by him, when reading and judgment were
matured, in 1664, the masterly, and learned,
and eloquent pages throughout denounce Tran
substantiation and the Mass as absolutely idola
trous. The learned remarker upon k Cranmer,
and Ridley, and Taylor, knows that I am correct
in my assertion ; and he knows, or ought to
know, that a very vigilant prelate ofthe English
Church long since noticed the endeavour, which
the remarker has stated, made by Taylor in his
" Liberty of Prophesying" to free the Papists
from formal idolatry ; the prelate adding, *' * but
the same Dr. Taylor afterwards, in his Dissua
sive from Popery, fully confutes Dr. Hammond,
(who would have the papistical worship of the
host to be only material idolatry,) and himself;
and truly proves, that the popish adoration of
the host in the Eucharist is properly idolatrical."
Now can the remarker upon Cranmer, and Rid
ley, and Taylor, himself a scholar of indefatiga
ble research, not have known this latter work of
a-j^nan than whom the whole Protestant Church
boasts no fairer name ? Or can he hope to con
tent the reader with a meagre extract from Tay
lor, afterwards over-ruled by himself, and pre
sent that as the solemn and only decision, upon
k Book of the Rom. Cath. Church, p. 324.
1 Bp. Barlow's Remains, p. 203. I have printed in the
appendix an extract from Taylor's own book.

XXVI HISTORICAL AND
the subject, of a man than whom the whole Pro
testant Church boasts no fairy name? Is the
suppression of truth the way to promote any in
quiry, civil or religious ? And is a compliment
to the name of a great divine a compensation for
withholding the mention of his illustrious ser
vices to the Protestant Church, in the elaborate
and unanswerable Dissuasive from Popery? And
is the whole truth proclaimed, when Mr. Butler
also m cites another prelate ofthe English Church
in his Debalf, because that prelate said in the
House of Lords, when the Declaration against
Transubstantiation was enacted by the law of
the land, " *" that the Church of Rome was not
idolatrous V This is all that Mr. Butler tells of
Dr. Gunning, bishop of Ely. But what was the
conduct of this bishop ? He had reflected, no
doubt, on the hastiness of his saying; and
though he had also said that he could not take
that test against Popery, " ° yet as soon as the
Bili was passed, he took it." How Mr. Butler
may digest this practical answer of one of his
own witnesses, it is not easy to say ; but it may
be easily seen why he himself, accomplished m
the science of the law, has not brought forward
this evidence. But besides these appeals to
¦ Book of the Rom. Cath. Ch. p. 327.
" Burnet, .Hist, of his own Times, under the year 1678.
• Ibid.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XXVII
Protestant divines in favour, as it is pretended,
of Transubstantiation ; Mr. Butler has also di
rected his readers to the Articles of the Church
of England, one of which, as it had been drawn
up by Cranmer, was altered in the reign of queen
Elizabeth, and rendered " p so comprehensive,"
he says, " as to let in the believers of Transub
stantiation." Now let our Protestant country
men be more fully informed as to this allegation.
And in order to this, the old paragraph of Cran-
mer's article is first to be observed : " "* Since
the very being of human nature doth require, that
the body of one and the same man cannot be at
one and the same time in many places, but must
of necessity be in some certain and determinate
place ; therefore the body of Christ cannot be
present in many different places at the same
time : and since, as the holy Scriptures testify,
Christ hath been taken up into heaven, and there
is to abide till the end of the world ; it becometh
not any of the faithful to believe, or confess,
that there is a real or corporal presence, as
they (the Papists) phrase it, of the body and
blood of Christ in the holy Eucharist." This
was omitted in the Articles established as they
now stand. And why? " The design of the
government was at that time much turned to
the drawing wer the body qfthe nation to the Refor-
<* Book of the Rom. Cath. Ch. p. 324.
* Articles ofHeligion, 1553. Art. XXIX.

XXviii HISTOrilCAL AND
mation," (bishop Burnet, in his History of the
Reformation, and especially in-his Exposition of
the Thirty-nine Articles, has wellobserved,) " in
whom the old leaven had gone deep; and no
part of it deeper than the belief of the corporal
presence of Christ in the Sacrament. Therefore
it was thought not expedient to offend them by
so particular a definition in this matter ; in which
the very words real presence were rejected. It
might, perhaps, be also suggested, that here a
definition was made that went too much upon
the principles of natural philosophy; which, how
true soever, might not be the proper subject of
an article of religion. Therefore it was thought
fit to suppress the old paragraph ; (it was thought
enough to condemn Transubstantiation, Hist. Ref.
ann. 1559 ;) though the paragraph was a part of
the Article that was subscribed. Yet it was not
published. But the paragraph, The body of
Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper* only
after an heavenly and spiritual manner, &c. Art.
28th, this paragraph was put in its stead, and
was received and published by the next Convo
cation ; which upon the matter was a full expla
nation of the way of Christ's presence in the Sacra
ment ; that he is present in a heavenly and spiritual
manner, and that faith is the mean by which he is
received. This seemed to be more theological,1
and it does indeed amount to the same
thing ;" that is, the declaration in the old para-

CRITICAL introduction. xxix
graph against Transubstantiation. And we see,
Burnet continues, " what was the sense of the
first Convocation in queen Elizabeth's reign :
it differed in nothing from that in king Edward's
time: and therefore, though the old paragraph
is now no part of our Articles, yet we are cer
tain that the clergy at that time did not at all
doubt the truth of it. "We are sure it was their
opinion ; since they subscribed it, though they
did not think it fit to publish it, at first ; and
though it was afterwards changed for another
that was the same in sense." (Burnet on the 28th
Article.) So much for the circumstance of let
ting in, as Mr. Butler calls it, those who believed in
Transubstantiation. But unless they professed
what the Article r delivers, they were let in to no
other purpose than self- congratulation on their
mental reserve, or than the Jesuitical pretence
of conforming to what they did not believe^ If
indeed they had been let in without the security
of this profession when required, there is no
knowing to_what extent a feigned submission to
Protestantism might have carried them.
I come now to the notice of some important
passages in the Defence of the true doctrine, which
relate to established articles of our faith, and
agree with the decisions of Cranmer upon the
subjects in our national confession. They are
I See the present Articles of Religion, Art. 28, throughout.

xxx historical and
his sentiments upon the doctrines of universal
redemption through Christ, and of regeneration
in baptism : the former being in the preface, as
now before the reader, p. 1, where he de
scribes the reason of Christ's coming into the
world, and again in the work, p. 234, from his
representation of Christ as our " high bishop,"
until " he took all men's sins unto himself;"
and the latter in p. 74, where the sentence
begins with " Forasmuch as the same is a most
holy sacrament," and closes with " wine is sig
nified;" and again in p. 191, where " The sum
of Damascene" commences, and "feed the soul"
concludes, the valuable observations. See also p.
243. So desirous was Cranmer, from first to last,
to maintain the belief of universal redemption,
that in the Necessary Erudition of a Christian
Man, published in 1543, which is admitted to be
his work; in the Royal 'Injunctions of 1547,
which (as I have before said) are believed to be
drawn up by his pen ; and in the Defence now
before us of 1550 *. he is uniform, animated, per-

" One of the anthems, directed to be sung in these injunc
tions, is this : " Lyke as Moyses lifte uppe the serpent in tbe
wildernes, even so was our Sa vyoure Jesus Christe lifte uppe
upon the crosse, that whosoever belevethe in him shulde not
perishe, but have joye for ever : ffor God so loved the worlde,
that he gave his onelie begotten Sonne, that such as beleve in
him shulde not perishe, but have life everlasting." Regist.
D. and Ch. of York, fol. 47. b.

critical introduction. xxxi
spieuous, and encouraging to every true peni
tent* And with this confidence he closed his days
in 1556: " 'The great mystery that God be
came man," he said, " was not wrought for
little or few offences. Thou didst not give thy
Son, O heavenly Father, unto death for small
sins only, but for all the greatest sins of the
world, so that the sinner return to Thee with his
whole heartj as I do here at this present."
II. From what has been said respecting the
Archbishop's book, and other works connected
with it, I proceed to a vindication of his charac
ter and Conduct in regard to circumstances*
which elsewhere have been detailed, not with
out misrepresenting the history both of himself
and- of the Reformation ; and which, in the de
preciation of both, have endeavoured to exalt
the adversaries of Protestantism. That the cha
racter of Cranmer will not allow deductions, he
must be an injudicious advocate who should pre
tend. I might indeed introduce his failings as
pleading, considering his difficult station, for some
remission of severe judgment upon them : I
might plead his virtues as far outweighing those
failings. But my object in these pages is only
to examine certain statements and insinuations,
' Fox, Acts and Mon.

XXXII historical and
brought against him and his cause, in a tone of
confidence as if not to be shaken, and as if defying
contradiction; as if it were j ust to condemn another,
and take little or no notice of facts that acquit
him ; as if the eloquence of declamation might bid
inquiry seek no further. Hence, if I may here
advert to the "revived slander upon the memory
also of Cranmer's early friend, the early friend too
of the Reformation, the celebrated xAnne Boleyn,
" That the sibaldry, scandal, and inconsistence, which are
found in the pages of Bayly and of Phillips upon the subject
of Anne Boleyn, should in these times be revived, is hardly
credible. The refutations of these malignant reflections are
numerous ; as I shall presently recount. Phillips, who was a
Canon of Tongres, half a century since followed Sanders, whom
about half a century before Bayly also followed ; and they are
accompanied, by another ecclesiastick of their communion, in
bringing forward again the report of Anne Boleyn being the
daughter of Henry. See a Sure way to find out the True
Religion, &c. by the Rev. T. Baddeley, 12mo. Manchester,
3d. ed. 1823. p. 29. But this is the person, who, in speaking
of Cranmer, bestows upon him every infamous name which the
imagination can form, and the pen describe, p. 72. and then in
a note, with unparalleled effrontery, appeals to the biography
of Dr. Lempriere, a Protestant Clergyman, as if confirming
all he says ; when Dr. Lempriere in fact is the eulogist of the
Archbishop. 1 " All the account of Anne Boleyn by Sanders is so palpable
a lie, or rather a complied"! heap of lies, and so much de
pends on it, that I presume it will not offend the reader to be
detained a few minutes in the refutation of it. For if it were
true, very much might be drawn from it, both to disparage king

critical introduction. XXXHl
who is not concerned to find that, to their notice
of the calumny, Dr. Lingard and Mr. Butler
have not distinctly subjoined the references to
authors who have refuted it ? that they talk only
of " y an attempt" to refute it, of its being
"problematical," and of a probability in favour
of the accused? that to " "the powerful argu
ments of Le Grand," and " the strong asser
tions of Sanders," as they are called, many emi
nent names, as of B Camden, and Herbert, and
Ridley, and others, besides that of Burnet,
have not been opposed ? that the b questionable
Henry, who pretended conscience to annul his marriage for the
nearness of affinity, and yet would after that marry his own
daughter. It leaves also a foul and lasting stain both on the
memory of Anne Boleyn, and of her incomparable daughter,
queen Elizabeth. It also derogates so much from the first re
formers, who had some kind of dependance on queen Anne Bo
leyn, that it scans to be of great importance for directing the
reader in the judgment he is to make of persons and things, to
lay open the falsehood of this account." Burnet, Hist, of the
Reformation, vol. i. p. -A2, which see. Hence Dr. Southey
has adverted to " the fiendish malignity, with which her story
has been blackened by tlie Romanists." Book of the Church,
vol. ii. p. 37. " With characteristick effrontery they asserted,
that her mother and sister had been both mistresses of tlie king,
and that she was his own daughter !" Ibid. p. 38.
y Lingard, Hist, of Eng. vol. vi. p. 153.
1 Butler, Book of die Rom. Cath. Church, p. 191.
m See Lord Herbert's Hist, of K. Hen. VIII. p. '259. And
Burnet's Hist, of the Ref. vol. i. p. 12, 43. And Appendix,
p. 278, 279.
b " A book of one Rastal, a judge, that was never seen by
c

xxxiv •- ' historical and
existence of the very authority, upon which
Sanders founded his tale, has not been stated ?
limy other person than Sanders." Burnet, Hist. Ref. vol. i.
p. 42. And pretending no other existence, it may be added,
than what a marginal note in Sanders's book exhibits : " haec
narratio a, Gulielmo R as t alio j udice, in vita Thomae Mori."
There is no printed life of Sir Thomas More by Rastal. Wood
indeed mentions a life of More by this person, as a manuscript;.
but evidently upon report, and not upon the sight of it. See
Ath. Ox. ed. 1691, vol. i. col. 115. Rastal was a Romanist,
the son of John Rastal, who married the sister of Sir Thomas
More, and who, according to Wood, " was a zealous man for
the Catholick cause, and a great hater of the proceedings of
K. Hen. VIII. as to his divorce, and for his ejecting the pope's
power from the nation." Ath. Ox. i. col. 38. Some hasty re
port, some fabricated malignity, from such a parent, and in
such times, the son perhaps had heard, and again reported, and
even committed to writing; but if he did thus much, where is
any contemporary authority to sanction the slanderous tale ?
And why slumbered it, so gratifying as at an earlier period the
knowledge of it must have been to the enemies of the Refor
mation, for more than half a century ? About thirty years
after the first appearance of Sanders's book, the calumny re
appeared with a pretence by the narrator of it, that he had
understood from several persons, while he was in England, just
what Sanders relates ; with which he introduces into his pages
whatever may further vilify her name, in statements most ab
surd, and in the grossest language. And his motive too, like
that which inserted the tale in Sanders, sprung from revenge
of the darkest character : it is found in a rare book, entitled,
Examen Catholicum Edicti Anglicani, quod contra Catholicc*
est latum auctoritate Parliament!' Anglia?, Anno Dom. 1606,
&c. " Is enim rex [Henricus] — in eam dementiam est pro
lapsus, ut eam, quam olim adulter ex Bolenii Vicecomitie

critical introduction. xxxv
and that their cold and circumlocutory avowal
of not believing the tale, (without the proper
guidance, however, to the testimonies that ex
pose the wickedness and silence the effrontery
of the charge,) should yet be accompanied with
the declaration of one of these gentlemen, that
" c he cannot think the historians, who have as
serted it, deserving the epithet of fiendish malign
nity, which Dr. Southey has bestowed upon
them in his Book of the Church ?" How gratify
ing might it have been, if, instead of this, the
able pen, which wrote it, had severely repre
hended Sanders, the leader of these historians,
and

to the fiend

Made answer meet, that made void all his wiles ;
So fares it, when with truth falsehood contends !"
uxore, Annam (Sanderus docet, et ab Anglis plurimis anno
praeterito, dum in Anglia essem, intellexi) procreaverat prolem,
in matrimonium, repudiate legitima et sanctissima conjuge»
duxerit." Ed. Paris, 1607, fol. 5. The wretched scribbler
then proceeds to state, in words which I will not copy, that
Anne Boleyn, not content to indulge her vicious propensities at
home, went into France for similar purposes ; and after her re
turn to England, he says, " fit filia pro conjuge, scortum pro
uxore !" His subsequent ribaldry as to queen Elizabeth would
be laughable, if it were not malicious. So much for impartial
narratives !
c Butler, Book ofthe Roman Cath. Church, p. 191.
* Milton, Par. Reg. It is to be lamented that the term is
applicable, which has been given to Sanders's calumny. " The
c2

XXXVI HISTORICAL AND
But I hasten to what immediately concerns
the archbishop. And I shall pursue the recent
observations of Dr. Lingard step by step ; occa
sionally joining to them the corresponding re
mark, made by other learned writers of the Ro
mish Church. Nor will I " set down any thing"
without a careful appeal to the evidences, which
substantiate what I relate.
The elevation of Cranmer to the see of Can
terbury is thus described. " I know not why
Burnet is so anxious to persuade his hearers^
that Cranmer was unwilling to accept the arch-
bishoprick, and found means to delay the matter
six months. There were few instances of the
see of Canterbury being filled so soon after a
vacancy. Six months indeed elapsed before his
consecration ; but that arose from the negocia-
tion with Rome to procure his bulls. He must
have given his consent at least three months
before." Lingard, Hist, of England, 2d edit*,
vol. 6. pp. 253, 254. Ought not Dr. Lingard
here to have given Cranmer's own account of
his declining the archbishoprick ? And is not
Burnet right in believing the solemn asseveration
of the primate, made in the presence of his ene-
authority of our countryman, Sanders, a man so famous for
veracity, that if Captain Lemuel Gulliver had not supplanted
him, we might use the proverbial phrase, It is as true as if
Sanders had said it .'" Jortin, Additions to Neve's Remarks
on Phillips, p. 563.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXvii
mies ? " e I protest before you all," said Cranmer,
" there never was man came more unwilling to a
bishoprick, than I did to that; insomuch that
when king Henry did send for me in post that I
should come over, I prolonged my journey by
seven weeks at the least, thinking that he would
be forgetful of me in the mean time." To the
insinuation of Dr. Martin, in his answer to this
manly avowal, that there was a base compact
between the king and the archbishop, the latter
replied, with all the firmness of insulted vera
city : " You say not true !" Dr. Lingard, how
ever, having omitted this self-defence of Cran
mer, is opposed to it, as we have seen, in saying
that there are few instances of the see of Canterbury
being filled so soon after a vacancy as in six months;
as if the delay of Cranmer had been only in con
formity to custom, and the time in question a
portion absolutely requisite to complete the
forms of his elevation ; and that therefore Cran
mer is not to be believed. Now the predeces
sors of Cranmer, for more than a century at
least, were certainly not thus impeded in their
approach to the primacy. We inquire after the
dates of vacancy and succession in the f cases of
e Fox, Acts and Mon.
' Archbishop Bredwardin died Aug. 26, 1349. Islip was
his successor, by the papal bull, dated Oct. 7, 1349, published
in the chapter-house at Canterbury, Dec. 18, and he was con
secrated the 20th. Le Neve's Fasti Eccl. Angl. p. 6. Arch-

XXXV1I1 HISTORICAL AND
Islip, and Chichele, and Stafford, and Kemp,
and Bourchier, and Dean, from 1349 to 1501,
and find all the formalities of the bull, and the
reception of the pall, and, the consecration,
within the time named. Then why should six
months be required for the negociation with
Rome, in Cranmer's case, to procure his bulls ?
Have we not the answer in the archbishop's own
declaration ? And yet Dr. Lingard says, that
" the necessary bulls for Cranmer were expe->
dited with unusual dispatch." Yes ; after the see
had long remained vacant, owing to the endear
vour of Cranmer to decline it, then came the
bishop Arundel died Feb. 19, or 20, 1413. Chichele was his
successor, by translation, March 4, 1413 ; received his tempo
ralities in May, and his pall in July following. Le Neve, p. 7,
Chichele' died April 12, 1443. Stafford was his successor, by
tlie papal bull, dated May 15, 1443, received the temporalities
in June, was consecrated in August, and inthronized in Sep
tember. Le Neve, p. 7. Stafford died in June, or July, 1452-;
Kemp was his successor, by the bull, dated July 21, 1452,
The bull of his translation reached Canterbury Sept. 21, the
next day was read in the chapter, and the same day he received
his cross. Le Neve, p. 7. Kemp died March 22, 1543.
Bourchier was his successor, elected April 22 following, and
received the bull of confirmation August 22. Le Neve, p. 8.
Langton died Jan. 27, 1500, that is, 1500-1. Dean succeeded
him ; elected in April following, and confirmed by the papal
bull May 26. Le Neve, p. 8. Abundance of similar exam
ples, as to time, in the cases of prelates of other sees, might be
added.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXIX
papal bull, g bearing the protracted date ; and
still the primate elect delayed his consecration
another month.
This leads us to the difficulty, as Dr. Lingard
terms it, which occurred at this solemnity.
" By what casuistry could the archbishop elect,
who was well acquainted with the services ex
pected from him, reconcile it with his consci
ence to swear at his consecration canonical
obedience to the pope, when he was already
resolved to act in opposition to the papal autho
rity? With the royal approbation he called
four witnesses into St. Stephen's chapel at
Westminster, and in their presence b declared,
that by the oath of obedience to the pope, which
for the sake of form he was obliged to take, he
did not intend to bind himself to any thing con
trary to the law of God, or prejudicial to the
rights of the king, or prohibitory of such reforms
as he might judge useful to the Church of En
gland. Thence he proceeded to the altar : the
ceremony was performed after the usual man
ner : and the pontifical oath was cheerfully taken
by the new prelate, both before his consecra-
* Warham died Aug. 23, 1532. The bull for Cranmer to
succeed him was dated Feb. 22, 1532-3, and he was consecrated
March 30 following. Le Neve, p. 8. Strype's Life of Cran
mer, b. i. ch. 4.
b Strype and Collier have printed the protestation, copied
from the register of Abp. Cranmer.

Xl HISTORICAL AND
tion, and at the delivery of the pallium." Lin
gard, Hist. vol. 6. p. 254. So Mr. Butler:
" Although, when he was consecrated Arch
bishop of Canterbury, Cranmer took the custo-f
mary oath of obedience to the see of Rome, did
he not, just before he took it, retire into a prv
vate room, and protest against it ? Was this
honourable ?" Book of the Roman Catholick
Church, p. 216. No ; certainly such conduct
would deserve a contrary epithet ; as the call
ing four witnesses only, before whom he was to
swear, would be pronounced a suspicious and
unjustifiable act. But the suspicious and -dis
honourable privacy has been only pretended.
Proof is yet wanting. They, who have concurred
with it in Phillips's ' Life of Cardinal Pole, have
withheld the replies to it by the distinguished
k writers who rose immediately in the cause of
Protestantism, and reviewed that insidious bio
graphy with all the accuracy requisite to detect
its numerous misrepresentations. By them, and
by Burnet and Strype before them, the truth
has been minutely drawn from authentick docu
ments. The scruples of Cranmer, concerning
the legality of the customary oath, had been
communicated to the best canonists and civi
lians. By their advice he was led to protest

' See Phillips's 2d edit. vol. ii. p. 210.
k Dr. Neve, Dr. Ridley, Mr. ^Stone, &c.

CRITtCAL INTRODUCTION. xii
against it ; not, however, in a private room, but
publickly and repeatedly1; first, in the chapter
house of the church in which he was to be con
secrated ; and then before those, by whom he
was consecrated, at the altar of the church.
The m register of the archbishop commences with
the declaration to succeeding times, (and yet
exists,) that his protestation was thus made
" openly and publickly, before witnesses specially
and officially named, and doubtless in the pre
sence of many dther unnamed. It has been
rightly ° considered as surprising, that Phillips,
the modern narrator of the pretended clandes-
tinity, should have confidently asserted it, when
the refutation of it by Fuller in particular, whom
he cites soon afterwards, was before him. Phil
lips silently, and as if ashamed of his predecessor,
partly follows indeed Sanders, who says that
Cranmer protested only to a notary, that he un
willingly took the oath of obedience to the pope;
when before him other testimonies also were
1 Burnet, Hist, of theRef. vol. i. p. 129. And Strype, Life
of Cranmer, b. i. ch. 4.
**" In the library of MSS. at Lambeth. Palace.
" In Dei nomine Amen. Coram vobis autentica persona, et
testibus fide dignis, hie presentibus, Ego Thomas in Cant.
Archiep. electus dico, allego, et in hiis scriptis palam, publice,
et e.vpresse protestor, &c. The Archbishop's Protestation,
Reg. fol. 4.
° Stone's Remarks upon Phillips's Life of Pole, 2d edit.
p. 233.

Xiii HISTORICAL AND
open, which deny any privacy. To the oath it
self, it may be observed, the coeval abjuration,
of Gardiner has been assimilated. He had
taken the same oath to the pope, and then re
fused the supremacy maintained in it, with a
declaration, "r that an engagement against right
is by no means binding." But still that is an
after-act, and indefensible. Cranmer, before he
took the oath, declared the limitations by which
he secured himself in his allegiance to the king*
and in his determination to reform the churchy
against a power which would admit neither the
supremacy of the former, nor the necessity of
alteration in the latter. Even the jurist, Dr,
Martin, the enemy of Cranmer, is opposed to
" the secret protest," as Dr. Lingard calls it;
and admits the publicity of the fact, while he
commented indeed severely, and in part falsely,
upon the occasion of it.
" q Martin. Did you not swear obedience to
the see of Rome ?
" Cranmer. Indeed I did once swear unto
the same.
' ' Martin. Yea, that you did twice, as appear-
eth by records and writings here ready to be shewn,
p From Gardiner's Oratio De Vera Obedientia. See Rid.
ley's Review of Phillips's Life of Pole, p. 308. Fox has ad
verted to the perjury of Gardener, and of Bonner, with irw
sistible strength of reasoning, in his Acts and Mon.
¦* Fox, Acts and Mon.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. xliii
"Cranmer. But I remember, I saved all by
protestation that L made by the counsel of the best
learned men I could get at that time." So that here
also we see the Archbishop believing his own
sincerity, which at first led him to declare his
entire repugnance to the oath, uninjured by tak
ing it, after his consultation with those who ad
vised the protest ; a belief, which, in the con
ference with Dr. Martin, he solemnly repeats.
Dr. Lingard adds an observation, made by a cor
respondent of Burnet, (and admitted in the
Appendix to the third volume of the History of
the Reformation,) who says, he had two manu
script letters of Cardinal Pole, in which the
Cardinal charges Cranmer with having made his
protestation only in a private manner. The Car
dinal is said to charge the Archbishop with the
matter in question : but it is not alleged that he
substantiated the charge. Of the letters, in which
this charge is brought forward, no account is
given by Phillips, the eulogist of Pole, and the
slanderer of Cranmer. No verification appears
in a note either from the letters of Pole, pub
lished by Quirini ; or from any other work,
which relates to the character and conduct of
Pole. Not a whisper is uttered as to the page
or volume, manuscript or printed, whence the
precious information has been stolen. But Phil-

xliv HISTORICAL AND
lips may be traced to 'Sanders; and perhaps
he was also indebted to the correspondent of
Burnet, who adds that Pole " s branded the
alleged proceeding of Cranmer with such ex
pressions as he was unwilling to transcribe."
But no transcript of this indignation has yet
descended to us. To this concealed authority
alone Dr. Lingard refers ; leaving Sanders, and
the published letters of Pole, and even Phillips)
" 'by whose aid (weak masters though they be)
he has bedimmed" occasionally the light of his
tory, unsummoned in its behalf. Nor has the
observation of Martin, the civilian, in his con
ference with Cranmer, been noticed as it de
serves. For there he appeals, yet certainly with
no friendly voice, to the record ; and there, as
we have seen, the repetition of Cranmer s oath con
nects with it the repeated protestation, which Mar
tin indeed denies not ; but, by the abuse with
which he loads it, confirms the fact. Collier,
r Sanders says, that Cranmer protested to a single notary,
that he took the oath against his will ; when, in fact, he neither
protested only before a single notary, nor that he took the oath
unwillingly ; but, as Dr. Lingard says, Ire took it " clieerfolly ;"
cheerfully, I suppose, upon the belief that by the publick pro
testation he had satisfied his own mind. See Burnet, Hist
Ref. 1. Records, p. 284. and Sanders De Schismate, . &c. ed.
1585, fol. 58. b. ed. 1586, p. 83.
8 Burnet, Hist. Ref. vol. 3. Append, p. 309.
' Shakspeare, Tempest.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. xiv
in his Ecclesiastical History, to "which Mr.
Phillips and Dr. Lingard often refer with appro
bation, has not thought the denial of the pub
licity in question worthy a single remark. Per
haps he considered, as doubtless every liberal
inquirer after truth will consider, that the objur
gatory words of Pole should have been pro
duced ; as the reader might then see whether
reason had given place to railing, and whether
the circumstances stated might in any respect
be impugned. The charges, made by Pole, have
not escaped at all times the suspicion of x fabri
cation. And if the correspondent of Burnet
had lived to read the masterly vindications, by
Neve and Ridley in particular, of the publicity
which the accusation in his manuscript letters
is said to contradict, he would, I am persuaded,
have joined his voice to the absolving voices of
them and of Burnet.
The divorce of Catherine next occasions Dr.
Lingard to introduce the Archbishop as a gross
hypocrite. " As soon as the convocation had
separated," (after the debate on this subject,)
" a hypocritical farce was enacted between Henry
" Collier was indeed a protestant, and a man of great learn
ing ; " but such a one as protestants generally, and justly, re
gard with suspicion." See Catholicus's Episcopal Oath of Al
legiance to the Pope, &c. p. 30.
* See Burnet, Hist. Ref. 1. Append, p. 282. " This was a
forgery of Cardinal Pole's, which Sanders greedily catched to
dress up the scene.''

Xlvi HISTORICAL AND
and Cranmer. The latter wrote a most urgent
letter to the king, representing the evils to which
the nation was exposed from a disputed succes
sion, and begging, for the exoneration of his
own conscience, and the performance of his
duty to the country, the royal licence to examine
and determine the great cause of the divorce;"
Hist, of Eng. ut supr. vol. 6. p. 256. It had
been well if Dr. Lingard had exhibited this let
ter of the Archbishop. It would at least have
rectified one mistake of Dr. Milner, who alsoj
in his reflections upon Cranmer, says, that " yhe
began an hypocritical and collusive letter to the
King, dated March 11, 1533, representing to him
the scandal taken at the undecided state of the
divorce ;" while the reader also would have been
again enabled to form his own judgment. I will
therefore give this letter, as it still exists, in the
hand-writing of the defamed prelate, among
other z original documents respecting him in the
State-Paper Office.
" Please yt your highnes, that wher your
grace's grete cause of matrimony is (as it is
thought) thorough all Christianytie divulgated,
5 Strictures on Southey's Book of the Church, p. 57.
1 There is a copy of this and of other letters written by the
Archbishop, among the Lansdowne MSS. in the British Mu
seum ; some of which have been printed in the Christian
Remembrancer, 1820. vol. 2. p. 661, et seq.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. xlvii
and in the mowthes of the rude and ignoraunte
coinon people of this your grace's realme so
talked of, thatfewe of theym do feare to reporte
and saye, that therof ys likelyhode herafter to
ensue grete ineonuenienee, daunger, and perill
to this your grace's realme, and moche incer-
teintie of succession, by whiche things the saide
ignoraunte people be not a litle offended : And
forasmoche as yt hathe pleased Almightie God
and your grace, of your habundant goodnes to
me shewed, to call me (albeyt a poure wretche
and moche unworthie) unto the high and charge
able office of primate and archebisshope in this
your grace's realme, wherein I beseche Almightie
God to graunte me his grace so to use and de-
meane myself, as may be standing with hys plea
sure, and the discharge of my conscience, and
to the weale of this your grace's said realme ;
and considering also the obloquie and a brute
which dailye doth spring and increase of the
clergie of this realme, and specialli& of the
heades and presidents of the same, because they
in this behalve do not forsee and prouide conve
nient remedies as might expell and put out of
doubt all such inconveniences, perilles, and
daungers, as the saide rude and ignoraunte peo
ple do speke and talke to be ymynent ; I your
moost humble orator and bedeman am, in con
sideration ofthe premisses, urgently constrayned
a Bruit, i. e. noise, rumour.

Xlviii HISTORICAL AND
at this tyme most humbly to beseche your most
noble grace, that wher my office, and duetie,
is by you and your predecessours sufferaunce
and graunts to directe and ordre causes spirituall
in this your grace's realme according to the lawes
of God and holye churche, and for relief of
almaner greves and infirmities of the peopkv
Goddes subjects and yours, happening in the
said spirituall causes, to provide suche remedy
as shalbe thought most convenient for their helpe
and relief in that behalf; and because I wolde.
be right lothe, and also it shall not becom me
(forasmoche as your grace ys my prince and
souereigne) to entreprise any parte of my office
in the said weightie cause, without your grace's
favour obteigned and pleasure therin first kno wen;
it may please the same to acerteyn me of your
grace's pleasure in the premisses, to th'entent
that the same knowen I may procede for my
discharge, afore God, to th'execution of my saide
office and duetie, according to his calling and
your's : Besechyng your highnes most humbly
uppon my knees to pardon me of thes my bolde
and rude letters, and the same to accepte and
take in good sense and parte, ffrom my Manor
at Lamhith the xjth day of Aprile in the first
yere of my Consecration.
" Your highnes' most humble
" bedisman and Chaplain,
" Thomas Cantuar."

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. xlix
Now the observations of Dr. Lingard and Dr.
Milner, and of other writers, upon this trans
action, have been gathered from the answer of
the King to the Archbishop, which has been pub
lished ; not from , the preceding letter, which
should " never be kept from the eye of the reader
of English history. Lord Herbert had probably
never examined it ; for he says no more, in cor
recting an untrue assertion of Sanders upon the
subject, than that " cthe records which I have
seen mention only that Cranmer demanded and
obtained leave of the King to determine the mat
ter, since it caused much doubt among the com
mon people, and fears of great inconvenience in
the matter of succession." Burnet, and Collier,
and Strype, would not have overpassed the hu
mility and the piety, observable in it, if they had
seen this letter. And. though, as Strype has re
lated, the Archbishop by pronouncing the sen
tence of divorce drew upon himself an implaca
ble hatred from the pope and emperor abroad,
as well as from the papists at home ; every can
did Romanist would at least concede to this let
ter the character of judicious caution, and per
haps be led to believe the assertion of one of
Cranmer's biographers, that his being placed in
this cause of the divorce at the head of other
b A transcript from the copy of this letter, with some
variations, is in the Christian Remembrancer, vol. 2. p. 662.
«* Hist, of Hen. VIII. ed, 1649. p. 347.
d

HISTORICAL AND

commissioners, (among whom indeed was the
active bishop Gardiner,) " d gave great offence
to the Queen, and shocked the Archbishop him
self." Convinced, however, that it was his duty
to determine the King's cause, yet knowing that
his judgement could have no effect without the
royal permission ; therefore it was that the Arch
bishop, " * as the most principal minister of his
majesty's spiritual jurisdiction within the realm,"
solicited and obtained the necessary consent, the
King " saving to himself his pre-eminence ovei
him as his subject."
" But what, it was then asked, must be
thought of the King's present union with Anne
Boleyn ? How could he have proceeded to a
new marriage before the former had been law-
rally annulled ? Was the right of succession
less doubtful now than before ? To silence these
questions, Cranmer held another court at Lam
beth ; and, having first heard the King's proc
tor, officially declared that Henry and Anne
were and had been joined in lawful matrimony;
that their marriage was and had been publick
and manifest ; and that he moreover confirmed
it by his judicial and pastoral authority." Lifl'
gard, Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 258. Such also
was the professed opinion, at the time, of Gard>
ner, the admired prelate of the Romanists,
" Gilpin's Life of Abp. Cranmer.
" Burnet, Hist. Ref.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. li
(though overpassed by Dr. Lingard,) who " pub
lished the King's divorce and second marriage
to be done by the undoubted word of God, the
censures of the most famous Universities of the
world, the judgement of the Church of England,
and by Act of Parliament ; whereof, he himself
was the procurer in the Universities, and in all
points a principal doer." Or as another prelate,
not unbefriended also by the pen of Dr. Lin
gard, Edmund Bonner, in his Preface to Gar
diner's printed Oration, has related it : "% In
this Oration De Yer a Obedientia, that is, concern
ing true obedience, — he (Gardiner) speaketh of
the King's marriage; which by the ripe judge
ment, authority, and privilege of the most and
principal Universities of the world, and then
with the consent of the whole Church of Eng
land, he contracted with the most clear and
most noble lady, queen Anne : after that, touch
ing the King's title as pertaining to the supreme
head of the Church of England : lastly of all,
of the false, pretensed supremacy of the bishop
of Rome in the realm of England, most justly
abrogated." How changed in the time of Mary
was this fellow- commissioner with Cranmer !
' Michael Wood's Translation of Gardiner's De Vera Obe
dientia, a book of extraordinary rarity, having been supposed
to be suppressed by Romanists where possible ; printed at
Rouen in 1553. Pref. sign. A. 3. b.
5 M. Wood, ut supr. sign. b. ii. b.
d2

IH HISTORICAL AND
" Now he layeth all the fault to the Archbishop
of Canterbury, as though it had been that Arch
bishop's only deed. Then he brake the queen's
head, in procuring and affirming her to be ille
gitimate : now he giveth her a plaster with re
canting, and saying, she is legitimate!" But
as the business of the divorce has been called
" a hypocritical farce," why is not Gardiner
also said to have " h enacted" a part in it ? We
might have admitted even a complimentary ad
dress to him upon the occasion, such as, " l my
lord, you. played once, — and were accounted
a good actor." And of the eulogium too, be
stowed, by Bonner upon his learned compeer,
we might have expected some notice. But nei
ther Bonner, nor Gardiner, is introduced into
the pages: of Dr. Lingard with any ridicule, or
reprehension, upon the conduct of either in re-
¦* Shakspeare, Hamlet, and Dr. Lingard. See before, p.
xiv. Indeed, as Strype observes, " though Cranmer pro
nounced the sentence, he was but the mouth of the rest, (the
bishops of Winchester, London, Bath, Lincoln, &c.) and they
were all in as deep as he." Life of Cranmer, b. 1 . ch. 4. And
thus correctly Shakspeare, Hen. VIII.
 " By the main assent
" Of all these learned men she was divorc'd."
Burnet is careful that the reader should not lose sight of
Gardiner in the business ; for to his description as a:bishophe :
adds his name ; but distinguishes other prelates by the names
only of their sees. Hist. Ref. 1. p. 131.
1 Shakspeare, Hamlet.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. liii
gard to the divorce. For an obvious purpose it
was sufficient to aim at the conviction only of
one, and to leave uncensured the " k fellows of
his (pretended) crime."
* Cranmer held another court at Lambeth, Dr.
Lingard says in the preceding extract. He did :
and there in general words, no reason being
given in the sentence, confirmed the marriage of
the king with Anne Boleyn. But before he
proceeded to this confirmation, and immediately
after pronouncing the sentence of divorce upon
queen Catherine, he exercised his usual judg
ment in addressing the king upon this important
point. The letter, in his ' own hand-writing,
still exists in the State-Paper Office.
" Please yt your highnes to be aduertised,
that this xxiij day of this present moneth of
May I haue gyven sentence in your grace's grete
and weightie cause, the copy wherof I haue sent
yhto your highnes by thys.berar, Richard Wat-
kyns. And when I was by the letters of Thurle-
bye, your grace's chapleyne, aduertised of your
grace's pleasure that I shulde cause your grace's
counsaile to conceyve a procuracye concernyng
the seconde matrymony, I haue sent the said
letters vnto theym, and required theym to do
k Milton, Par. Lost.
1 This letter is also found among the copies before-men
tioned, and with variations.

liv HISTORICAL AND
according to the tenore therof; most humbly
beseching your highnes, that I may knowe your
grace's ferther pleasure concerning the same
matrymony, assone as your grace with your
counsaile shalbe perfectly resolved therm, ffor
the time of the coronation is so instaunte, and
so nere at hande, that the matter requireth good
expedition to be hadd in the same. And thus
our Lord haue your highnes evermore in his
blessed tuition and gouemance. ffrom Dmv
staple, the xxiij. day of May.
" Your highnes' most humble
" Chaplain and bedisman,
" Thomas Cantuar."
The procuracy, mentioned by the Archbishop,
is the instrument, by which a person delegated
his proctor to represent him in any judicial court
or cause. The proctor, upon the present occa
sion, appeared in order to assert, that the mar
riage had been solemnized with Anne Boleyn in
the preceding January. And now let us for a
moment revert to this fact. " On the 25th of
January, at an early hour, Dr. Rowland Lee,
one of the royal chaplains, received an order
to celebrate mass in a garret at the western end
of the palace of Whitehall. There he found
the King attended by Norris and Heneage, two
of the grooms of the chamber, and Anne Boleyn
accompanied by her train-bearer Anne Sayage,

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. Iv
afterwards lady Berkeley. — Burnet treats this
account as one of the fictions of Sanders : but
it is taken from a manuscript history of the di
vorce, presented to queen Mary thirty years
before the work of Sanders was printed. See
Le Grand, ii. 110." Lingard, Hist, ut supr.
vol. 6. pp. 250, 251. That the marriage was
private, is not to be doubted ; but that the King
of England should condescend to the celebra
tion of it in a m garret, a circumstance seeking
in vain the corroboration of Sanders, and of any
other writer, and exhibited (as it is said) only in
a solitary unknown manuscript, is what even
the " n smith, with open mouth swallowing a
tailor's news," would hardly credit. Lord Her
bert describes with accuracy the time and the
circumstances of the marriage, except as to the
presence of Cranmer ; who himself has told us
in a letter to Hawkyns, ambassador at the Em
peror's Court, upon the subject of Anne Bo
leyn's coronation, " n You may nott ymagin that
m Sanders mentions the secrecy of the marriage, but evi
dently had no knowledge of its being celebrated in a garret.
For after Lee had consented to proceed with the ceremony,
" annuente rege," Sanders only says, " vertit se ad altare :"
De Schism, ed. 1586. pp. 90, 91. ' But would he not gladly,
and sneeringly, have added, in contigHatione tegulis proximd,
or some such expression, if there had been any rumour of
the kind to bear him out ?
" Shakspeare, King John.
° Archaeologia, vol. xviii. And Ellis's Letters illustr. of
English Hist. 1824. vol. 2. p. 39.

lvi HISTORICAL AND
this coronacion was before her marriage, for she
was maried muche about sainte Paules daye last.
Notwithstandyng yt hath byn reported thorowte
a great parte of the realme that I married her ;
whiche was playnly false, for L myself knewe not
therof a fortenyght after yt ivas donne. And many
OTHER THYNGES BE ALSO REPORTED OF ME,
WHICHE BE MERE LYES AND TALES." Dr. Lin
gard has cited the self-defence of the Archbi
shop, so far as it rectifies the mistake of Lord
Herbert, and after him of Burnet, and of Strype,
and of Dr. p Milner too, that he was one of the
witnesses at the marriage. But it has not been
denied, that the duke of Norfolk, the earl and
countess of Wiltshire, and the brothers of the
Queen, were present at the ceremony. It may
lead the reader often to pause, when the story
of Cranmer meets his eye, if he regards the con
clusion of the defence, which I have just cited,
and which he will not find in the pages of Dr.
Lingard. To the King's supremacy, as it is stated by
Dr. Lingard, our attention is next required-
" The spiritual supremacy of a lay prince was
so repugnant to the notions to which men had
" Dr. Milner is mistaken not in this respect alone ; for he
says, that Cranmer " stood witness to the monarch's nuptials
with Anne Boleyn, on Nov. 14, 1532." Strictures on Southey,
p. 58. Cranmer was not a witness, we see by his own testi
mony ; and the time was not in Nov. but in January.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lyii
been habituated, that it was every where re
ceived with doubt and astonishment. To dispel
these prejudices Henry issued injunctions, that
the word pope should be carefully erased out of
all books employed in the publick worship ; —
that all clergymen, from the bishop to the curate,
should on every Sunday and holiday teach,
that the King was the true head of the Church,
and that the authority hitherto exercised by the
popes was an usurpation, tamely admitted by
the carelessness or timidity of his predecessors.
Cranmer, as the first in dignity, gave the exam
ple to his brethren, &c." (that is, as a preacher
upon the subject.) Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 283.
And yet Dr. Lingard has not here informed the
reader, that Gardiner even xorote a book, violent
against the supremacy of the pope. The supremacy
was invested in the King, as Lord Herbert re
lates it, " q by the approbation of his parlia
ment. The universities and bishops of this king-"
dom did not a little second him ; and particu
larly Stephen Gardiner in his Latin Sermon r De
Vera Obedientia, with the Preface of Dr. Bonner."
** Hist, of Hen. VIII. ed. 1649, pp. 389, 390.
' There is a copy of this book in the library of York Cathe
dral, viz. Stephani Wintoniensis Episcopi de Vera Obedientia
Orat. 4to. Hamburgi, 1536. On the first page is a remark in
MS. the coeval hand-writing, apparently, of some amazed or
offended Romanist: " Apostates Gardineri excusatio." Through
out the book are scorings and other marks, as if implying the
detestation or astonishment of the penman.

lVlii HISTORICAL AND
Dr. Lingard indeed ingeniously observes, that
Henry " ' called on the most loyal and learned
prelates to employ their talents in support of his
new dignity: and the call was obeyed by Samp
son and Stokesley, Tunstal and Gardiner: by
the former, as was thought, from affection to
the cause, by the latter through fear of displea
sure." Stimulated by fear, " as was thought"
behold Gardiner then, as well as Cranmer, giv
ing an example to his brethren, and to the whole
kingdom ; and introduced, with a commendatory
analysis of the product of his fear, by the ob
sequious Bonner ; who concludes his address to
the reader with observing, " 'if thou at any
time heretofore have doubted either of true obe
dience, or of the King's marriage or title, or of
the bishop of Rome's false pretensed supre
macy ; — having read over this Oration, (which,
if thou favour the truth, and hate the tyranny of
the bishop of Rome and his devilish fraudulent
falsehood, shall doubtless wonderfully content
thee,) throw down thine error, and acknowledge
the truth now freely offered thee at length."
But before we copy a syllable from the timid
prelate's Oration, let us not fail to observe him
represented by Dr. Lingard as merely " u con-
' Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 284.
' M. Wood, Transl. of Bp. Gardiner's Oratio, &c, and of
Bonner's preface, sign. b. iiii. b.
* Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 8i9. ,

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lix
senting, in order to avoid the royal displeasure,
to renounce the papal supremacy ;" not as re
probating it with all the learning and accuracy
which he possessed, and which he well knew
were rightly so employed. The title of " "su
preme head of the Church of England," Gardi
ner accordingly asserts, " is granted to the King
by free common consent in the open court of
Parliament : — wherein there is no r newly invented
matter wrought : only their will was to have the
power, pertaining to a prince of God's law, to
be the more clearly expressed with a fit term to
express it by ; namely for this purpose, to with
draw that vain opinion out of the common peo
ple's heads, which the false pretensed power of
the bishop of Rome had, for the space of certain
years, blinded them withal, to the great impeach
ment of the King's authority." The zeal of
Gardiner, and not his fear, is noticed in a man
ner, deserving particular attention, by one of
" M. Wood, Transl. ut supr. fol. xviii.
y The statute that declares the supremacy " is, as the com
mon lawyers term it, statutum dedarativum, not introductivum
novi juris ; as doth clearly appear by the preamble, which hath
these words: Albeit the King's Majesty justly and rightfully
is and ought to be taken and accepted supreme head of the
Church of England, and so is recognised by the Clergy in their
Convocation ; yet nevertheless, for corroboration and confir.
mation tliereof, Be it enacted, that the King shall be taken and
accepted supreme head, &c." Dr. HakewiM's Answer to Dr..
Carier, &c. 1616. p. 47.

Ix HISTORICAL AND
our most learned divines at the beginning of
James the first's reign : " zThe Clergy were the
forwardest in persuading the King to accept and
assume the title of supreme head of the Church,
as may appear in the treatises of divers bi
shops ; as namely, Stephen Gardiner's discourse
of true obedience with • Bonner's preface an
nexed to it ; Longland's sermon ; and Tunstal's
letter to Cardinal Pole : and surely he that shall
observe their vehement protestations, specially of
Gardiner, whom L hold the most sufficient among
them for learning, and withal the soundness and
weight of the reasons which they enforce against
the pope's jurisdiction, will easily believe that-
they thought in very deed as they wrote,
that their minds and their pens concurred in
one." Of short duration was the concurrence,'
however, (if there were any concurrence,} in
the pens and minds of Gardiner and of Bonner:
" "What man," says the indignant and accurate
Fox, " what man reading this book of Winches
ter De Vera Obedientia, with Bonner's preface
before the same, would ever have thought any
alteration could so work in man's heart to make
1 Dr. Hakewill, as in the preceding note, pp. 153, 154. He
was the author of that most ingenious, entertaining, and
learned book, An Apology, or Declaration of the Power and
Providence of God ; as also of other useful works ; and was
Archdeacon of Surrey.
* Acts and Mon.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxl
these men thus to turn the cat, as they say, in
the pan, and to start so suddenly from the truth
so manifestly known, so pithily proved, so ve
hemently defended, and (as it seemed) so faith
fully subscribed ! If they dissembled all this that
they wrote, subscribed, and sware unto, what
perjury most execrable it was before God and
man ! If they meant good faith, and spake then
as they thought, what pestilent blindness is
this, so suddenly fallen upon them, to make that
false now which was true before, or that to be
now true which before was false !"
But while Dr. Lingard has not obtruded upon
the reader more respecting Gardiner, on this
occasion, than what illustrates the pretended
fear of that prelate ; he scruples not to speak of
Cranmer, as though the archbishop were a fana-
tick, and not a man of learning ; when, in truth,
where Cranmer has been considered in the cha
racters of a scholar and a divine, his profound
learning has ever been the object of admiration ;
and his composure of temper has ever been re
garded in opposition to wild notions of religion.
" Cranmer, as the first in dignity, gave the ex
ample to his brethren ; and zealously inculcated
from the pulpit, what his learning or fanaticism
had lately discovered, that the pontiff was the anti
christ of the Apocalypse (Poli Ep. i. p. 444.) :
an assertion, which then filled the Catholick
with horror, but at the present day excites no-

Ixii HISTORICAL AND
thing but contempt and ridicule." Lingard,
Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. pp. 283, 284. - What? that
Cranmer had lately discovered this assertion, when
Dr. Lingard knows that what Cranmer incul
cated had, long before his time, and in the song
of the poet, as well as in the disquisition of the
theologian, been a frequent theme. " b As if
his Holiness," says the admirable writer whom I
just now cited, " had never been graced with
the title of Antichrist before Henry assumed his
title of supreme head!" Dr. Lingard will allow
me to refresh his memory, and to subtract from
his notices of Cranmer the imputed discovery,
in referring to authors with whom he is well ac
quainted. I am not about to expatiate upon the
correctness of the discovery : I profess only to
shew, historically, thtit the title was not coined
by Cranmer. Wicliffe, a century before the
archbishop, ' believed the pope to be Antichrist
Chaucer, his contemporary, the father of our
poetry ; and Dante, his senior, the famous poet
of Italy, d asserted the same of the Romish
Church. At the opening of the sixteenth cen
tury, the title was so often applied to the

b Dr. Hakewill, ut supr. p. 154.
*• Fox, Hist. Ecclesiastica, Argent. 1564. fol. 178. Baber's
Life of Wicliffe, prefixed to his valuable republication of Wie
liffe's New Test. p. xvi.
4 See Dr. Walton's notes on Pope, edit. Bowles, vol. v.
p. 14j'.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. Ixiil
power, that Julius II. forbad the Clergy even
to speak of the coming of Antichrist. The Ro
manists saw the tendency of this application in
our own country at the time when Dr. Lingard
speaks of " the discovery;" the pope being then
(in 1533) " e reckoned among many as the Anti*
christ;" and accordingly, " f by fabulous and
ridiculous stories of Antichrist, they endeavoured
to cast a mist before mens eyes, that they should the
less believe and understand the pope to be him." Of
this ingenious device Strype has presented us
with a g specimen, entitled, A Popish Discourse
of Antichrist. Now Warburton says, that " '" on
this common principle, that the pope, or church of
Rome, was the very Antichrist foretold, was the
Reformation begun and carried on : on this was
the great separation from the Church of Rome
conceived and perfected." So that the wonder
diminishes, when we find the title considered as
the child of fanaticism, and as an ambidextrous
weapon in. theological warfare.
Upon the trial of Lambert very observable
are the words of Dr. Lingard. " Of all the pro
secutions for heresy, none excited greater inte
rest than that of Lambert, alias Nicholson, a
e Strype's Eccl. Memorials, vol. i. p. 163.
' Ibid. p. 164.
* Ibid. Appendix, p. 122.
h Serm. on the Rise of Antichrist.

lxiv , HISTORICAL AND
clergyman in priest's orders, and a school
master in London. Nor is it the least remarka- ,
ble circumstance in his story, that of the three
men who brought him to the stake, Taylor, Bames>
and Cranmer, two professed, even then, most
certainly later, the very same doctrine as their
victim, and all three suffered afterwards the
same, or nearly the same, punishment." Hist.
ut supr. vol. 6. p. 367. Has Dr. Lingard been
able, then, to prove that Cranmer brought Lam
bert to the stake ? He pretends no proof. The
particulars of the examination of Lambert, he
admits, have not been preserved. But he fol
lows the assertion of Phillips, who * says that
Cranmer ,had consented to Lambert's and Anne
Askew 's death. Dr. Milner and Mr. Butler
k join in asserting the especial instrumentality of
the archbishop to that effect. Now from the
court of the archbishop, before which. he had
been brought, Lambert appealed to the king.
And by the king he was heard, overpowered in
the disputation, and condemned to the stake.
" ' We do not find," an amiable biographer of
Cranmer says, " that the archbishop took any
part in his death." Another defender of Cran:
mer, against the present and other assertions of
1 Life of Cardinal Pole, ut supr. vol. ii. p. 208.
k Strictures on Southey's Book of the Church, pp. 32. 60;
and the Book ofthe Rom. Cath. Church, p. 217.
1 Gilpin's Life of Cranmer.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION*. Ixv
Phillips, observes, that " " Fuller acknowledges
tlie consent which Phillips has alleged ; but I
cannot see for what reason ; as it is not authen
ticated by any historian that I can meet with.
Henry had disputed with Lambert, and ordered
him to be burnt, or retract his' opinion : and
chancellor Wriothesley prosecuted Askew, and
put her to the rack : — but it no where appears that
Cranmer s advice, or consent, was asked upon either
of them" Cranmer at that time believed the
corporal presence ; the disbelief of which was
the crime of Lambert and of Askew. To Va-
dian, a learned foreigner, however, who had
written a book denying transubstantiation, and
who wished to find a patron of it in Cranmer,
the refusing* reply evidently marks, in the strong
expression of " ° heec tam cruenta controversia,''
the archbishop's aversion, to cruelties which
phad been practised, in consequence of such
disputes. But while these circumstances are
stated, who would not wish to find, instead of
them, the testimony either of Cranmer's oppo-
• Stone's Remarks on Phillips, &c. ut supr. p. 840.
• Soe the whole letter in Strype's Appendix to his Life of
Cranmer, No. XXV. The date of it is believed to be 1537.
v Alluding, most probably, to the cases of Frith and Hewet,
which Cranmer mentions in the letter to Hawk yns, before cited ;
the former of whom he endeavoured to save by persuasion.
See Lingard, vol. vi. p. S66. And Ellis's Original Letters, &c
vol. ii. p. 10.

lxvi HISTORICAL AND
sition to the proceedings, or his interference in
behalf of the persons whom they affected ? Aa
for the truly mournful tale of the martyr, Anne
Askew, Dr. Lingard indeed refers to it only in
a note, in which he q says, she was, after two
recantations, condemned to the flames by Cran
mer and other bishops. And yet this injury to
the fame of the lady is repelled in her own
words, which Fox has preserved in her Answer
against the false surmises of her recantation. " rl
have read the process," says the noble-minded
woman, " which is reported, of them that know
not the truth, to be my recantation. But, as the
Lord liveth, I never meant thing less than to
recant. Notwithstanding, this I confess, that
in my first troubles I was examined by the bi
shop of London about the sacrament. Yet had
they no grant of my mouth, but this; that I
believed therein, as the Word of God did bind
me to believe : more had they never qf me. Then
he made a copy which is now in print, and re
quired me to set thereunto my hand. .But 1
refused it. Then my two sureties did will me
in no wise to stick thereat ; for it was no great
matter, they said. Then with much ado, at the
last I wrote thus : I Anne Askew do believe
this, if God's Word do agree to the same, and
the true catholick church. Then the bishop be-
*' Hist, ut supr. vol. vi. p. 458.
r Acts and Mon.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxvii
ing in great displeasure with me, because I made
doubts in my writing, commanded me to prison,
where I was a while ; but, afterwards, by the
means of friends, \ came out again. Here is the
'truth of that matter. Anne Askew."
In the foreground of these melancholy pro
ceedings should stand Gardiner, and not Cran
mer. But that arrangement has not been thought
expedient in the pages of Dr. Lingard. With
Lambert the Archbishop had, before his trial,
expostulated l mildly on the maintenance of his
alleged error; nor in the publick disputation
with him was he harsh or overbearing, but ap
peared as it were checked by the arguments of
bis opponent ; (or as Fox describes it, " ° him
self entangled, and all the audience amazed ;")
when Gardiner, " x being drowned with malice
against the poor man, without the king's com
mandment, observing no order, before the Arch
bishop had made an end, unshamefacedly kneeled
down to take in hand the disputation." So in
the case of Askew, while Bonner y attempted
¦ Entries, respecting the examination of this lady, appear to
have been falsely made in the Register of bishop Bonner. Fox,
Acts and Mon.
' See Gilpin's Life of Cranmer, p. 58.
" Acts and Mon.
' Ibid.
T Ibid. Bonner lastly waited upon her in Newgate, in
company with M. Rich. And there, the persecuted lady
says, " M. Rich and the Bishop of London, with all their
E 2

lxviii HISTORICAL AND
to inveigle her in disputation, Gardiner wasp-
ishly called her a parrot ; for " ** she made some
smart repartees upon this bishop-of Winchester;"
and to his severer remarks sl-*e replied, " "she
was ready to suffer all things at his hands ; not
power and flattering words, went about to persuade me from
God : but I did not esteem their glosing pretences. Then
came there to me M. Nich. Shaxton, and counselled me to re
cant as he had done. I said to him, that it had been good
for him never to have been born." Ibid. — Shaxton had been
bishop of Salisbury, and favoured the Reformation ; re
signed his bishoprick, and was in danger of suffering as a
heretick : but he recanted ; and to complete this apostasy,
preached the sermon at the burning of Anne Askew, and wrote
a book in defence of articles to which upon his recantation he
subscribed ; a transaction which escaped not the vigilance of a
warm opponent to the Romanists, who in these articles consi
ders the spirit of Gardiner to be very apparent : " I call these
articles your's, because you subscribe to them, and set them
forth under your name. But if I were required to say my con
science, I could not deny but I think them Winchester's work
manship ; because they agree so well with his doctrine, &c."
See the Confutation of xiii Articles whereunto N. Shaxton, late
bishop of Salisbury, subscribed, and caused to be set forth in
print, the year of our Lord 1546, when he recanted in Smith-
field at London at the burning of Mrs. Anne Askew." By R.
Crowley. Address to Shaxton, sign. A. ii. What became of
Shaxton in king Edward's time, Burnet says, he cannot tell;
but he found that, in the reign of Mary, he was a cruel per*
secutor and burner of Protestants ; yet that by the Romanists
he was still little considered, and raised no higher than to be
bishop suffragan of Ely. «
1 Burnet, Hist. Ref. vol. I. p. 341.
¦ Fox, Acts and Mon."'' '*¦

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxix
only his rebukes, but all that should follow be
sides ; yea, and all that gladly." The name of
Cranmer, throughout the narrative of this lady's
sufferings, is b not once introduced either by
Fox, or Lord Herbert, or Burnet, or Strype, or
Collier. Upon her, it is highly probable, the
sentence of condemnation was pronounced by
c Bonner, bishop of London, in whose register
proceedings against her were recorded. Upon
Lambert, indeed, Cromwell, the Vicar-General,
d delivered the cruel judgement.
With the case of Lambert, Dr. Lingard has
embodied his own opinion of Cranmer's theolo
gical tenets, as to the doctrine of the sacra
ment. " Cranmer's promptitude to reject the
doctrine of the real presence, when he could do
it with safety, has provoked a suspicion that he
b Upon no other authority, than what is contained in the
following exclamation, Dr. Mdner says, that " Cranmer was
publickly reproached with causing A skew's death, by her com
panion and friend, Joan Bocher, when, subsequendy, be was on
the point of pronouncing the same sentence on the latter wo
man : It is not long ago, she said, since you condemned Anne
Askew for a piece of bread ; and now you are ready to con
demn me for a piece of flesh." Strictures on Southey's Book
of the Church, p. 32.
c The bishop of London pronounced the sentence in the
cases of Frith and Hewet. See Cranmer's relation of this,
cited by Dr. Lingard, Hist. vol. 6. p. 366. and Ellis's Orig.
Lett. vol. 2. p. 40.
d Collier, Eccl. Hist. vol. 2. p. 152.

1XX HISTORICAL AND
did not sincerely believe it before : but Burnet
and Strype conceive that he held the Lutheran
tenet of consubstantiation at this period : and I
am inclined to assent to them from the tenor of
two letters already quoted, that to Hawkyns,
and the other to Vadianus." Hist, ut supr.
vol. 6. p. 368. The former of these letters, writ
ten by Cranmer, recites the opinion of Frith,
who had been condemned by the bishop of Lonr
don: " eHis said opynion ys of such nature,
that he thoughte it not necessary to be believed,
as an article of our faythe, that ther ys the very
corporall presence of Christe within the oste
and sacramente of the alter ; and holdeth of this
poynte moste after the opynion of Oecolampa*
dius. And surely I myself sent for hym iii or
iiii tymes to persuade hym to leave that his
imaginacion." The letter to Vadian is f sup
posed to express the prudent desire of eluding,
and, if possible, of then suppressing contro
versy upon the subject, knowing the King's at
tachment to the doctrine of the" real presence;
because, " gdici non potest, quantum haec tam
cruenta controversia — maxime apud nos bene
currenti verbo evangelii obstiterit." But Dr.
Lingard is not correct in supposing that, at this
" Lingard and Ellis, as in the preceding note.
f Lingard, Hist. vol. 6. p. 367.
* Strype, Life of Cranmer, App. No. XXV. and Lingard,
ut supra.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxxi
period, Cranmer held the Lutheran tenet. The
Archbishop was asked by Martin, the civilian,
at his trial, what he maintained as to this point ,
and his answer is preserved.
" h Martin. What doctrine taught you, when
you condemned Lambert, the sacramentary, in
the King's presence in Whitehall ?"
" Cranmer. / maintained then the papists' doc
trine." Dr. Lingard has here found it convenient
to lean to the notions of Fox, and Burnet, and
Strype; who, as Dr. Wordsworth has justly
observed, " * upon no better authority than the
calumnies of his adversaries, and the slight pre
sumptions arising from his early familiarity with
Germans, and his translating the Latin Cate
chism of Justus Jonas, have supposed that Cran
mer once maintained the Lutheran doctrine of
the sacrament ; from whose hands the same error
has been received by very many modern wri
ters." Hence the affirmation of Dr. Milner,
that " k it is universally acknowledged that Cran
mer was a thorough-paced Lutheran, or Zuin
glian, when he travelled through Germany, and
married Osiander's sister, [niece,] for his second
wife, in 1529." And Gardiner and Smith 'ac
cused the Archbishop of being first a Papist,
h Fox, Acts and Mon.
1 Eccles. Biography, 1st edit. vol. 3. p. 550.
L Strictures on Southey's Book of the Church, p. 32.
1 See before, p. xii.

lxxii HISTORICAL AND^
then a Lutheran, and at last a Zuinglian, in
what he maintained upon the doctrine of the
sacrament. And thus too Dr. Martin assailed
the primate with this taunt, " mYou, Mastir
Cranmer, have taught in this high sacrament of
the altar three contrary doctrines, and yet you pre
tended in every one verbum Domini." — " Nay,"
replied the Archbishop, " I taught but two con
trary doctrines in the same :" that is, the two
doctrines of the Church of Rome, and of the
Reformed Church of England. Yet Sanders,
who cared not what he wrote, as Strype ob
serves, " "so he might but throw his dirt upon
the Reformation and the Reformers," has re
peated without any proof the threefold charge
against the Archbishop. Cranmer indeed ap
pears to have ° faltered at the doctrine of transub
stantiation, after examining a learned preacher"
who denied it, in 1539 ; and again, upon a simi
lar occasion, in 1541 ; though he professed the
Romish tenet, till the conference with Ridley
led him wholly to disclaim it, and gave rise to
the treatise which in the following pages is again
presented to the publick. An original letter,
from the Archbishop to Sir Thomas Wriothes
ley, is in the State Paper Office, (without the
date of the year, but, by the date of the letter
"* Fox, Acts and Mon.
u Strype, Life of Cranmer, B. 1. ch. 18.
° Ibid.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxxiii
which it describes, evidently written imme
diately after the receipt of it in Sept. 1540,)
in which the aversion of Cranmer to the Church
of Rome is undisguised.
" p Maister Wrythiosley,
" After my right harty recomendations, theis
be to signifie vnto you that I have receyved out
of the realme of Pole lettres from Dantiscus,
busshope of Varmien. who was many yeres the
kynge of Pole his ambassadour vnto the empe
rour the same tyme that I was the kyng our
master his ambassadour ; in whome I founde at
that tyme grete humanitie and feithfulnes ; and,
as I coude perceyve, an hart he had to serve
the kyngs majestie our master, as if he had been
his own subjecte ; and as lovyngely he intreated
me, as if he had been my own brother, notwith-
sandynge that we were of two contrary jugements ;
for he was a meer papiste. Nevertheles, he wold
heare me diligently, and patiently, to say al my
mynde concemynge the busshope of Rome, and
seemed many times to condescend vnto my juge
ment, and to alowe the same. Howbeit, after
he came home into his own contray, and had ij
busshoprycks gyven vnto hym, Jordanus conver
sus est retrorsum : for he returned agayne holly
*> Directed, To my loving ffrend Sr Thomas Wrythisley,
Secretary vnto the Kyng's Majestie.

1XX1V HISTORICAL AND
adpapismum. And now they say, that he is the
gretest persecutor of Godd's worde that is in all
the lande of Pole ; and you may perceyve by
his lettre, (which herewith you schal receyve,)
how much he is offended with me, for that ac-
cordynge to Godd's worde I wrote myselfe in
the subscription of my lettre, ecclesie Cantuarien,
ministerum. Now syns I receyved this lettre, I
haue been moch inquieted therwith, consider-
ynge what haynous rumors by myschevous
tongues be spred into so farr contrays of the
kyng's majestie, which wolde make any true and
lovynge subject's harte to blede in his body to
heare or reade of his Prince. And bycause you
sholde the better perceyve the same, I haue sent
you Dantiscus' own letter, interlined in places
most notable concernyng that matter; desief-
ynge you to declare the same to the kyng's
highnes at conuenient opbrtunitie, and to knowe
his pleasure whether I shall make any answere
vnto the said Dantiscus, and what answer I
schal make : for the matter is of such import
ance, that I dare not presume to make a slender
aunswer vpon myn own heade. Nevertheles, I i
thynke it not good to open this matter vnto the
kyng's grace vntyl he be wel recouered of his
disease, which I pray God shortely to put away,
lest peradventure it myght trouble and move his
grace, and rather be occasion of longer conty-
nuance of the said disease. And if that had not

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxXV
been, I wolde haue come to the Courte this day
my selfe, but I thought it veray evyl that any
person or matter sholde at this present disquyete
his grace. Wherefore I referr vnto your wise-
dome to breake this matter vnto his grace at
such tyme as you schal thynke most expedient.
ffrom Lamhith this saynt Mathies day.
" Your assured,
" T. Cantuarien."
The original letter of Dantiscus, sent with
the preceding, is in the same repository, but is
in a perishing state. It is dated " ex arce nos
tra Heilsberg. prima Septembris 1540." It is
written with strong animadversion upon obvious
occurrences in England in that year, and with
the following prophetical application as it were
to Cranmer: " Tu tamen ne te wpa^ov fiopog
occupet, quum ea sint apud vos tempora, quae
nulla prius in orbis Christiani regione fuerunt
unquam, caveas." The passage is underlined
by Cranmer, and over the Greek words are
written by him salamandre fatum. Part of ano
ther sentence, underlined also by the Archbi
shop, which is much decayed, is too curious to
be omitted: " Tot scilicet bonorum Ecclesias
difjreptiones, qu.] — quodque magis hlc omnes
in admiracionem ac detestacionem inducit, tot
conjugia, tot que contra omnes cum humanas tum
etiam divinas leges repudia, quae tamen, quamvis

lxxvi HISTORICAL AND
passim hie in vulgus sparsa pro veris habentur,
apud me adhuc sunt ambigua." Here is an
evident allusion to the q frequency of divorces,
which at that time prevailed. And presently
there is an apparent reference to the marriage
of the King ; " de insigni ad te conjugio scrip-
serim." .,
So much for this curious correspondence,
so near the time too when the King, instead of
promoting the Reformation, had been retracing
his steps ; and when Gardiner had been active
in framing, and successful in establishing, the
merciless Act of the Six Articles. This Act
Cranmer had opposed. Dr. Lingard thus re
lates the opposition: " On the second day the
king himself came down to the house, and
joined in the debate : to resist the royal theolo
gian required a degree of courage unusual in
the prelates of that day : and Cranmer. and his
colleagues, who had hitherto led the opposition*
now, with the exception of the bishop of Salis
bury, owned themselves vanquished and con
vinced by the superiority of his reasoning, and
learning. '•On the authority of Fox we are told
that the Archbishop persisted in his opposition
to the last; (Fox, ii. 372. Burnet, i. 258.) but
this statement not only seems irreconcilable with
the Journals, but is contradicted by the express
assertion of one of the lords who were present.
i Strype, Life of Cranmer, B. 1, ch. 20.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxXVU
' Notwithstanding my lord of Canterbury, my
lord of Ely, my lord of Salisbury, my lords of
Worcester, Rochester, and St. Davyes, defended
the contrary a long time, yet finally his highnes
confounded them all with goodlie learning. York,
Durham, Winchester, London, Chichester, Nor-
wiche, and Carlisle, have shewed themselves
honest and well learned men. We of the tem-
poralty have been all of one opinion ; and my
lord chancellor (Audley) and my lord privy seal
(Cromwell) as good as we can devise. My lord
of Canterbury and all his bishops have given
their opinions, and have come in to us, save
Salisbury, who yet continueth a lewd fool.'
Cleop. E. v. p. 128." Hist, up supr. vol. 6. p. 381.
The preceding extract is part of the letter copied
from the manuscript by the accurate Strype,
and printed in the Appendix to his Life of Cran
mer, No. XXVI. though Dr. Lingard has not
noticed it ; where it is observable that the letter
is " without any name subscribed," which also Dr.
Lingard has suppressed ; so that instead of being
written by one of the lords present at the debate,
it may have been the exaggerated communi
cation of any friend to the papal cause, in the
way of news, as indeed it seems to be ; for it
begins, " And also newes here, I assure you
never prince shewed himself so wise a man, &c.
as the King hath done in this parly ment ;" (which
in Dr. Lingard's extract is omitted ;) and pro-

lXXviii HISTORICAL AND
bably was gathered from the report of some lord
who had been present. In relating a publick
circumstance, whether orally or by letter, which
succeeds according to our wish, nothing is more
common than to identify ourselves with the
promoters of it. " r Great triumphing," says
Strype, " was now on the papists' side as ap*
pears by this letter." He calls the news in this
letter, however, " s a flying report." The letter
also, I have observed, is anonymous ; and stiU
it conceals the strenuous, the noble opposition
made to it by Cranmer ; still it affirms, what is
not true, that the bishop o{ Salisbury alone per
sisted in refusing his assent, and that the Arch
bishop of Canterbury with the bishops who have
been already named of his opinion " came in" to
the opposing party, when the ' bishop of Wor?
cester, as well as the bishop of Salisbury, rather
than conform, resigned his bishoprick ; and still
it coldly talks of the debate, in general terms,
of having continued only a long time, when as
Fox has stated the fact, and as Lord Herbert,
and Burnet, and Strype, and even Collier,
r Strype, Life of Cranmer, B. 1. ch. 19.
• Ibid.
• Lord Herbert, p. 449. Burnet, i. p. 266. Strype, Life of
Cranmer, B. I. ch. 19. and Dr. Lingard himself; " Latimer,
and Shaxton, the bishops of Worcester and Salisbury, who by
the intemperance of their language had given offence, resigned
their sees. The French ambassador says, that both refused
fheir assent." Hist. vol. 6. p. 384.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxXlX
have repeated it, " u Cranmer for three days to
gether in the open assembly opposed these Articles
boldly;" and when even the second edition of
Sanders has admitted the " longam difficilemque
akercationem" in parliament upon the subject,
after the first edition (like the anonymous wri
ter of the present letter) had conceded only
" diu multumque disputatum." But the Roman
ists have ever aimed, in reciting the circum
stances of the Six Articles, to fix upon the
memory of Cranmer the stain of a judgment
slavishly prostituted to the will of the king.
" x There was no abject compliance," says
Phillips, " to which he did not let himself
down, to flatter the passions of Henry VIII. and
to secure his own credit, &c. In consequence
of this abandoned turn of mind, he subscribed to
the six famous Articles, which contain so many
points in which the Reformers disagree with the
ancient doctrine, though he disbelieved them
all." Here the archbishop is introduced assent
ing in a manner, which has been invented by
the slanderer : for y subscription to these Articles
° Lord Herbert, p. 448.
* Life of Cardinal Pole, vol. ii. p. 211.
' And yet Mr. Butler thus expostulates with Dr. Southey ; ,
" Although Cranmer subscribed, and caused hia clergy to sub
scribe, the Six Articles, the third and fourth of which enjoined
celibacy to the clergy, and the observance of the vow of chas
tity, was he not married, and did not he continue to cohabit

lXXX HISTORICAL AND
was never enjoined at all. And when after the
second day's debate, (a second day is admitted
by Dr. Lingard,) and the third day to which the
question was adjourned had arrived ; Cranmer
z protested against the bill, though the king de
sired him to retire, since he could not consent to
it. Dr. Lingard adds, that " two separate com
mittees were appointed, with the same instructions
to each, to prepare a bill in conformity with the
royal suggestion. One consisted, and it must
appear a most singular selection, of three converts
to the cause, the prelates of Canterbury, Ely,
with his wife ? was not this dissimulation 1" Book of the Rom.
Cath. Church, p. 216. Let Strype answer Mr. Butler: " The
papist writers say, Cranmer opposed the Six Articles, because
himself was a married man, and so it would touch him close :
but it is plain that there were other of these Six Articles, which
he utterly disliked ; and especially he abhorred the rigorous
penalty of the Act. But hereupon he privately sent away his
wife into Germany among her friends." Life of Cranmer, b. i.
ch. 19. Hear also the belief and assertion of Lord Herbert:
" It appears not what arguments Cranmer used : only I find
the king sent to him for a copy of them, and misliked not his
freedom, as knowing all he spake was out of a sincere inten
tion, though some thought he had a private interest as being a
married man ; though, fearing this law, he sent away his wife
for the present into Germany, &c,'' Hist. p. 448. Astosui-
scriptions to the Act in question, they are the gratuitous appen
dages to it of Mr. Phillips and Mr. Butler. The Clergy were
enjoined by the Act to read it in their churches once a quarter,
but they were never required to subscribe to it.
* " The king desired the archbishop to go out of the House,
since he could not give his consent to the Bill ; but he humbly

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. IxXxi
and St. David's ; and the other, of their warm
est opponents, the bishops of York, Durham,
and Winchester." Hist. vol. 6. p. 382. Has
Dr. Lingard, then, never observed that, in com
mittees ofthe lords and commons upon extraor
dinary questions, both enemies and friends of the
point at issue are found ? And can Dr. Lingard
call Cranmer a convert to a cause, which he waited
for opportunity only again to oppose'? Of these very
six, Articles the archbishop himself afterwards
brought in a bill to mitigate the penalties. For
what the three converts, as Dr. Lingard calls them,
had "proposed as a committee, was rejected.
His most impartial biographer shall relate the
subsequent proceeding. " a This was a bold at
tempt, and drew on him the whole force of oppo
sition. The bishops of Rochester and Hereford,
who had promised to assist him, gave way, as
the debate grew warm ; and begged him to fol
low their example. It was in vain, they told
him, to persist : he could not benefit his cause ;
but he might ruin himself. The archbishop,
with that spirit which he always exerted where
religion was concerned b, declared himself care
less of any consequences. His perseverance had
excused himself; for he thought he was bound in conscience to
stay and vote against it." Burnet, vol. i. p. 258.
** Gilpin, p. 81.
" See Collier, vol. ii. p. 201. f

1XXXH HISTORICAL AND
an effect which he durst not have hoped for.
The laity were entirely exempted from the pe
nalties of the act; and the clergy were in no
danger, till after the third conviction. The pri
mate obtained also that no offences should be
cognizable, after they had lain dormant a year.
It is not improbable, that he was indebted for
this victory to the c book, which he had sent to
the king ; the rigour of whose opinions it might,
in some degree, have qualified."
To the charges which have been brought
against the archbishop for his conduct in the
condemnations of Joan Bocher or Bourchier,
and George Van Parris, as hereticks, we proceed
with sorrow ; as recalling circumstances in our
history, and in the history of Cranmer, truly
painful. For the burning of the former, usually
called Joan of Kent, Cranmer is said to have
contended with the young king, who argued
against it: " the objection was solved by, the
example of Moses, who had condemned blas
phemers to be stoned ; and the king with tears
put his signature to the warrant" Lingard,
Hist. vol. 7. p. 101. It has been usual to leave
Cranmer in the present deplorable scene with
out any strong effort of defence. Strype, who
in his Life of the Archbishop retires as it were
* Burnet, vol. i. p. 265. " Cranmer went about that which
the king had commanded, and made a book of the reasons that
led him to oppose the Six Articles," &c.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxxxiii
from the attempt, resolved afterwards, in his
Ecclesiastical Memorials, not thus to " desert
the primate in his utmost need." Sir John
Hayward, in his Life and Reign of Edward VI.
had said, " d that Cranmer was violent with the
king by persuasions and entreaties to seal the
warrant for Joan Bocher ; and by his importu
nity prevailed with the king, who told the arch^-
bishop, he would lay the charge of it upon him
before God :" — and then he adds his conjecture
upon this, " that it might be Cranmer's impor
tunity of bloOd, by which that woman was burnt,
that he himself afterwards felt the smart of
fire." — To these remarks Strype replies : " e This
passage, whether it be true or no, I cannot tell.
The king mentions nothing of it in his Journal,
only that she was burnt for her obstinacy in her
heresy. And the character is utterly disagree
ing from Cranmer's spirit. For none was more
tender of blood than he ; none more pitiful and
compassionate. Nor was he a man for rigorous
methods and violent courses. Indeed Fox men
tions, that the Council put Cranmer upon mov
ing the king to sign this warrant : which was a
sign he had no great forwardness to it himself.
And in obedience to them he did labour with
the kihg about it, and obtained it. And though
d Eccl. Memorials, vol. ii. p. 473.
' Ibid.
f2

lxXXiv HISTORICAL AND
he did this, it neither argued violence, nor impor
tunity for blood. For as he was not present at
her condemnation, as appears by the Council-
Book, so he may be concluded to have had no
desire of her death, though the warrant by his
means was signed for her execution. His
thoughts, I am apt to think, were, that this fear
of death, which she saw so near, might serveto
reclaim her from her error, when his and other
learned men's reasonings with her, being both
ignorant and obstinate, were ineffectual." Dr.
Lingard notices the next victim, Van Parris, a
j Dutchman,' and a surgeon in London, without
any aggravation ; unlike the historian, whom he
sometimes follows, who, in order to heap re
doubled shame upon his memory, has intro
duced the archbishop as resorting to the king
with the same importunity for the punishment
of Van Parris, as he had for Joan Bocher, and as
if they had both suffered together ; when be
tween their respective condemnations there was

' There were in several parts of England many Anabaptists,
as this Dutchman is said to have been, who had left their homes
in Holland, and in Germany, on account of their tenets. Of
these tenets Burnet has given, in the case of Van Parris, some
account, Hist. Ref. vol. ii. p. 111. A very full account is to
be found in the proceedings against Giles Vanbellar, ano
ther Dutchman, who abjured them, in the MS. Register of
Edward (Lee) Archbishop of York, under the year 158*.
Reg. Prerog. Off. York,

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. 1XXXV
an interval of two years : " 8 Whereas the young
king," Phillips says, " shewed a reluctance to
sign the warrant for the execution of these wretches,
one of whom was more a bedlamite than a here
tick, Cranmer solved his scruples, and prevailed
on him to put his hand to it." Of such inter
ference by Cranmer, at the time when Van Parris
really suffered, there is no notice in the Journal
of Edward; as of such interference also there is
none in the case of Bocher. But Dr. Milner
appeals to Burnet, as testifying the alleged cruelty
of Cranmer alike to Bocher and Van Parris.
And indeed Burnet has misled this learned Ro
manist, and others, by the inaccuracy of his state
ment subjoined to instruments copied from the
register of Cranmer in the Lambeth library.
Burnet must have entrusted the labour of copy
ing to some b unskilful hand. He himself would
never have printed (as in the Records, No. 35.
illustrating his second volume of the History of
the Reformation, it is printed) " Sermo f actus regi,
&c." when the real words in the Register are
" Certificatorium factum regi, &c." It is in fact,
the necessary certificate of the sentence passed
upon Bocher, and again recited in the case of
* Life of Cardinal Pole, vol. ii. p. 209.
** Even the reference to the entries in the Register, and a
date, here mentioned by Burnet, are not correct. The true
date is April 7. 1551. Thefoliainthe Register are 74, 75, and
78, 79.

lXXXvi HISTORICAL AND
Van Parris, in obedience to the Act which had
been passed at the beginningof this reign, that
" the courts of Bishops and all their processes .
should be carried on in the King's name, as in
the other courts of law." And therefore in
these cases the words are, " Vestree Regiae sub-
limitati, &c. dictam Hsereticam relinquimus, &c."
and " Vestrae Regia? sublimitati, et potenftae
brachii vestri secularis, dietum Haereticum reKn*
quimus, et tradimus, animadversione vestra Regii;
puniendum, &c." Now, because Burnet, speak
ing ofthe case of Van Parris> says that the pro
cess and sentence, " together with a petition im^
ploring the execution thereof, and the assistance of
the secular power," are the same as in the case of
Bocher : therefore the legal form, leaving the
convict to the disposal ofthe king, in which there
is no imploration except that of blessing upoa the
reign of Edward, has been converted into the
stain of importunity for blood in the character
of the principal judge. The word petition must
have been adopted by Burnet, or by him who
gave him the copy of the instruments, in the
forensick meaning of the address to one haviftg
j urisdiction or authority ; for the instruments ex
hibit no entreaty whatever, no desire of assistance,
but simply state the process and the sentence,
(as was requisite,) and leave the punishmeal to
the power and the direction of the king. With.-'
out this explanation, the enemy of Cranrner

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. lxXXvii
might still "have advantage against him ;" with
it, the charge deduced from Burnet, as by Dr.
Milner, is refuted.
The intelligence brought to the Archbishop,
upon the accession of Mary to the throne, that
the Roman catholick service had been performed
in his church at Canterbury, has drawn from
the pen of Dr. Lingard the following statement
of the consequences. . The intelligence added,
" that by strangers this innovation was supposed
to have been made by Cranmer's order, or with
his consent ; and that a report was circulated of
his having offered to celebrate mass before the
queen. Cranmer hastened to refute these charges
by a publick denial ; and in a declaration which,
while its boldness does honour to his courage,
betrays by its asperity the bitterness of his feel
ings, ^asserted that the mass was the device and
invention of the father of lies, who was even
then persecuting Christ, his holy word, and his
church ; that it was not he, the Archbishop, but
a false, flattering, lying, and deceitful monk,
who had restored the ancient worship at Can
terbury ; that he had never offered to say mass
before the queen, &c. Of this intemperate de
claration several copies were dispersed, and
publickly read to the people in the streets."
Hist, ut supr. vol. 7. pp. 185, 186. But the
whole truth is not told. The declaration was
certainly drawn with a view to publick use ; and

lxxxviii HISTORICAL AND
was submitted by Cranmer to Scory, who had
been bishop of Chichester, for the advantage of
his private and friendly consideration. Of this
incomplete paper Scory indiscreetly gave co
pies ; one of which was read in Cheapside ; and
many were subsequently dispersed ; but with
out the knowledge or consent, on the contrary
to the great mortification, of the Archbishop.
For being summoned before the Council, and
asked if he was the author of the declaration,.
he answered, that certainly he was ; but that he
was very sorry to find the paper had gone from
him in such a manner, as he had resolved to
enlarge it in many respects, and to affix it, with
his hand and seal to it, to the doors of the
churches in London. This reply before the Privy
Council was made on the 8th of Sept. 1553,
when, Burnet and others say, the Archbishop
was, contrary to all expectation, dismissed It
was on that day, however, that the Council re
solved to commit the Archbishop to the Tower
upon the charge of treason, " * aggravated by
spreadinge aboute seditious bills movinge tu-
multes to the disquietnes of the presente state."
Not a single bill is Cranmer known to have dis
persed. To the injudicious zeal of his friend
the alleged mischief is to be attributed. At the
close of the Latin version of the declaration,
1 Extracts from the Privy Council Book, Archeeolog. vol.
xviii. cited by Dr. Lingard.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. IxXxix
published in 1554, it is there said, " m Lecta
publico Londini in vico mercatorum ab amico,
qui clam autographum sttrripuerat, 5. Sept. Anno
Dom. 1553." Valerandus Pollanus republished
it, in 1554; though Burnet and Strype have
overpassed the circumstance. The English co
pies were probably called in and destroyed. Of
the reprint in 1557 by the English exiles a copy
yet exists among Fox's collections in the ° Har
leian manuscripts, (No. 417.) to whom it was
sent by Grindal, afterwards archbishop of Can
terbury ; and in that part of the written narra
tive, which names it, there is a marginal direc
tion by Grindal, " it is goode that the letter it
selfe be lette in : the copie of it in prynte is
annexed ;" which is a single duodecimo leaf. In
it "the religion of the former reign is nobly
owned ; and a vindication both of the Reforma
tion, and of Cranmer himself, proposed. And
what wonder, if in it there be also an " asperity
which betrays the bitterness of his feelings?"
The false, flattering, lying, and dissembling monk,
who caused the mass to be set up at Canterbury
without his advice or counsel, was Thornden,
prebendary of Canterbury and suffragan bishop
of Dover, who had lived in his family, and with
whom he used to converse most familiarly ; and
was one of several dissembling monks whom Cran
mer had unfortunately selected, or permitted to
¦ Burnet, ii. Records, p. 250.

XC HISTORICAL AND <¦
be selected, from the dissolved priory of Christ
Church, Canterbury, into his cathedral, and
who were joined with Thornden in a wicked
confederacy against him. If, upon .witnessing
this new act of baseness by the leading monk,
Cranmer had shewn no asperity, I should have
marvelled at the tameness which allowed the
usurpation of his authority to pass unrepre-
hended. The recollection, probably, of the ill
choice which had been made of p other worth-
p Besides Thornden, who had been a monk of Christ Church,
I am compelled to name Mills, and Parkburst, and Gardiner,
who also had been of the same monastick body, and were
transferred to prebends in the new foundation. Whether Wil
loughby and Sentleger, who were also of the first prebendaries,
had been monks, I know not. These six were all concerned in
the conspiracy against Cranmer. Indeed Strype has said that
"for the most part, the prebendaries of Canterbury were at that
time addicted to the pope and the old superstitions." Life of
Cranmer. B. i. chapters 26, and 27 ; where the above conspi
rators and their proceedings are named, and their base ingra
titude as well as their false accusations exposed ; together with
the confessions of their guilt ; their supplications to the arch«#
bishop for pardon, and to the king for release from confine
ment ; and the conduct of the Archbishop towards them, " be
ing a man that delighted not in revenge." The meanness o'f
guilt is also very observable in their confessions and submisi
sions. Strype's Cranm. Appendix, No. 33. It is apparendy/
to this transaction of the late monks of Canterbury that an
eloquent allusion is made, in a publication not many years after.
the event : " Did ever those papists, whose lives were sparea
by good byshop Cranmer's meanes, who were brought up, who
were defended, who were advanced, who were sheelded from

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XCI
less characters from the monks of Christ Church,
might also renew the bitterness of his feelings.
"•Many of the members of the new foundation
he had himself preferred, and to many of them
was a kind friend. The expression is too strong
to be mistaken ; and however Dr. Lingard may
deny the practice of other * immoralities, as
cribed to the monks of Christ Church by several
writers ; of the sins of falsehood and ingratitude
towards the benefactor whom they surrounded
he will allow some to be guilty.
But, amongst the many partialities of Dr. Lin
gard, none canbe more revoltingthan his pretence,
by way of contrast to the character of Cranmer,
of an unpersecuting temper in Gardiner and of
a mild demeanour in Bonner; men, who have been
hitherto regarded with national disgust, and of
whom the mention in the pages of Dr. Lingard
disclaims as it were the notice of them as per
secutors, either in combination, or apart. " With
whom the persecution under Mary originated,
is a matter of uncertainty. By the reformed
barme and perill by him, once requite hym with one drop of
kyndnesse? And yet they spake hym faire in hys prospe
ritie!" A Warning against Papists, &c. sign. L. 8. b. Tha
behaviour of Cranmer, upon the present occasion, " who was
gentle even to excess," is also recited by Burnet, UL p.
110. *¦ Strype, Life of Cranm. B. 1. ch. 26.
' Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 346.

XCU /HISTORICAL AND
writers the infamy of the measure is usually
allotted to Gardiner, more, as far as I can judge,
from conjecture and prejudice, than from real
information. The charge is not supported by
any authentic document : it is weakened by the
general tenor of the chancellor's conduct." Hist.
ut supr. vol. 7. p. 259. And whom has Dr.
Lingard introduced to bear him out in the pre
tence of Gardiner's innocence ? The Jesuit Per
sons, or Parsons, who was one of Cranmer's
slanderers ; an Englishman who dishonourably
left his own country, and became a Romanist;
and from the pope obtained leave to esta
blish a seminary at Rome, in which English
students might be educated to act as mis
sionaries in their native country for the propa-.
gation of the Romish faith. But Dr. Lingard
requires " real information," as to the innocence
or guilt. of Gardiner; which is a demand that
cannot be too highly praised, and a demand that
may be answered. Sir John Harington, whose
literary character is well known, and who has.'
repeatedly supplied other information with which
Dr. Lingard has enriched his pages, has left an
account in manuscript of the treatment which
his father experienced, while a prisoner in the
Tower, from Gardiner, who pretended to be his
friend ; and of the opinion, expressed by him,
as to the general character both of the prelate,

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XC1U
and of the times. " 5 Gardiner and his fellowes
did condemne to the fyre a number of poore
harmlesse soules that profest to beleue as they
were taught but three yeares before: — which
great extremitye was part the cause of stirring
vp of Wiat's rysing, for which many Protestants
were greatly troubled : among others my father
was committed to the Tower ; and there, among
other thinges he wrote, he translated Tullie de
Amicitia, but finding Gardiner as he thought his
heavie freind and harkning to no reason, he
wrote a ryme to him, (in which kynde if I were
not a partiall praiser, I would say he was equall
to the best of those tymes,) one stanza whereof
I will here sett downe, that charges the Bishop
with ingratitude :
" Ypur chaunce was once as myne is now,
To keep this hould against your will ;
And then you sware you knew well how,
Though now you swarve I know how ill.
But thus the world his course doth passe :
The Priest forgets that Clark he was :
And you that then cryde Justice still,
And now have justice at your will,
Wrest justice wrong against all skill.
" This and much more to the like effect he
wrote, but still lay in the Tower for his labor ;
• Manuscript in the Library of York Cathedral, No. XVI.
L. 5.

XC1V HISTORICAL AND
which wrong, infecting his Muse with some ran
cor, he prosecuted him with his penne after his
death that persecuted him by his power in his
life, verefieng the old saieng, Scribit in marmore
icesus : for this epitaph I found in a book of my
father's of his owne writing :
" Here lye the bones of busy Gardiner dead,
That in flue yeares spoild more good lawes and lore,
Than two great kings, with all the witts they bred,
Could stablish sure in forty yeares before :
The Queen beguild, the Lords like lymehounds led,
The usurping rule of Rome he did restore,
Burne, head, and hang, imprison, vex, and spoile
The worthie sort of this declyning soile.
" Thus generallie did all the Protestants com-
plaine of the great crueltie in Queen Maries
tyme." pp. 231, 2, 3.
Sir John Harington also left an account, which
has been published in his Catalogue of bishops,
both of Gardiner and of Bonner ; in which the
former is certainly exhibited as an object of less
dread and detestation than the latter. " 'But,"
Sir John observes, " for his sharp persecuting or
rather revenging himself on Cranmer and Ridley,
his too great cruelty cannot be excused. And
the plots he laid to entrap the lady Elizabeth ;
1 Brief View, or Catalogue, ut supr. under the Bishops of
Winchester.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XCV
his terrible hard usage of all her followers ; I
cannot yet scarce think of with charity, nor
write of with patience." Yet Sir John adds,
that he had heard " some as partially praise his
clemency," and others assert " that Bonner was
more faulty than he ; and that Gardiner would
rate him for it, and call him ass for using poor
men so bloodily." Others have attempted to clear
him of being the author of the cruelties in the
reign of Mary, by laying the blame of them
upon Cardinal Pole. Of the subtilty of his
character none appear to have doubted ; and to
his learning all have yielded their testimony.
Fox proclaims not his pride, and envy, and
cruelty, without mentioning also his sharp wit
and his excellent memory. But the severest
reflection upon him, among many which remain,
is, that avarice and cruelty were the chief " or
naments of his character.
*' There appears to be reason to think," Mr.
Butler observes, " that Mary's bishops, in gene
ral, did not promote the persecution. Little blame
seems imputable to " Cardinal Pole, or bishop Tun-
" " Avaricia et crudelitas, ejus erant prcecipua ornamenla."
Account of Gardiner, prefixed to D. Nicolai Ridleii, Episc.
Lond. de Ccena Dominica Assertio, &c. Genev. 1556. Epist.
p. 6.
x Very powerfully it has been remarked, that " it ought not
to create surprise that Pole should have found advocates, when
such characters as Bonner and Gardiner have had their apolo
gists. Of the former it has been said lay a Catholick historian

XCV1 HISTORICAL AND
stal ; more is chargeable on Gardiner ; the greatest
part of the odium fell on Bonner. Dr. Lingard
[him, who has prefixed the name of Dodd to his Church His
tory,] that he acted according to the statutes ; which is a mani
fest untruth : for he began to persecute the Protestants with
the utmost rigour before the revival of the repealed laws ; and
even after their re-enactment he exceeded the powers, which
were vested in him, by taking the execution into his own hands,
and inflicting cruel and illegal punishments. The same charge
justly lies against the crafty Gardiner, of whom it is said upon
the authority of the Jesuit, Robert Parsons, that ' no one great
man in that government was further off from blood and bloodi
ness, or from cruelty and revenge ; and that he was known to
be a most tender-hearted and mild man in that behalf; inso
much that it was sometimes, and by some great personages,
objected to him for no small fault, to be ever full of compas
sion in the office and charge that he bare ; yea, to him espe
cially it was imputed, that none ofthe greatest and most known
Protestants in queen Mary's reign were ever called to account,
or put to trouble for religion." Parsons's Answer to Sir Fran
cis Hastings, as quoted by Lingard, vol. vii. p. 259. " Upon
this testimony of an apostate and traitor, who endeavoured all
that in him lay to make his native country a province of Spain,
we are required to believe, contrary to the evidence of Gar
diner's contemporaries, that this intriguing and versatile church
man was a man of compassion, and adverse to persecution.
Yet it is a known fact, and the historian who has quoted Par
sons as a voucher for Gardiner's character, could not but know
it, that with this ecclesiastick, and with him alone, originated
the six bloody Articles, &c. and that the butchery of- the two
prelates, Ridley and Latimer, to say nothing of Cranmer, was
the joint deed of Gardiner and Pole, &c." The Life of Lati
mer, prefixed to his Sermons, by John Watkins, LL.D. 1824,
p. clxi.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XCVII
suggests some observations, which render it very
probable, that neither Gardiner nor Bonner were
quite so guilty as they have been represented."
Book of the Rom. Cath. Church, p. 207. Of
Gardiner I have spoken. The tyranny of Bon
ner, and his exultation over the victims of it,
are the themes of several publications from 1541
till long after his death ; exclusively of what
Fox has at large related of him. Even Phillips,
the biographer of Pole, conceding that " y a
number of unhappy persons" (that is, protes
tants in the reign of Mary,) " "suffered in the
diocese of London, of which Bonner was bi
shop, who is represented as the chief incendiary of
that flame ;" even Phillips has offered no contra
diction to this especial charge. But it is need
s' Life of Cardinal Pole, vol. ii. p. 216.
1 I will here advert to Dr. Lingard's account of the Protes
tant martyrs in the reign of Mary : " After every allowance it
will be found, that in the space of four years almost two hundred
persons perished in tlie flames for religious opinion." Hist, ut
supr. vol. vii. p. 285. An authentick account has been pre
served, which Strype has printed, (Eccl. Mem. vol. iii. Orig.
Papers, p. 291,) of the number of those who were burned, in
the time of Mary, for religion ; and of the places where they
suffered. The gentle relation of only " almost two hundred,"
which the pen of Dr. Lingard concedes, miserable to relate, is
augmented in the "four years,'' of which he speaks, to " two
hundred and eighty-eight, besides those that dyed of famine in
sondry prisons :T but with this number of those who perished
at the stake, and with any mention of those who perished by
famine, the pages of Dr. Lingard are not stained.
S

XCV111 HISTORICAL AND
less to cite further evidence. When Bonner is
named, " who knows not of his story?" Who
has not read, that from him Elizabeth, at her
accession to the throne, " •* turned aside, as from
a man polluted with blood, who was a just ob
ject of horror to every heart susceptible of huma
nity 1" His successor, bishop Grindal, has left
another exhibition of the " real information,"
whidi Dr. Lingard demands, in the last tribute
which was paid to this miserable prelate. Bon
ner had been excommunicated: By the law
therefore, Grindal says, " b Christian sepultures
might have been denyed him. But we thought
nott goode to deale so rigorouslye, and therfore
permitted him to be buried in St. George's
church-yarde ; and the same to be done nott in
the daye solemnely, butt in the nighte privilye :
which I, and some other with whome I con
ferred, thought requisite in that person for two
causes. One was, I hearde that diverse his po-
pishe cousins and frendes in London assembled
themselves, entendynge to honor his funeralle so
moche as they coude : of which honor such a per
secutor was nott worthy, and speciallye in these
dayes. Another was, for that I feared that the
people of the cittie, (to whom Bonner in his life was
odious,) if they had seene flockynge of Papistes
* Hume, Hist, of Eng. and Burnet, vol. ii. 374.
* Ellis's Original Letters, ii. p. 258.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. XCIX
aboute his coffin, they would have been moved
with indignation."
But in relating the persecution under Mary,
Dr. Lingard observes* that " fortunately for the
professors of the ancient faith, Edward died
before the code of ecclesiastical laws, supplied
by Cranmer, had obtained the sanction of the
legislature : by the accession of Mary the power
of the sword passed from the hands of one reli
gious party to those of the other ; and within a
short time Cranmer and his associates perished
in the flames which they had prepared to kindle
for their opponents." Hist. vol. 7. p. 258. We
might, at the first reading of this melancholy
passage, imagine that the persons who prepared
and digested the body of laws, entitled Refor
matio Legum Ecclesiasticarum, (which is the code
in question,) had all perished in like manner with
the primate ; and that to these merciless pre
lates, divines, and lawyers, in all thirty-two,
was meted out the punishment which they only
had enacted. In this company there were indeed
four or five, who were associates in martyrdom
with Cranmer. And as to the persecuting code,
it is called by Strype " a very noble enterprise ;"
and by Burnet, " that noble design, so near be
ing perfected in king Edward's days." It was
not perfected ; that is, perhaps some hesitation
still existed among the framers of the code as to
the penalties recited in it, which in the mind of
g2

C HISTORICAL AND
the king, or of Cranmer, is very likely to have
prevailed ; but certainly it failed of being com
pleted or ratified, in consequence of the death
of the king. As to an establishment of it, which
indeed had been intended in the former reign, it
cannot be said that " the feet" of these associates
of Cranmer " were swift to shed blood ;" for
the design, when it was revived in 1549 by act
of parliament, directed indeed the examination
of the old and a compilation of new ecclesias
tical laws, but not absolutely the establishment
of the altered code exactly at the end of the
time prescribed for the important labour ; which
was the term of three years. And were Cranmer
and his associates as active in exercising " the
power of the sword" in the reign of Edward, as
by others it was exercised in the reign of Mary ?
But they d intended it, as Dr. Lingard evidently
insinuates ; and it may be sufficient in his esti
mation, perhaps, to condemn a Protestant for
the supposed intention, and acquit the Ro
manist for the real act ; or it may be his hope
to persuade the reader, that persecution was
equally busy on both sides ; that even the as
sociates of Cranmer led the way to the atroci
ties of Mary's agents ; and that, in the present
'' Mr. Butler charitably says, that Cranmer and his asso
ciates wished Mary and her associates to be exposed to their
projected persecutions. See the Book of the Rom. Cath.
Church, p. 205.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. CI
case, the accomplished scholars and divines of
the reign of Edward, of whose names the nation
is proud, are to be dragged before the publick,
exclaiming as it were,

• " * we but teach

" Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return
" To plague the inventor."
But these learned men were not the inventors
of such measures, nor the persecutors of hundreds
of persons, or of tens. By their means severe
laws of the former reign were repealed. From
the school, in which they had been taught the
lesson of persecution, they gathered indeed so
much ofthe papal laws as pronounced the ty
ranny of putting men to death for their opi
nions ; and to the civil magistrate assigned the
power, which had long been exercised by the
pope, of punishing those who maintained here
tical opinions. It was by the decisions and
practice of the Church of Rome for above six
centuries, by the revived laws against hereticks,
that the agents of Mary directed their pro
ceedings in regard to such persons. And hence
originated " the '** foulest blot, on the character
of the queen, her long and cruel persecution of
the reformers ;" the sacrifice of nearly three
• Shakspeare, Macbeth.
' Dr. Lingard's own confession, Hist. vol. 7. p. -330.

CU HISTORICAL AND
hundred persons at the stake, the death of others
in prison and by famine, for not yielding their
religious opinions ; and most of them for deny
ing transubstantiation.
This brings us at once to the last days and
hour of Cranmer, who " perished in the flames
which" the Church of Rome in earlier times
" had kindled," and which in the reign of Mary
raged with redoubled fury. With no concession
to the s weakness of human nature, with no ac
knowledgment of the fallen prelate's self-con
viction, Dr. Lingard thus introduces him. ¦" He
had not the fortitude to look death in the face.
To save his life, he feigned himself a convert to
the established creed; openly condemned his
past delinquency ; and, stifling the remorse of
his conscience, in seven successive instruments
abjured the faith which he had taught, and
approved of that which he had opposed." Hist.
vol. 7. p. 274. Not a syllable follows of the
subtilty, with which the fortitude of the Arch
bishop had been assailed and subdued ; nor of
the manner by which the instruments of abjura
tion were procured, and in which they appeared.
Dr. Lingard would not willingly, I am per
suaded, augment the degradation of Cranmer:
bat to the six instruments of the Archbishop's.
* " We may admire inflexible constancy ; but it becomes
very few of us to insult over such weakness." Dr. Sturgee,
Answ. tp Dr. Milner, 2nd edit. p. 1 82. «

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. ciii
abjuration, published by Bonner, he has for the
first time in the page of history mistakenly
added a seventh. It is necessary here to copy at
length what the indefatigable and accurate
Strype has recorded.
" h Other historians speak of the Archbishop's
recantation, which he made upon the incessant
solicitations and temptations of the popish zea
lots at Oxford. Which unworthy compliance
he was at last prevailed with to submit to, partly
by the flattery and terror suggested to him, and
partly by the hardship of his own straight im
prisonment. Our writers mention only one re
cantation ; and that Fox hath set down ; wherein
they follow him. But this is but an imperfect
relation of this good man's frailty. I shall there
fore endeavour to set down this piece of his his
tory more distinctly. There were several re
canting writings to which he had subscribed one
after another : for after the unhappy prelate by
over persuasion wrote one paper with his sub
scription set to it, which he thought to pen so
favourably and dexterously for himself, that he
might evade both the danger from the state, and
the danger of his conscience too ; that would not
serve, but another was required as explanatory
of that. And when he had complied with that,
yet either because writ too briefly or too ambi-
h Eed. Mem. vol. iii* p* 232.

CIV HISTORICAL AND
guously, neither would that serve, but drew on
a third, fuller and more expressive than the for
mer. Nor could he escape so : but still a fourth
and fifth paper of recantation were demanded of
him to be more large and particular. Nay, and
lastly a sixth, which was very prolix, containing
an acknowledgment of all the forsaken and de
tested errors and superstitions of Rome, an ab
horrence of his own books, and a vilifying of
himself as a persecutor, a blasphemer, and a
mischief-maker ; nay, and as the wickedest
wretch that lived. And this was not all; but
after they had thus humbled and mortified the
miserable man with recantations, subscriptions,
submissions, and abjurations, putting words into
his mouth which his heart abhorred ; by all this
drudgery they would not permit him to redeem
his unhappy life; but prepared him a renunciatory
oration to pronounce publickly in St. Mary's Church,
(Oxford,) immediately before he was led forM$ to
burning. But here he gave his enemies, insatia
ble in their reproaches of him, a notable disap
pointment. They verily thought that when they
had brought him thus far, he would still have
said as they would have him. But herein their
politicks failed them ; and by this last stretch of
the cord all was undone, which they with so
much art and labour had effected before.' . For
the reverend man began indeed ,his speech ac
cording to their appointment and pleasure; but

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. CV
in the process of it, at that very cue when he
was to own the Pope and his superstitions, and
to revoke his own book and doctrine of the Sa
crament, (which was to be brought in by this
preface, that one thing above all the rest troubled
his conscience beyond all that ever he did in his life,)
he, on the contrary, to their great astonishment
and vexation, made that preface serve to his re
vocation and abhorrence qf his former extorted sub
scriptions, and to his free owning and standing to his
book wrote against Transubstantiation, and the
avowing the evangelical doctrines he had before
taught." To the preceding passage Dr. Wordsworth
has subjoined his own acute observation, that
" * notwithstanding all the researches of the his
torians, it cannot, I think, be denied, that this
part of Cranmer's story is involved in great ob
scurity and uncertainty. That he made, a sub
mission and recantation, cannot be doubted:
but I own, I know not how to reconcile six seve
ral submissions, and the nature of them, their
dates, &c. with other circumstances of the nar
rative. We are not told the precise period at
which he was removed to the lodgings of the.
dean of Christ Church, and plied with the seve
ral k topicks, and arts, of seduction, enumerated
' Eccl.. Biography, vol., hi. p. 591.
k Especially witli the promise of his life being spared, and
with suggestions that yet he might live many years, and yet

CV1 HISTORICAL AND
by Fox. But let it be observed, that the 14th
of February was the day of his degradation, at
which time, surely, the Archbishop's behaviour
gave no warnings of his lamentable fall : and y«fc
the fourth submission, as published by Bonner,
(and it should seem that they are ranged chro-.
nologically,) is dated on the 16th of the same
month, only two days after. There are other
very suspicious circumstances accompanying
Bonner's publication. But the above remark, I
think, is alone sufficient to shew, that this part
of the narrative requires further elucidation."
Indeed there are very ' suspicious circum
stances attending the publication of the six ab
jurations. Dr. Lingard says, " there is an entry
in the Council- Book of March 13, ordering. the
printers, Rydall and Copland, to give up the
printed copies of Cranmer's recantation to be
burned. (Burnet, vol. iii. p. 179.) Perhaps it
was incorrectly printed : perhaps ' they waited
enjoy, dignity or ease, or both, This was no new artifice, of the
Romanists of that period, when a Protestant was to be reco-
vered to their church. To the martyr, Dr. Rowland Taylor,
it was accordingly urged, though in vain, as to producing any
recantation, just as it had been successfully urged to Cranmer :
" You are a man of goodly personage, in your best strength,
ami by nature like tp live many years ; and, without doubt,
you should in time come to be in as good reputation as ever
you were, or rather better," &c. Fox, Acts and Mon.
' ' : Came rar ins, in his Life of Melancthon, seems to suspect
the subscriptions. Vita P. Mel. 1655, p. 340.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. CV11
for that which, he said, God would inspire him
to make." Hist. vol. 7. p. 276. The date of
the order, in this extract, is the eighth day pre
ceding the martyrdom of Cranmer. But the
order which I will copy, appears to have been
dated three days later. I shall premise, what
Burnet has fairly told, and Dr. Lingard unfairly
concealed, " " that the Privy Council were con
cerned, when they heard that Cranmer's paper of
recantation was published." This is the entry in
the Council Book : "°A recognisance entred
intT) by one Ryddall and Coplande prynters, that
they will deliver forthwith to Mr. Cawood the
queen's Majesties printer all such bookes as
they of late printed concerning Cranmer's re
cantation to be by the said Cawoode burnt.
dat. xvi Marcb>1555." The sneer and the con
jectures of Dr. Lingard, in regard to this order,
we have seen. Let us now observe what the
learned Whiston, in defending the Archbishop,
has said ; that " ° if the Privy Council had been
satisfied that this recantation was genuine, their
procedure seems not a little absurd and incredi
ble. It is much more likely that the Council
ordered it to be burnt as a known forgery, and as
m Burnet, vol. iii. p. 179.
a From the Orig. MS. by Bishop Kennet. Lansdowne MSS.
Brit. Mus. No' 980, p. 189. ¦**"
.. ? Ap Enquiry into the Evidence of Archbishop Cranmer's
Recantation, &c, 1736, p. 16.

CVlll HISTORICAL AND
capable of raising a groundless compassion and
indignation in the people, when they should be
lieve Cranmer was become a thorough Roman
Catholick, and yet was to be burnt as an obsti
nate Protestant heretick." However, after a
few days, the recantations, certainly with some
palpable fabrications in them, were entrusted to
the press of Cawood, and appeared with the
sanction both of royal and episcopal authority.
Bonner, bishop of London, is said in the title-
page to have examined it; and it. was printed
cum privilegio, that is, with Mary's express per
mission. Now to the words in this authorized publica
tion, pretending to be those of the Archbishop, is
prefixed this direction, " p Here to declare the
Querns just title to the crowne;" at^once betraying

p From the publication of Bonner, entitled, " All the Sub-
myssyons and Recantations of Thomas Cranmer, late Arche-
byshop of Canterburye, Iruehj set forth both in Latyn and
Englysh, agreable to the originalles, wrytten and subscribed
with his owne hande. Visum et examinatum per reverendum
patrem et dominum, Edmundum, Episcopum London. Anno
MDLVI. Excusum Lond. in sedibus J. Cawodi, Typogr.
Regiae Majest. cum privilegio." Sign. B. i. b. ' This publica
tion in its original form is very rarely to be met with ; as though
not called in by authority to be burnt, it is supposed to have
been by die Romanists, in after times, for obvious reasons, sup
pressed as much as possible. From an original copy I have
made my extracts. Strype has printed the whole, interspersed
with his remarks. Eccl. Mem. vol. iii. p. 283, et seq.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. CIX
a part of what had been q prepared for the martyr
by others, not what he uttered himself. The
words are as follow. " r And now I come to the
great thing that so much troubleth my consci
ence, more than any other thing that ever I did ;
and that is, setting abroad untrue books and wri
tings contrary to the truth of God's Word, which
' Dr. Lingard observes, that on the morning of his execution
Cranmer transcribed and signed a paper ; and giving to Gar-
cina, the Spanish friar, who was directed to attend him, " one
copy of it, retained the other for his own use. But when the
friar was gone, he appears to have made a second copy, in
which, entirely omitting the fourth article, the assertion of the
queen's right, he substituted, in lieu ofthe confession contained
in the fifth, a disavowal of the six retractations which he had
already made." Hist. vol. 7. p. 278. Dr. Lingard then must
suppose, what is irreconcilable with all the circumstances, that
though Cranmer gave the friar a copy of his paper in which the
assertion of the queen's right was made, and which, as he ob
serves, the Archbishop entirely omitted, Bonner would be so
moderate as not to have printed it ! This egregious super-
intendant of the publication of Cranmer's recantations, having
the effrontery to publish to the world the very contrary to
what Cranmer professed as if it had been approved and pro
nounced by him, here forgot to fabricate the fourth article, or
assertion of the queen's right ; and, relying on the deluded
primate's complete submission, prepared for him only the hint
on which he was to speak: " Here to declare the quenes just
title to the crowne." Dr. Milner, strange to tell, refers to
these recantations in Strype, as if taken from the Lambeth Re
cords ! Strict, on Southey, p. 61. Not a syllable on the sub
ject is in the Lambeth Records ; nor indeed has Strype named
them. * From the Submyssyons, &c. sign. B. i. b. B. ii. a.

CX HISTORICAL AND
now I renounce and condemn, and refuse them utterly
as erroneous and none of mine. But you must know
also what books they were, that you may beware of
them ; or else my conscience is not discharged. For
they be the books which I wrote against the Sacra
ment qf the Altar, since the death of King Henry
the Eighth. But whatsoever I wrote then, now is
time and place to say truth. Wherefore renouncing
all those books, and whatsoever is in them contained*
I say and believe, that our Saviour Christ Jesus is
really and substantially contained in the blessed Sa
crament of the Altar, under the forms of bread and
wine." Now the real words of Cranmer (those which
are printed in the preceding extract, in Italick
letters, not being his,) have been s preserved by
Fox, in his Acts and Monuments; and agree
minutely with the speech, taken at the time by
s Fox thus abridges the narration : " the Archbishop revokes
his former recantations, and repents the same ; stands to his
book; deceives the expectation of the Papists; and throws
them into great rage." Burnet, in his History of the Refor
mation, says, that the Archbishop, after their last extortion of
subscriptions from him, " still conceiving some jealousy that
they might burn him, wrote secretly a paper, containing a sin
cere confession of his faith, such as flowed from his conscience,
and not from his fears ; and being brought out, he carried that
along with him." The historian then gives the substance of
this paper, precisely corresponding with what is found in Fox,
and what is related by the Papist who attended the last moments
of the martyr.

CRITICAL .INTRODUCTION. Cxi
a papist, who was an eye and ear witness to the
last moments of the martyr.
From the honest, plain, and uncontradicted
testimony, therefore of the papist, an adversary
of the Archbishop, the genuine speech here fol
lows ; such testimony convincing us, that when
death approached, Cranmer had " the fortitude
to look it in the face ;" convincing us also of the
baseness practised by those who, to the act of
martyring him, scrupled not to join the fabrica
tion we have just seen.
These, then, are the true words : " ' And now
I come to the great thing that troubleth my con
science more than any other thing that ever I
said or did in my life ; and that is, the setting
abroad things contrary to the truth ; which here
I now renounce and refuse, as things written
with my hand, contrary to the truth which I
thought in my heart, and writ for fear of death,
and to save my life, if it might be ; and that is,
all such bills, which I have written or signed
with mine own hand since my degradation ;
wherein I have written many things untrue.
And forasmuch as my hand offended in writing
contrary to my heart, therefore my hand shall
first be punished ; for if I may come to the fire,
' This account of Cranmer's end, related by a Papist to his
friend in a letter from Oxford, which is of considerable length
and very circumstantial, is given by Strype in his Life of Cran
mer, b. iii. ch. 21.

CXII HISTORICAL AND
it shall be first burned. And as for the Pope,' I
refuse him, as Christ's enemy and antichrist,
with all his false doctrine. And here, being ad
monished of his recantation and dissembling, he
said, Alas, my lord, I have been a man that all
my life loved plainness, and never dissembled
till now against the truth; which I am most
sorry for. He added hereunto, that, for the Sa
crament, he believed as he had taught in his
"book against the bishop of Winchester. And
here he was * suffered to speak no more. Com
ing to the stake with a cheerful countenance
and willing mind, he put off his garments with
haste. Fire being now put to him, he stretched
out his right hand, and thrust it into the flame ;
and held it there a good space before the fire
came to any other part of his body, where his
u See the account of this book in the present Introduction,
p. xi. et seq.
* In his disputation with the Papists on Transubstantiation
and the Mass, he had in like manner not been suffered to speak
all he wished. " Such haste was made, that no answer could
be suffered to be taken fully to any argument, before another
brought a new argument, &c." And Ridley, who was con
cerned with him in the same disputation, has recorded that he,
" never saw or heard any thing done or handled more vainly,.
or tumultuously," than this disputation was by their papistical
opponents, who compelled them, after every kind of outrage
and insult, to leave off the reading their arguments and theif
proofs. Fox, in his Acts and Monuments, has preserved at
large these memorials of literary as well as religious cruelty.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. CXU1
hand was seen of every man sensibly burning ;
crying with a loud voice, " * This hand hath
qffended." •Such was the end of Archbishop Cranmer,
over whose weakness, as well as strength, the
Romanists triumphed ; but of whom it may be
also said, in the history of his abjuration, that
" z out of weakness he was made strong, and
waxed valiant ;" regardless of the base denial
of their promised pardon, and punishing as far
as he could his own unworthy submission to the
treacherous conditions of it
Whoever attentively considers the character
of Cranmer, will agree with ' one of his biogra
phers, that the light in which he appears to most
advantage, is in that of a reformer, conducting
the great work of a religious establishment.
That work for near three centuries has " b stood
like a tower." And is it now to be assailed, with
the hope of shaking it, by the revived enginery of
early and of midway opponents ? Is it possible
that the misrepresentations of former days, the
distortions of ancient facts, supported by in
sinuating/ diction and ingenious arrangement,
should lead us to believe that the labours of
^ Cranmer were ill-directed, and that his great
* "His eyes were lifted up to heaven," says Fox, " and often
times he repeated his unworthy right hand, so long as his voice
would suffer .him." ?
* Heb. xi. 34. » Gilpin. » MiltoB, P, L.
h

CX1V HISTORICAL AND ' "*
work is not worth defence ? Forbid it, truth ;
forbid it, honour; forbid it, liberty. And to
the "doubts or queries whether happiness,
and wisdom, and improvement in morals, and
the revival of letters, have been promoted by
this great work, the Reformation, the sublime
words of one of its noblest children might be a
sufficient answer, if a passage of very animated
eloquence upon the subject, from a production
honoured by the University of Oxford, did not
also present itself as worthy to be generally
known and admired; with whieh I shall finish
what I have collected, and what I urge, in be
half of Archbishop Cranmer, and of the Refor
mation in England.
And first, in the words of Milton : *" d When
I. recall to mind at last, after so many dark
ages, wherein the huge overshadowing train of
error had almost swept all the stars out of the
firmament of the church; how the bright and
blissful Reformation, by Divine Power, struck
through the black and settled night of ignorance
and antichristian tyranny, methinks a sovereign
c They are expressed by Mr. Butler in his Book of the Ro
man Cath. Church, p. 167, et seq. Need I refer Mr. Buder
also for an answer to the fine observations of Blackstone upon
the Reformation, at the close of his excellent Commentaries on
the laws of England i The learned members of Mr. Butler's
communion will hardly be obliged by his queries.
kl Of Reformation in England, B. 1.

CRITICAL INTRODUCTION. 6XV
and reviving joy must needs rush into the bosom
of him that reads, or hears ; and the sweet odour
of the returning Gospel imbathe his soul with
the fragrancy of heaven. Then was the sacred
Bible sought out of the dusty corners where
profane falsehood and neglect had thrown it;
the schools opened ; divine and human learning
raked out of the embers of forgotten tongues ;
the princes and cities trooping apace to the new-
erected banner of salvation ; the martyrs, with
the unresistible might of Weakness, shaking the
powers of darkness, and scorning the fiery rage
ofthe old red dragon."
Lastly, let us mark the. observation made
in our own times. " " The Reformation, that
•great spring-time of English literature; the
nativity, as it were, and very cradle of our
national genius. For the children of the Re
formation are, indeed, the great supporters
and pedestals of our national fame. To the
Reformation we are indebted for Hooker, and
Hall, and Chillingworth, and even for the flower
of our countrymen, Milton. Nor can it be
doubted, but that those agitations and con
vulsions of the publick mind, which ever accom
pany any great change in publick opinion, es
pecially on matters of such eternal importance,
e A Comparative Estimate of the English Literature ofthe
seventeenth and eighteenth Centuries, by Richard Burdon of
Oriel College ; a prize Essay, recited in the Theatre at Oxford,
in the year 1814. p. 29, et seq.

CXvi HISTORICAL, &C,
are highly favourable to the excitation of dor»
mant genius, the evolution of latent powers*
They say to the sluggard, arise ; and to the
secret one, come forth. They speak with a voice
which not even the obstinacy of inveterate indo
lence can resist, which penetrated even to the
dark cells of superstition. At the Reformation
the mind first again recovered its liberty, and
resulted back to its native independence of
thinking. This was that universal and truly
Catholick emancipation, that Egyptian deliver
ance, that enlargement and liberation of the
soul, that manumission of the spirit, whereby it
•Was rescued from the subtleties of the school
men, the vanities of a fearful ignorance; and
naving escaped as a bird out of the snare of the
fowler, it took its flight from earth, to bring
down fire from heaven. But what was more
than all this, the writers of that day had tlieir
imaginations .warmed, and their conceptions
elevated,, by that constant conversation with the
Scriptures, which the Reformation excited .; the
Scriptures, those abundant repertories of all that
is vast in thought, stupendous in imagery, and
-magnificent in language. To these, fountains of
sublime truth they made their daily pilgrimage,
and their nightly visitations. Here it is that we
must look for the reason, why there are passages
in Hooker, which might have done honour to
Shakspeare ; passages, such as we now search
for in vain either in poetry, or in prose."

A
DEFENCE

TRUE AND CATHOLICK DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENT
OF THE BODY AND BLOOD
op
OUR SAVIOUR CHRIST.

WITH
A CONFUTATION OF SUNDRY ERRORS CONCERNING THE SAME, GROUNDED AND
ESTABLISHED UPON GOD'S HOLY WORD, AND APPROVED BY THE CONSENT
OF. THE MOST ANCIENT DOCTORS OF THE CHURCH.

MADE BY THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,
THOMAS,
ARCHBISHOP OP CANTERBURY,
PRIMATE OF ALL ENGLAND, AND METROPOLITAN.
1550.

[a]

THIS BOOK IS DIVIDED INTO FIVE PARTS.

FAQB
The first is of the True and Catholick Doctrine and
Use of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of
our Saviour Christ ------ 9
The second is against the Error of Transubstantia
tion  - - - 43
The third teacheth the Manner how Christ is pre
sent in his Holy Supper - - - - -101
The fourth is of the Eating and Drinking of the
Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ - - 198
The fifth Book is of the Oblation and Sacrifice of
our Saviour Christ ------ 229

A TABLE

OF THE
CHIEF AND PRINCIPAL MATTERS
CONTAINED IN THIS BOOK.

THE CONTENTS OF THE FIRST BOOK. FAQK
The abuse of the Lord's Supper - - - 9
The eating of the body of Christ - - 10
The eating of the sacrament of his body - 12
Christ calleth the material bread his body - - 15
Evil men do eat the sacrament but not the body of Christ 1 6
Things sufficient for a Christian man's faith, concerning
this sacrament - - - - - 1 7
The sacrament which was ordained to make love and con
cord, is turned into the occasion of variance and discord 17
The spiritual hunger and thirstiness of the soul - 19
The spiritual food of the soul - - - 22
Christ far excelleth all corporeal food - - 25
The sacraments were ordained to confirm our faith - 25
Wherefore this sacrament was ordained in bread and wine 28
The unity of Christ's mystical body - - 29
This sacrament moveth all men to love and friendship 30
The doctrine of Transubstantiation doth clean subvert our
faith in Christ - - - 31
The spiritual eating is with the heart, not with the teetli 32
The principal errors of the Papists - - 36
The first is of Transubstantiation - - - 36
The second is of the Presence of Christ in this sacrament 38

VU THE TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PACE

The third is, that evil men eat and -drink the very body
and blood of Christ - - - - 41
[And a fourth error is,* that Christ is offered every day for
remission of sins] - - - - - 41
THE CONTENTS OF THE SECOND BOOK.
The confutation of the error of Transubstantiation - 43
The Papistical doctrine is contrary to God's word - 44
The Papistical doctrine is, against reason - 50
The Papistical doctrine is also against our senses - 52
The Papistical doctrine is contrary to the faith of the old
authors of Christ's church - - - - 54
Transubstantiation came from Rome - - - 69
The first reason of the Papists to prove their Transubstan
tiation - ¦ - - - - 71
The second argument for Transubstantiation - -75
Authors wrested by the Papists for their Transubstantiation 78
Negatives by comparison - - - - 82
Absurdities that follow of Transubstantiation - - 97
THE CONTENTS OF THE THIRD BOOK.
The presence of Christ in the sacrament - - 101
Christ corporally is ascended into heaven - - 102
The difference between the true and the Papistical doc
trine concerning the presence of Christ's body - 103
The proof whereof by our profession in our common creed 107
Another proof by the holy Scripture ... 108
Also another proof by ancient authors - - - 109
One body cannot be in divers places at one time - 116
An answer to the Papists, alleging for them these words,
"This is my body" - - - - 124
The argument of the Papists - - - - 124
The interpretation of these words, " This is my body" - 124
Christ called bread his body, and wine his blood - 128
Bread is my body, wine is my blood, be figurative speeches 131

THE TABLE OF CONTENTS.

I-ASF,

To eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood, be figurative
speeches - - - - - -132
This is my body, this is my blood, be figurative speeches 138
The bread representeth Christ's body, and the wine his
blood - '- - - - - 138
Signs and figures have the names of the things which they
signify - - - - - -141
Five principal things to be noted in Theodoretus - 155
Figurative speeches be not strange - - - 158
Christ himself used figurative speeches - - 158
The Paschal Lamb - - - - - 160
The Lord's Supper - - - 161
What figurative speeches were used at Christ's last supper 163
Answers to the authorities and arguments of the Papists 164
One brief answer to all - - - - 164
The answers to all the doctors ... 166
THE CONTENTS OF THE FOURTH BOOK.
Whether evil men do eat and drink Christ - 198
The godly only eat Christ - - - - 198
What is the eating of Christ's flesh, and drinking of his
blood - ... 200
Christ is not eaten with teeth, but with faith - - 201
The good only eat Christ .... 202
The answer to the Papists that do" affirm that the evil do
eat Christ's body, &c. - - - - 215
The answer to the Papists' authors, which, at the first shew, »
seem to make for them - - - - 216
Figures be called by the names of the things which they
signify ...... 219
The adoration of the sacrament ... 221
The simple people be deceived - - . - 221
They be the Papists that have deceived the people - 227
An exhortation to the true honouring of Christ in the
sacrament ------ 228

THE TABLE OF CONTENTS.

THE CONTENTS OF THE FIFTH BOOK. PAGE
The sacrifice of the mass ... - 229
The difference between the sacrifice of Christ, and of the
priests of the old law - - - - 230
Two kinds of sacrifices .... 232
The sacrifice of Christ ... - 232
A more plain declaration ofthe sacrifice of Christ - 234
The sacrifices of the old law .... 235
The mass is not a sacrifice propitiatory - - 237
A confutation of the Papists' cavillation - - 238
The true sacrifice of all Christian people - - 239
The Popish mass is detestable idolatry, utterly to be ba
nished from all Christian congregations - - 241
Every man ought to receive the sacrament himself, and
not one for another - - - - 242
The difference between the priest and the layman - 243
The answer to the Papists, concerning the sacrifice pro
pitiatory ------ 244
An answer to the authors - - - - 246
The lay persons make a sacrifice as well as the priest - 248
The Papistical mass is neither a sacrifice propitiatory, nor
of thanksgiving - - - - - 249
There were no Papistical masses in the primitive church - 249
The causes and means how Papistical masses entered into
the church - - - - - 252
The abuses of the Papistical masses - 252
Which church is to be followed - - - 253
A short instruction to die holy communion - - 254

HERE ENDETH IHE TABLE.

PREFACE TO THE READER.

Our Saviour Christ Jesus, according to the
will of his Eternal Father, when the time thereto
was fully accomplished, taking our nature upon
him, came into this world, from the high throne
of his Father, to declare unto miserable sinners
good news; to heal them that were sick; to
make the blind to see ; the deaf to hear; and the
dumb to speak; to set prisoners at liberty; to
shew that the time of grace and mercy was
come ; to give light to them that were in dark
ness and in the shadow of death; and to preach
and give pardon and full remission of sin to all
his elected. And to perform the same, he made
a sacrifice and oblation of his own body upon the
cross, which was a full redemption, satisfaction,
and propitiation, for the sins of the whole world.
And to commend this his sacrifice unto all his
faithful people, and to confirm their faith and
hope of eternal salvation in the same, he hath
ordained a perpetual memory of his said sacri

3 A PREFACE to
fice, daily to be used in the church to his perpe
tual laud and praise, and to our singular comfort
and consolation ; that is to say, the celebration
of his holy supper, wherein he doth not cease to
give himself, with all his benefits, to all those that
duly receive the same supper, according to his
blessed ordinance. But the Romish Antichrist,
to deface this great benefit pf Christ, hath taught
that his sacrifice upon the cross is not sufficient
hereunto, without another sacrifice devised by
him, and made by the priest, or else without in
dulgences, beads, pardons, pilgrimages, and such
other pelfry, to supply Christ's imperfection;
And that Christian people cannot apply to them
selves the benefits of Christ's passion, but that
the same is in the distribution of the bishop of
Rome, or else that by Christ we have no full re
mission, but be delivered only from sin, and yet
remaineth temporal pain in purgatory due foi
the same, to be remitted after this life by the
Romish Antichrist and his ministers, who take
upon them to do for us that thing, which Christ
either would not or could not do. O heinoms
blasphemy and most detestable injury against
Christ ; O wicked abomination in the temple of
God ; O pride intolerable of Antichrist, and mos,t
manifest token of the son of perdition, extolling
himself above God, and with Lucifer exalting
his seat and power above the throne of God!
For he that taketh upon him to supply that

THE READER.
thing, which he pretendeth to be imperfect in
Christ, must needs make himself above Christ,
and so very Antichrist. For what is this else,
but to be against Christ, and to bring him into
contempt as one that either for lack of charity
would not, or for lack of power he could not,
with all his blood- shedding and death, clearly
deliver his faithful, and give them full remission
of their sins, but that the full perfection thereof
must be had at the hands of Antichrist of Rome
and his ministers ? What man of knowledge and
zeal to God's honour can with dry eyes see this
injury to Christ, and look upon the state of reli
gion brought in by the Papists, perceiving the
true sense of God's word subverted by false
glosses of man's devising, the true Christian re
ligion turned into certain hypocritical and super
stitious sects, the people praying with their
mouths and hearing with their ears they wist not
what, and so ignorant in God's word, that they
could not discern hypocrisy and superstition
from true and sincere religion ? This was of late
years the face of religion within this realm of
England, and yet remaineth in divers realms.
But (thanks be to Almighty God and to the
king's majesty, with his father, a prince of most
famous memory,) the superstitious sects of monks
and friars, that were in this realm, be clean
taken away; the Scripture is restored unto the
proper and true understanding; the people may
b2

A PREFACE TO
daily read and hear God's heavenly word, and
pray in their own language which they under
stand, so that their hearts and mouths may go
together, and be none of those people of whom
Christ complained, saying, " These people ho
nour me with their lips, but their hearts be far
from me "." Thanks be to God, many corrupt
weeds be plucked up, which were wont to rot
the flock of Christ, and to let the growing of the
Lord's harvest.
But what availeth it to take away beads, par
dons, pilgrimages, and such other like Popery,
so long as the chief roots remain unpulled up ?
whereof, so long as they remain, will spring
again all former impediments of the Lord's har
vest, and corruption of his flock. The rest is
but branches and leaves, the cutting away
whereof is but Uke topping and lopping of .a
tree, or cutting down of weeds, leaving the body
standing, and the roots in the ground ; but the
very body of the tree, or rather the roots of the
weeds, is the Popish doctrine pf Transubstantia
tion, of the real presence of Christ's flesh and
blood in the sacrament of the altar, (as they call
it,) and of the sacrifice and oblation of Christ
made by the priest for the salvation of the quick
and the dead. Which roots, if they be suffered
to grow in the Lord's vineyard, they will over-
* Matt. xv.

THE READER;
Spread all the ground again with the old errors
and superstitions. These injuries to Christ be
so intolerable, that no Christian heart can wil
lingly bear them. Wherefore seeing that many
have set to their hands, and whetted their tools,
to pluck' up the weeds> and to cut down the tree
of error, I, not knowing otherwise how to excuse
myself at the last day, have in this book set to
my hand and axe with the rest to cut down this
tree, and to pluck up the weeds and plants by
the roots, which our heavenly Father never
planted, but were grafted and sown in his vine
yard by his adversary the devilj and Antichrist;
his minister. The Lord grant, that this my tra
vail and labour in his vineyard be not in vain,
but that it may prosper and bring forth good
fruits to his honour and glory. For when I see
his vineyard overgrown with thorns, brambles*
and weeds, I know that everlasting woe apper-
taineth unto me, if I hold my peace, and put not
to my hands and tongue to labour in purging
his vineyard. God I take to witness, (who seeth
the hearts of all men thoroughly unto the bot
tom,) that I take this labour for none other con
sideration, but for the glory of his name, and the
discharge of my duty* and the zeal that I bear
toward the flock of Christ. I know in what
office God hath placed me, and to what purpose ;
that is to say, to set forth his word truly unto his
people, to the uttermost of my power, without

A PREFACE TO
respect of person, or regard of thing in the
world, but of Him alone. I know what account
I shall make to Him hereof at the last day, when
every man shall answer for his vocation, and re
ceive for the same, good or ill, according as he
hath done. 1 know how Antichrist hath ob
scured the glory of God, and the true knowledge
of his word, overcasting the same with mists
and clouds of error and ignorance, through false
glosses and interpretations. It pitieth me to
see the simple and hungry flock of Christ led
into corrupt pastures, to be carried blindfold,
they know not whither, and to be fed with poi
son in the stead of wholesome meats.
And moved by the duty, office, and place,
whereunto it hath pleased God to call me, I give
warning in his name unto all that profess Christ,
that they flee far from Babylon, if they will save
their souls, and to beware of that great harlot,
that is to say, the pestiferous see of Rome, that
she make you not drunk with her pleasant wine.
Trust not her sweet promises, nor banquet
with her; for instead of wine she will give you
sour dregs, and for meat she will feed you with
rank poison. But come to our Redeemer and
Saviour Christ, who refresheth all that truly
come unto him, be their anguish and heaviness
never so great. Give credit unto him, in whose
mouth was never found guile, nor untruth. By
him you shall be clearly delivered from all your

THE READER.
diseases* of him you shall have full remission,
a poena et a culpa. He it is that feedeth continu
ally, all that belong unto him, with his own flesh
that hanged upon the crPSs ; and giveth them
drink of the blood flowing out of his own side,
and maketh to spring within them water that
floweth unto everlasting life. Listen not to the
false incantations, sweet whisperings, and crafty
jugglings of the subtle Papists, wherewith they
have this many years deluded and bewitched
the world, but hearken to Christ, give ear unto
his words ; which shall lead you the right way
unto everlasting life, there with him to live ever
as heirs of his kingdom. Amem

THE FIRST BOOK
IS OF
THE TRUE AND CATHOLICK DOCTRINE AND USE
OF THE
SACRAMENT
OF THE
BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR SAVIOUR CHRIST.

The Supper of the Lord, otherwise called the chap.
Holy Communion, or Sacrament of the Body

and Blood of our Saviour Christ, hath been of oftheiXf
many men, and by sundry ways, very much upper-
abused; but especially within these four or five ».
hundred years. ' Of some it hath been used as a
sacrifice propitiatory for sin, and otherwise su-
perstitiously, far from the intent that Christ did
first ordain the same at the beginning; doing
therein great wrong and injury to his death and
passion. And of other some it hath been very
lightly esteemed, or rather condemned and de-

10 THE true doctrine and use
spised, as a thing of small or none effect. And
thus between both the parties hath been much
variance and contention in divers places of
Christendom. Therefore to the intent that this
holy Sacrament, or Lord's Supper, may hereafter
neither of the one party be contemned or lightly
esteemed, nor of the other party be abused to
any other purpose than Christ himself did first
appoint and ordain the same ; and that, so, the
contention on both parties may be quieted and
ended ; the most sure and plain way is, to cleave
unto holy Scripture. Wherein whatsoever is
found, must be taken for a most sure ground and
an infallible truth ; and whatsoever cannot be
grounded upon the same (touching our faith) is
man's device, changeable and uncertain. And
therefore here are set forth the very words that
Christ himself and his apostle St. Paul spake,
both of the eating and drinking of Christ's body
and blood, and also of the eating and drinking of
the sacrament of the same.
chap. First, as concerning the eating of the body
"• and drinking of the blood of our Saviour Christy
rftLebriFy ne sPeaketh himself, in the sixth chapter of St.
of Christ. j0hn, m thjg wjse .
" Verily, verily I say unto you, except you
eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his
blood, you have no life in you. Whoso eateth
my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal
life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For

OF THE LORD'S SUPPEK. 11
my flesh is very meat, and my blood is very
drink. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh
my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him. As the
living Father hath sent me, and I live by the
Father, even so he that eateth me, shall live by
me. This is the bread which came down from
heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna,
and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall
live for everb."
Of these words of Christ % it is plain and ma
nifest, that the eating of Christ's flesh, and drink
ing of his blood, is not like to the eating and
drinking of other meats and drinks. For al
though without meat and drink man cannot live,
yet it followeth not, that he that eateth, ¦ and
drinketh, shall live for ever.
But as touching this meat and drink of the
body and blood of Christ, it is true, both he
that eateth and drinketh them, hath everlasting
life ; and also he that eateth and drinketh them
not, hath not everlasting life. For to eat that
meat and drink that drink, is to dwell in Christ,-
and to have Christ dwelling in him d.
And therefore no man can say or think % that
he eateth the body of Christ or drinketh his
blood, except he dwelleth in Christ, and hath
Christ dwelling in him. Thus have ye heard pf
" John vi. c Augustin. in Joan. Tractat. 26.
d Eodem tract. * Aug. de Civitate, lib. 21. cap. 25,

12 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
the eating and drinking of the very flesh and
blood of our Saviour Christ.
chap. Now as touching the sacraments of the same,
our Saviour Christ did institute them in bread

ofthe sacra- and wine, at his last supper, which he had with
ment of his * . *
•*"%• his apostles the night before his death, at which
time, (as St. Matthew saith,)
" When they were eating, Jesus took bread,
and when he had given thanks, he brake it, gave
it to his disciples, and said, Take, eat, this is my
body. Ahd he took the cup, and when he had
given, thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink
ye all of this, for this is my blood ofthe New Tes
tament, that is shed for many, for the remission
of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink
henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that
day, when I shall drink it new with you in my
Father's kingdom f."
This thing is rehearsed also of St. Mark, ia
these words :
" As they did eat, Jesus took bread, and
when he had blessed, he brake it, and gave it
to them, and said, Take, eat, this is my body :
and taking the cup, when he had given thanks,
he gave it to them, and they all drank of it.
And he said to them, This is my blood of the
New Testament, which is shed for many. Ve
rily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the
f Matt, xxvi,

OK THE LORD'S SUPPER. 13
fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it
new in the kingdom of God g."
The Evangelist St. Luke uttereth this matter
on this wise.
" When the hour was come, he sat down, and
the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto
them, I have greatly desired to eat this pascha
with you before I suffer. For I say unto you,
Henceforth I will not eat of it any more, until it
be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he
took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take
this, and divide it among you. For I say unto
you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine,
until the kingdom of God come. And he took
bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake
it, and gave it unto them, saying, This is my
.body, which is given for you. This do in re
membrance of me. Likewise also when he had
supped, he took the cup, saying, This cup is the
New Testament in my blood, which is shed for
you\" Hitherto you have heard all that the Evange
lists declare, that Christ spake or did at his last
supper, concerning the institution of the com
munion and sacrament of his body and blood.
Now you shall hear what St. Paul saith concern
ing the same, in the tenth chapter of the First to
the Corinthians, where he writeth thus :
* Mark xiv. b Luke xxii,

14 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
" Is not the cup of blessing, which we bless,
a communion of the blood of Christ ? Is not the
bread, which we break, a comm.uD.ion of the body
of Christ ? We being many, are one bread and
one body, For we all are partakers of one
bread and of one cup V
And in the eleventh he speaketh on this manner,
" That which I delivered unto you, I received
of the Lord. For the Lord Jesus, the same night
in the which he was betrayed, took bread, and
when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said,
Take, eat, this is my body, which is broken for
you . Do this in remembrance of me. Likewise
also he took the cup, when supper was done,
saying, This cup is the New Testament in my
blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in re
membrance of me. For as often as you shall
eat this bread and drink this cup, shew forth the
Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whoso
ever shall eat of this bread or drink of this cup
unworthily, shall be guilty ofthe body and blood
ofthe Lord. But let a man examine himself,
and so eat of the bread, and drink of the cup.
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eat
eth and drinketh his own damnation, because
he maketh no difference of the Lord's body.
For this cause many are weak and sick among
you, and many do sleep V
¦ 1 Cor. x. k Ibid. xi.

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. J*
By these words of Christ rehearsed by the
Evangelists, and by the doctrine also of St. Paul,
(which he confesseth that he received of Christ,)
two things specially are to be noted.
First, that our Saviour Christ called the ma- chap.
terial bread which he brake, his body, and the

Christ call-
Wine (which was the fruit of the vine) his blood, ed the mite-
* rial bread
And yet he spake not this to the intent that men tu bodj.
should think that material bread is his very
body, or that his very body is material bread :
neither that wine made of grapes is his very
blood, or that his very blood is wine made of
grapes, but to signify unto us (as St. Paul saith)
that the cup is a communion pf Christ's blood
that was shed for us, and the bread is a commu
nion of his flesh that was crucified for us. So
that although, in the truth of his human nature,
Christ be in heaven, and sitteth on the right
hand of God the Father, yet whosoever eateth
of that bread in the supper of the Lord, accord
ing to Christ's institution and ordinance, is as
sured by Christ's own promise and testament,
that he is a member of his body, and receiveth
the benefits of his passion, which he suffered foi
us upon the cross. And likewise he that drink-,
eth of that holy cup in that supper ofthe Lord,
according to Christ's institution, is certified by
Christ's legacy and testament, that he is made
partaker ofthe blood of Christ, which was shed
for us. And this meant St. Paul, when he saith,

16 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
" Is not the cup of blessing which we bless, a
communion of the blood of Christ ? Is not the
bread which we break, a communion ofthe body
of Christ ?" So that no man can contemn or
lightly esteem this holy communion, except he
contemn also Christ's body and blood, and pass
not whether he have any fellowship with him- or
no. And of those men St, Paul saith, " That
they eat and drink their own damnation, because
they esteem not the body of Christ."
chap. The second thing which may be learned of
v* the foresaid words of Christ and St. Paul is this,
fafthe1ad0 that although none eateth the body of Christ,
noTftebody and drinketh his blood, but they have eternal
life, (as appeareth by the words before recited of
St. John,) yet both the good and the bad do eat
and drink the bread and wine, which be the sa
craments of the same: but, beside the sacrar
ments, the good eateth everlasting life; the evil,
everlasting death. Therefore St. Paul saith,
" Whosoever shall eat of the bread or drink
of the cup of the Lord unworthily, he shall
be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord,"
Here St. Paul saith not, that he that eateth the
bread and drinketh the cup of the Lord unworr
thily, eateth and drinketh the body and blood
of the Lord, but is guilty of the body and blopd
of the Lord. But what he eateth and drinketh
St. Paul declareth, saying, " He that eateth and
drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh his

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 17
own damnation." Thus is declared the sum of
all that Scripture speaketh of the eating and
drinking, both of the body and blood of Christ,
and. also of the sacrament ofthe same.
And as these things.be most certainly true, be- chap.
cause they be spoken of by Christ himself, the

VI.

author of aU truth, and by his holy apostle St. suffice fo™!3
Paul, as he received them of Christ, so all doc- man's faith,
concerning
tnnes contrary to the same be most certainly u>*s sacnn
J J ment.
false and untrue, and of all Christian men to be
eschewed, because they be contrary to God's wordi
And all doctrine- concerning this matter, that is
more than this, which is not grounded upon
God's word, is of no necessity, neither ought the
people's heads to be busied, or their consciences
troubled with the same. So that things spoken
and done by Christ, and written by the holy
Evangelists and St. Paul, ought to suffice the
faith of Christian people, as touching the doc
trine of the Lord's Supper, and holy communion
or sacrament of his body and blood ; which, being
well considered and weighed, shall be a just oc-^
casion to pacify and agree both parties, as well
them that hitherto have contemned or lightly
esteemed it, as also them which have hitherto,
for lack of knowledge or otherwise, ungodly
abused it.
Christ ordained the sacrament to move and chap.
stir all men to friendship, love, and concord,

VII.

, / . , j . The sacra-
and to put away all hatred, variance, and ais- me»t which

18 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE ,
eWdato°make cord- and to testify a brotherly and unfeigned
concord, is love between all them that be the members of
Coccasion Phrist ; but the devil, the enemy of Christ and*
MdS?rd.of all his members, hath so craftily juggled
herein, that of nothing riseth so much conten
tion as of this holy sacrament. God grant that
all contention set aside, both the parties may
come to this holy communion with such a lively
faith in Christ, and such an unfeigned love to all
Christ's members, that as they carnally eat with
their mouth this sacramental bread and drink
the wine, so spiritually they may eat and drink
the very flesh and blood of Christ, which is in
heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of his Fa
ther. And that finally by his means they may
enjoy with him the glory and kingdom of hea*
ven. Amen.
chap. Whereas in the first part of this treaty of the
sacrament cf the body and blood of our Saviour
Christ, was briefly declared the institution and
meaning of the same, according to the very
words ofthe Gospel and of St. Paul, yet it shall
toot be in vain somewhat more at large to de
clare the same, according to the mind, as well
of holy Scripture, as of old ancient authors; and
that so sincerely and plainly, without doubts,
ambiguities, or vain questions, that the very
simple and unlearned people may easily under
stand the same, and be edified thereby ; which
by God's grace is mine only intent and desire,

VIII.

. * OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 19
that the flock of Christ dispersed in this realm
(among whom I am appointed a special pastor)
may no longer lack the commodity, and fruit,
which springeth of this heavenly knowledge*
For the more clearly it is understood, the more
sweetness, fruit, comfort', and edification it bring
eth to the godly receivers thereof. And to the
clear understanding of this sacrament, divers
things must be considered.
First, that as all men of themselves be sinners, chap*
and through sin be in God's wrath, banished far

IX.

away from him, condemned to hell and everlast- ?0ai hunger
ing damnation, and none is clearly innocent, but Sessonte
Christ alone : so every soul, inspired by God, is
desirous to be delivered from sin and hell, and
to obtain at God's hands mercy, favour, righte
ousness, and everlasting salvation. And this
earnest and great desire is Called in Scripture^
the hunger and thirst of the soul; with which
kind of hunger David was taken, when he said :
" As an hart longeth for springs of water, so doth
my soul long for thee, O God *."— " My soul
hath thirsted after God, who is the well of life.
My soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh wisheth for
theem." And this hunger the silly, poor, sinful
soul is drawn into, by means- of the law, which
sheweth unto her the horribleness of sin, the
terror of God's indignation, and the horror of
| Psalm xiii. m Ibid, ixiii.
C 2

20

THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
death and everlasting damnation. And when
she seeth nothing but damnation for her offences,
by justice and accusation of the law, and this
damnation is ever before her eyes; then, in this
great distress, the soul being pressed with hea
viness and sorrow seeketh for some comfort,
and dcsireth some remedy for her miserable and
sorrowful estate. And this feeling of her damn
able condition, and greedy desire of refreshing,
is the spiritual hunger of the soul.,, And whoso
ever hath this godly hunger, is blessed of God,
and shall have meat and drink enough, as Christ
himself said : " Blessed be they that hunger
and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be
filled full n." And on the other side, they that
see not their own sinful and damnable estate,
but think themselves holy enough, and in good
case and condition enough, as they have no spi
ritual hunger, so shall they not be fed of God
with any spiritual food. For as Almighty God
feedeth them that be hungry, so doth he send
away empty all that be not hungry. But this
hunger and thirst is not easily perceived of the
carnal man : for when he heareth the Holy Ghost
speak of meat and drink, his mind is by and by
in the kitchen and buttery, and he thinketh
upon his dishes and pots, his mouth and his
belly. But the Scripture in sundry places useth
" Matt. v.

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 21
special words, whereby to draw our gross minds
from the fancying of our teeth and belly, and
from this carnal and fleshly imagination. Fbr
the apostles and disciples of Christ, when they
were yet carnal, knew not what was meant by
this kind of hunger and meat, and therefore
when they desired him to eat, to withdraw their
minds from carnal meat, he said unto them :
" I have other meat to eat, which you know
not °." And why knew they it not ? Forsooth
because their minds were gross as yet, and had
not received the fulness of the Spirit. And
therefore our Saviour Christ, minding to draw
them from this grossness, told them of another
kind of meat than they fancied, (as it were,) re
buking tHem, for that they perceived not that
there was any other kind of eating and drinking,
besides that eating and drinking which is with
the mouth and the throat. Likewise when he
said to the woman of Samaria : " Whosoever
shall drink of that water that I shall give him,
shall never be thirsty again p." They that heard
him speak those words, might well perceive that
he went about to make them well acquainted
with another kind of drinking, than is the drink
ing with the mouth and throat. For there is no
such kind of drink, that with one's drinking, can
quench the thirst of a man's body for ever.
" Johniv. p Ibid.

22 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
Wherefore, in saying, he shall never be thirsty
again, he did draw their minds from drinking
with the mouth unto another kind of drinking
whereof they knew not, and unto another kind
of thirsting wherewith as yet they were not ac
quainted. And when our Saviour Christ said,
« He that cometh to me shall not hunger; and
he that believe th on me shall never be thirsty";"
he gave them a plain watch-word, that there was
another kind of meat' and drink than that where
with he fed them at the other side of the water,
and another kind of hungering and thirsting,
than was the hungering and thirsting of the
body. By these words therefore he drove the
people tp understand another kind of eating and
drinking, of hungering and thirsting, than that
which belongeth only for the preservation of
temporal life. Now then as the thing that com-
forteth the body, is called meat and drink ; of a
like sort the Scripture calleth the same thing
that comforteth the soul, meat and drink.
chap, Wherefore as here before in the first note is de
clared the hunger and drought of the soul, so is

X.

tuai K of it now secondly to be noted, what is the meat,
drink, and food of the soul. The meat, drink,
food and refreshing of the soul, is our Saviour
Christ, as he said himself. " Come unto me
all you that travail and be laden, and I will

? Johnvi.

<¦ OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 23
refresh you1."—" And if any man be dry,"
saith he, " let him come to me and drink. He
that believeth in me, floods of water of life
shall flow out of his beliy \" — " And I am the
bread of life," saith Christ; " he that cometh
to me, shall not be hungry ; and he that believ
eth in me, shall never be dry '." For as meat
and drink do comfort the hungry body, so doth
the death of Christ's body, and the shedding of
his blood, comfort the soul, when she is after
her sort hungry. What thing is it that comfort-
«eth and nourisheth the body ? Forsooth, meat
and drink. By what names then shall we call
the body and blood of our Saviour Christ (which
do comfort and nourish the hungry soul) but by
the names of meat and drink 1 And this simili
tude caused our Saviour tp say, " My flesh is
very meat, and my blood is very drink u." For
there is no kind of meat that is comfortable to
the soul, but only the death of Christ's blessed
body ; nor no kind of drink that can quench her
thirst, but only the blood-shedding of our Savi
our Christ, which was shed for her offences.
For as there is a carnal generation, and a carnal
feeding and nourishment, so is there also a spi
ritual generation, and a spiritual feeding. And •
as every man, by carnal generation of father and
rMatt. xi. "John vii. ' John vi, "Ibid.

24 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
mother, is carnally begotten and born unto this
mortal life, so is every good Christian spiritually
born by Christ unto eternal life. And as every
man is carnally fed and nourished in his body by
meat and drink, even so is every good Christian
man spiritually fed and nourished in his soul by
the flesh and blood of our Saviour Christ. And
as the body liveth by meat and drink, and there
by inCTeaseth and groweth from a young babe
unto a perfect man, (which thing expejpence
teacheth us,) so the soul liveth by Christ himself,
by pure faith eating his flesh and drinking his
blood. And this Christ himself teacheth us in
the sixth of John, saying, " Verily, verily I say
unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of
Man, and drink his blood, you have no life in
you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my
blood, hath eternal life, and I will raise him up
at the last day : for my flesh is very meat, and
my blood is very drink. He that eatejb my
flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me,
and I in him. As the living Father hath sent
me, and I live by the Father, even so he that
eateth me, shall live by me1." And this St.
Paul confessed of himself, saying, " That \ have
life, I have it by faith in the Son of God. And
now it is not I that live, but Christ liveth in
me'."
* John vi. ' Gal. ii.

OF THE LORD S SUPPER. 25

„ The third thing to be noted is this, that al- chap.
though our Saviour Christ resembleth his flesh .

XI.

and blood to meat and drink, yet he far passeth exeeUetiTau
and excelleth all corporal meats and .drinks, food?
For although corporal meats and drinks do
nourish and continue our Ufe here in this world,
yet they begin not our hfe. For the beginning
of our life we have of our fathers and mothers ;
and the meat, after we be begotten, doth feed
and nourish us, and so preserveth us for a time.
But our Saviour Christ is both the first begin-
a ner of our spiritual life, (who first begetteth us
unto God his Father,) and also. afterward he is
our lively food and nourishment.
Moreover, meat and drink doth feed and nou
rish only our bodies ; but Christ is the true and
perfect nourishment both of body and soul. And
besides that, bodily food preserveth the Hfe but
for a time, but Christ is such a spiritual and per
fect food, that he preserveth both body and soul
for ever. As he said unto Martha, " I am resur
rection and life. He that believeth in me, al
though he die, yet shall he hve. And he that
liveth and believeth in me, shall not die for
ever." Fourthly, it is to be noted, that the true know- chap
ledge of these things is the true knowledge of

xn.

Christ; and to teach these things, is to teach ments weW
ordained to
Christ ; and the believing and feeling of these confirm our
things, is the believing and feeling of Christ in

26 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
our hearts. And the more clearly we see, un
derstand, and believe these things, the more
clearly we see and understand Christ, and have
more fully our faith and comfort in him. And
although our carnal generation and our carnal
nourishment be known to all men by daily ex
perience, and by our common senses ; yet this.
our spiritual generation and our spiritual nutri
tion be so obscure and hid unto us, that we
cannot attain to the true and perfect knowledge
and feeling of them, but only by faith, which
must be grounded upon God's most holy wordi
and sacraments. And for this consideration our
Saviour Christ hath not only set forth these
things most plainly in his holy word, that we
may hear them with our ears ; but he hath also
ordained one visible sacrament of spiritual rege-'
neration in water, and another visible sacra
ment of spiritual nourishment in bread and wine,
to the intent, that as much as is possible for man,
we may see Christ with our eyes, smell him at
our nose, taste him with our mouths, grope him
with our hands, and perceive him with all ouf
senses. For as the word of God, preached, put
teth Christ into our ears ; so likewise these ele
ments of water, bread, and wine, joined to God's
word, dp, after a sacramental manner, put Christ
into our eyes, mouths, hands, and all our senses.
And for this cause Christ ordained baptism in
water, that as surely as we see, feeF, and touch

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 27
water with our bodies, and be Washed with wa
ter ; so assuredly ought we to believe, when we
be baptized, that Christ is verily present with
us, and that by him we be newly born again
spiritually, and washed from our sins, and
grafted in the stock of Christ's own body, and
be apparelled, clothed, and harnessed with him,
in such wise, that as the devil hath no power
against Christ, so hath he none against us, so
long as we remain grafted in that stock, and be
clothed with that apparel, and harnessed with
that armour. So that the washing in water of
baptism, is, as it were, a shewing of Christ be
fore our eyes, and a sensible touching, feeling,
and groping of him, to the confirmation of the
inward faith, which we have in him. And in
like manner Christ Prdained the sacrament of
his body and blood in bread and wine, to preach
unto us, that as our bodies be fed, nourished,
and preserved with meat and drink, so (as touch
ing our spiritual life towards God) we be fed,
nourished, and preserved by the body and blood
of our Saviour Christ ; and also that he is such
a preservation unto us, that neither the devils of
hell, nor eternal death, nor sin, can be able to
prevail against us, so long as, by true and con
stant faith, we be fed and nourished with that
meat and drink. And for this cause Christ or
dained this sacrament in bread and wine, (which
we eat and drink, and be chief nutriments of our

28 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
body,) to the intent that as surely as we see the
bread and wine with our eyes, smell them with
our noses, touch them with our hands, and taste
them with our mouths; so assuredly ought we to
believe, that Christ is our spiritual life and sus
tenance of our souls, like as the said bread and
wine is the food and sustenance of our bodies.
And no less ought we to doubt, that our souls be
fed and live by Christ, than that our bodies be
fed and live by meat and drink. Thus our Sa
viour Christ knowing us to be in this world, as
it were, but babes and weaklings in faith, hath
ordained sensible signs and tokens, whereby to
allure and draw us to more strength and more
constant faith in him. So that the eating and
drinking of this sacramental bread and wine, is,
as it were, a shewing of Christ before our eyes,
a smelling of him with our noses, a feeling and '
groping of him with our hands, and an eating,
chawing, digesting, and feeding upon him to our
spiritual strength and perfection.
chap. Fifthly, it is to be noted, that although there
be many kinds of meats and drinks, which feed

XIII.

this sacra* the body, yet our Saviour Christ (as many an-
ment was . . v . '. „' e
ordained in cient authors write) ordained this sacrament ot
bread and
wine. our spiritual feeding in bread and wine, rather
than in other meats and drinks, because that
bread and wine do most truly represent unto us
the spiritual union and knot of all faithful people,
as well unto Christ, as also amongst themselves.

OF THE LORDS SUPPER.

29

For like as bread is made of a great number of
grains of corn, ground, baken, and so joined to
gether, that thereof is made one loaf; and an
infinite number of grapes be pressed together in
one vessel, and thereof is made wine; likewise
is the whole multitude of true Christian people
spiritually joined, first to Christ, and then among
themselves together, in one faith, one baptism,
one holy spirit, one knot and bond of love.
. Sixthly, it is to be noted, that as the bread CHAP- XIV •
and wine, which we do eat, be turned into our  : —
flesh and blood, and be made our very flesh and Christ's mystical
very blood, and be so joined and mixed with ourbodJ-
flesh and blood, that they be made one whole
body, together, even so be all faithful Christians
spiritually turned into the body of Christ, and be
so joined unto Christ, and also together among
themselves, that they do make but one mystical
body of Christ, as St. Paul saith : " We be one
bread and one body, as many as be partakers of
one bread and one cup y." And as one loaf is
given among many men, so that every one is
partaker of the same loaf, and likewise orie cup
of wine is distributed unto many persons, where
of every one is p'artaker; even so our Saviour
Christ (whose flesh and blood is represented by
the mystical bread and wine in the Lord's Sup
per) doth give himself unto all his true members,

' 1 Cor. x.

30 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
spiritually to feed them, nourish them, and to
give them continual life by him z. And as the
branches of a tree, or member of a body, if they
be dead or cut off, they neither live, nor receive
any nourishment or sustenance of the body or
tree; so likewise ungodly and wicked people,
(which be cut off from Christ's mystical body,
or be dead members of the same,) do not spiri
tually feed upon. Christ's body and blood, nor
have any life, strength, or sustenance thereby.
chap. Seventhly, it is to. be noted, that whereas no-
XV n
.  !  thing in this life is more acceptable before God,
mentm^ek or more pleasant unto man, than Christian peo-
love and pie to live together quietly in love and peace,
friendship. . , -.
unity and concord : this sacrament doth most
aptly and effectually move us thereunto. Fof
when we be made all partakers of this one table,"
What ought we to think, but that we be alH
members of one spiritual body, (whereof Christ
is the head,) that we be joined together in one
Christ, as a great number of grains of corn be
joined together in one loaf. Surely they have
very hard and stony hearts, which with these
things be not moved. And more cruel and un
reasonable be they than brute beasts, that can-
npt be persuaded to be good to their Christian
brethren and neighbours (for whom Christ suf
fered death) when in this sacrament they be put
* Dionysius.

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 31
in remembrance, that the Son of God bestowed
his life for his enemies. For we see by daily
experience, that eating and drinking together
maketh friends, and continu eth friendship. Much
more then ought the table of Christ to move us
so to do. Wild beasts and birds be made gen
tle by giving them meat and drink ; why then
should not Christian men wax meek and gentle
with this heavenly meat of Christ ? Hereunto
we be stirred and moved as well by the bread
and wine in this holy supper, as by the words of
holy Scripture recited in the same. Wherefore;
whose heart soever this holy sacrament, com
munion, and supper of Christ, will not kindle
with love unto his neighbours, and cause him to
put out of his heart all envy, hatred, and malice,
and to grow in the same all amity, friendship,
|aid concord, he deceiveth himself if he think
that he hath the spirit of Christ dwelling within
him. But all these foresaid godly admonitions,
exhortations, and comforts, do the Papists (as
much as lieth in them) take away from all Chris
tian people, by their Transubstantiation.
Fpr if we receive no bread nor wine in the ThedoctrinaofTransub-
holv communion, then all those lessons and stantiation
" doth clean
comforts be gone, which we should learn and*™.^4
receive by eating of the bread and drinking of Christ'
the wine. And that fantastical imagination giv
eth an occasion utterly to subvert our whole
faith in Christ, For if this sacrament be or*

doth clean our
faith in

32

THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE

dained in bread and wine (which be food for the
body) to signify and declare unto us our spiri
tual food by Christ, then if our corporal feed
ing upon the bread and wine be but fantastical,
(so that there is no bread nor wine there indeed
to feed upon, although there appear there to be,)
then it doth us to understand, that our spiritual
feeding in Christ is also fantastical, and that in
deed we feed not of him. Which sophistry is
so devilish and wicked, and so much injurious
to Christ, that it could not come from any other
person but only from the devil himself, and from
his special minister, Antichrist.
CHAP- The eighth thing that is to be noted is, that
this spiritual meat of Christ's body and blood,

XVI

with the
teeth.

The spiri
tual eating ls not received in the mouth, and digested in the
is with the °
with'the04 stomach, (as corporal meats and drinks com
monly be,) but it is received with a pure heart}
and a sincere faith. And the true eating and
drinking of the said body and blood of Christf is
with a constant and a lively faith to believe that
Christ gave his body, and shed his blood upon
the cross for us, and that he doth so join and in*
corporate himself to us, that he is our head, and "
we his members, and flesh of his flesh, and bone
of his bones, having him dwelling in us, and we
in him. And herein standeth the whole effect
and strength of this sacrament. And this faith
God worketh inwardly in our hearts by his holy
Spirit, and confirmeth the same outwardly to

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 33
our ears by hearing of his word, and to our
other senses, by eating and drinking of the sa
cramental bread and wine in his holy supper.
What thing then can be more comfortable to us,
than to eat this meat and drink this drink?
Whereby Christ certifieth us, that we be spiri
tually and truly fed and nourished by him, and
that we dwell in him, and he in us. Can this
be shewed unto us more plainly, than when he
saith himself, " He that eateth me, shall live by
mea?" Wherefore whosoever doth not contemn
the everlasting life, how can he but highly esteem
this sacrament ? , How can he but embrace it,
as a sure pledge of his salvation ? And when he
seeth godly people devoutly receive the same,
how can he but be desirous oftentimes to re
ceive it with them ? Surely no man, that well
understandeth and diligently weigheth these
things, can be without a great desire to come
to this holy supper. All men desire to have
God's favour; and when they know the contrary,
that they be in his indignation, and cast out of
his favour, what thing can comfort them ? How
be their minds vexed ! What trouble is in their
consciences! All God's creatures seem to be
against them, and do make them afraid, as things'
being ministers of God's wrath and indignation
towards them. And rest and comfort can they
* John vi.

34 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
find none, neither within them nor without them.
And in this case they do hate as well God as the
devil ; God as an unmerciful and extreme judge,
and the devil as a most malicious and cruel tor
mentor. But in this sorrowful heaviness, holy
Scripture teacheth them, that our heavenly Fa
ther can by no means be pleased with them
again, but by the sacrifice and death of his only-
begotten Son, whereby God hath made a per
petual amity and peace with us, doth pardon
the sins of them that believe in him, maketh
them his children, and giveth them to his first-
begotten Son Christ, to be incorporate into him,
to be saved by him, and to be made heirs of
heaven with him. And in the receiving of the
holy supper of our Lord, we be put in remem
brance of this his death, and of the whole mys
tery of our redemption. In the which supper
is made mention of his testament, and of the
foresaid communion of us with Christ, and of
the remission of our sins by his sacrifice upon
the cross. Wherefore in this sacrament (if it be
rightly received with a true faith) we be assured
that our sins be forgiven, and the league of
peace and the testament of God is confirmed
between him and us, so that whosoever by a
true faith doth eat Christ's flesh, and drink his
blood, hath everlasting life by him. Which
thing when we feel in our hearts, at the receiv
ing of the Lord's Supper, what thing can be

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 35
more joyful, more pleasant, or more comfortable
unto us ? All this to be true, is most certain by
the words of Christ himself, when he did first
institute his holy supper, the night before his
death, as it appeareth, as well by the words of
the Evangelists, as of St. Paul. " Do this,"
saith Christ, "as often as you drink it in remem--
brance of me." And St. Paul saith, " As often
as you eat this bread, and drink this cup, you
shall shew the Lord's death until he come."
And again, Christ said, " This cup is a new tes
tament, in my own blood, which shall be shed
for the remission of sins." This doctrine, here
recited, may suffice for all that be humble and
godly, and seek nothing that is superfluous, but
that is necessary and profitable. And therefore
unto such persons may be made here an end of
this book. But unto them that be contentious
Papists, and idolaters, nothing is enough. And
yet because they shall not glory in their subtle
inventions and deceivable doctrine, (as though
no man were able to answer them,) I shall de^
sire the readers, of patience, to suffer me a little
while to spend some time in vain to confute
their most vain vanities. And yet the time shall
not be altogether spent in vain, for thereby shall
more clearly appear the light from the darkness,
the truth from false sophistical subtleties, and
the certain word of God from men's dreams and
fantastical inventions. d 2

3G THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
chap. But these things cannot manifestly appear to

XVII.

the reader, except the principal points be first
pai errors of set out, wherein the Papists vary from the truth
The first is* of God's word, which be chiefly four. -
ofTransub- J
stantiation. First, the Papists say, that in the Supper of
<?' the Lord, after the words of consecration (as
they call it) there is none other substance re
maining, but the substance of Christ's flesh and
blood, so that there remaineth neither bread to
be eaten, nor wine to be drunken. And although
there be the colour of bread and wine, the sa
vour, the smell, the bigness, the fashion, and all ;
other (as they call them) accidents or qualities
and quantities of bread and wine, yet. (say they)
there is no very bread nor wine, but they be
turned into the flesh and blood of Christ. And
this conversion they call Transubstantiation, that
is tp say, turning of one substance into another
substance. And although all the accidents, both
of the bread and wine, remain still, yet (say
they) the same accidents be in no manner of
thing; but hang alone in the air, without any
thing to stay them upon. For in the body and
blood of Christ (say they) these accidents can
not be, nor yet in the air for the body and blood •
of Christ, and the air, be neither of that bigness^'
fashion, smell, nor colour, that the bread and
Wine be. Nor in the bread and wine (say they)
these accidents cannot be ; for the substance of

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 37
bread and wine (as they affirm) be clean gone.-
And so there remaineth whiteness, but nothing
is «white : there remaineth colours, but nothing
is coloured therewith : there remaineth round
ness, but nothing is round : and there is bigness,
and yet nothing is big: there is sweetness, with
out any sweet thing : softness, without any soft
thing : breaking, without any thing broken : di
vision, without any thing divided : and so other
qualities and quantities, without any thing to
receive them. And this doctrine they teach as
a necessary article of our faith. But it is not the
doctrine of Christ, but the subtle invention of
Antichrist, first decreed by Innocent the Third b,
and after more at large set forth by school au
thors, whose study was ever to defend and set
abroad to the world all such matters, as the bi
shops of Rome had once decreed. And the devil,
by his minister Antichrist, had so dazzled 'the
eyes of a great multitude of Christian people in
these latter days, that they sought not for their
faith at the clear light of God's word, but at the
Romish Antichrist, believing whatsoever he pre
scribed unto them, yea though it were against all
reason, all senses, and God's most holy word
also. For else he could not have been very Anti
christ indeed, except he had been so repugnant
'" De summa Trini. et fide Catholic^

38 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
unto Christ, whose doctrine is clean contrary to
this doctrine of Antichrist. For Christ teach
eth, that we receive very bread and wine in tbe
most blessed Supper of the Lord, as sacraments
to admonish us, that as bodily we be fed with
bread and wine bodily, so we be fed with the
body and blood of our Saviour Christ spiritually.
As in our baptism we receive very water, to sig
nify unto us, that as water is an element to wash
the body outwardly, so be our souls washed by
the Holy Ghost inwardly.
The second The second principal thing, wherein the Pa-
isofthepre- .
senceof pists vary from the truth of God's word, is this.
Chnst in * J
mentsacra" They say, that the very natural flesh and blood
of Christ, which suffered for us upon the cross,
and sitteth at the right hand of the Father in
heaven, is also really, substantially, corporeally
and naturally, in or under the accidents of the
sacramental bread and wine, which they call the
forms of bread and wine. And yet here they
vary not a little among themselves. For some
say, that the very natural body of Christ is there,
but not naturally nor sensibly. And others say,
that it is there naturally and sensibly, and ofthe
same bigness and fashion that it is in heaven,
and as the same was born of the blessed virgin
Mary, and that it is there broken and torn in
pieces with our teeth. And this appeareth
partly by the school authors, and partly by the

OF THE LORDS SUPPER. 39
confession of Berengarius c, which Nicholas the
Second constrained him to make, which was this.
That of the sacraments of the Lord's table, the
said Berengarius should promise to hold that
faith, which the said Pope Nicholas and his
counsel held ; which was, that not only the sa
craments of bread and wine, but also the very
flesh and blood of our Lord Jesu Christ, are sen
sibly handled of the priest in the altar, broken,
and torn with the teeth of the faithful people.
But the true Catholick faith, grounded upon
God's most infallible word, teacheth us, that our
Saviour Christ (as concerning his man's nature
and bodily presence) is gone up into heaven,
and sitteth at the right hand of his Father, and
there shall he tarry until the world's end, at what
time he shall come again, to judge both the
quick and the dead, as he saith himself in many
Scriptures. " I forsake the world," saith he,
" and go to my Father11." And in another place
he saith, " You shall have ever poor men among
you, but me you shall not ever have '." And
again he saith, " Many hereafter shall come and
say, look, here is Christ, or, look,, there he is,
but believe them notf." And St. Peter saith in
the Acts, " That heaven must receive Christ,

** De consecrati. Distin. 2. Ego Berengarius.
d John vi. « Matt. xxvi. f Ibid. xxiv.

40 THE TRUE DOCTRINE AND USE
until the time that all "things shall be restored8."
And St. Paul, writing to the Colossians, agreeth
hereto, saying, " Seek for things that be abofe,
where Christ is sitting at the right hand of the
Father "." And St. Paul, speaking of the very
sacrament, saith, " As often as you shall eat
this bread, and drink this cup, shew forth the
Lord's death until he come1." Till he come,
saith St. Paul, signifying, that he is not there
corporeally present. For what speech were this,
or who useth of him that is already present,- to
say, until he come ? For until he come, signi
fieth that he is not yet present. This is the Ca
tholick faith, which we learn from our youth in
our common Creed, and which Christ taught,
the apostles followed, and the martyrs confirmed
with their blood. And although Christ in his
human nature substantially, really, corporeally,
naturally and sensibly, be present with his Fa
ther in heaven, yet sacramentally and spiritually
he is here present in water, bread, and wine, as
in signs and sacraments, but he is indeed spiri
tually in the faithful Christian people, which
according to Christ's ordinance be baptized, or
receive the holy communion, or unfeignedly be
lieve in him. Thus have you heard the second
^principal article, wherein the Papists vary from
" Acts iii. h Coloss. iii. ' 1 Cor. xi,

OF- THE LORD'S SUPPER. 41
the truth of God's word, and from the Catholick
faith. Now the third thing, wherein they vary,
is 'this. The Papists say, that evil and ungodly men The third is,
tli S3 1. p vii m tin
receive in this sacrament the very body and eatanddrink
*/ J the very bo-
blood of Christ, and eat and drink the self-same „fchrist?0<i
thing that the good and godly men do. But
the truth of God's word is contrary, that all
those that be godly members of Christ, as they
corporally eat the bread and drink the wine, so
spiritually they eat and drink Christ's very flesh
and blood ; and as for the wicked members of
the devil, they eat the sacramental bread, and
drink the sacramental wine, but they do not
spiritually eat Christ's flesh, nor drink his
blood, but they eat and drink their own damna^
tion. The fourth thing, wherein the Popish priests
dissent from the manifest word of God, is this.
They say, that they offer Christ every day for
remission of sin, and distribute by their masses
the merits of Christ's passion. But the pro
phets, apostles, and evangelists do say, that
Christ himself in his own person made a sacri
fice for our sins upon the cross, by whose wounds
all our diseases were healed, and our sins par
doned; and so did never no priest, man, nor
creature but he, nor he did the same never more
than once. And the benefit hereof is in no

42 THE TRUE DOCTRINE. AND USE, &C
man's power to give unto any other, but every
man must receive it at Christ's hands himself,
by his own faith and belief, as the prophet
saith k. k Habakkuk ii.

HERE ENDETH THE FIRST BOOK.

THE SECOND BOOK

is

AGAINST THE ERROR

TRANSUBSTANTIATION.

Thus have you heard declared four things, CHAP.
wherein chiefly the Papistical doctrine varieth l-

from the true word of God, and from the old The con/u,-
tation of the
Catholick Christian faith, in this matter of the Tr™s°D_
Lord's Supper. stantiation.
Now, lest any man should think that I feign
any thing of mine own head, without any other
ground or authority, you shall hear, by God's
grace, as well the errors of the Papists confuted,
as the Catholick truth defended, both by God's
most certain word, and also by the most old
approved authors and martyrs of Christ's
church.

44 AGAINST THE ERROR OF

chap. And first, that bread and wine remain after
 '—— the words of consecration, and be eaten and
ticaidoc-8 drunken in the Lord's Supper, is most manifest
trine is con- . . ~
trary to by the plain words of Christ himself, when he
God's word. *' r
ministered the same supper unto his disciples.
For as the Evangelists write, " Christ took
bread, and brake it, and gave it to his disciples,
and said, Take, eat, this is my body1."
Here the Papists triumph of these words, when
Christ said, " This is my bodym," which they
call the words of consecration. For (say they)
as soon as these words be fully ended, there is
no bread left, nor none other substance, but only
Christ's body. When Christ said " this," the
bread (say they) remained. And when he said
" is," yet the bread remained. Also when he
added "my," the bread remained still. And
when he said " bo-." yet the bread was there
still. But when he had finished the whole sen
tence, " This is my body," then (say they) the
bread was gone, and there remained no sub
stance but Christ's body, as though the bread
could not remain, when it is made a sacrament.
But this negative, that there is no bread, they
make of their own brains, by their unwritten
verities. Oh, good Lord, how would they have bragged
if Christ had said, this is no bread ! But Christ
1 Matt. xxvi. Mark xiv. m Luke xxii.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 45
spake not that negative, this is no bread, but
said affirmingly, " This is my body," not deny
ing the bread, but affirming that his body was
eaten (meaning spiritually) as the bread was
eaten corporally. And that this was the mean
ing of Christ, appeareth plainly by St. Paul, in
the tenth chapter to the Corinthians, the first
Epistle, where he (speaking of the same matter)
saith, " Is not the bread, which we break, the
communion of the body of Christ ° ?" Who un
derstood the mind of Christ better than St. Paul,
to whom Christ shewed his most secret counsels ?
And St. Paul is not afraid, for our better under
standing of Christ's words, somewhat to alter
the same, lest we might stand stiffly in the letters
and syllables, and err in mistaking of Christ's
words. For whereas our Saviour Christ brake
the bread and said, This is my body, St. Paul
saith, that the bread which we break is the
communion of Christ's body. Christ said, his
body : and St. Paul said, the communion of his
body: meaning, nevertheless, both one thing,
that they, which eat the bread worthily, do eat
spiritually Christ's very body. And so Christ
calleth the bread his body, (as the old authors
report,) . because it represented his body, and
signifieth unto them which eat that bread ac
cording to. Christ's ordinance, that they do spi-
• 1 Cor. x.

46 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
ritually eat his body, and be spiritually fed and
nburished by him, and yet the bread remaineth
still there, as a sacrament to signify the same.
But of these words of consecration shall be
spoken hereafter more at large. Therefore to
return to the purpose, that the bread remaineth,
and is eaten in this sacrament, appeareth by the
words which go before the consecration. For
that Christ " took bread, and brake it, and gave
it to his disciples, and said, Take, eatp:" all this
was done and spoken before the words of conse
cration. Wherefore they must needs be under
stood of the very bread, that Christ took bread,
brake bread, gave bread to his disciples, com
manding them*' to take bread, and eat bread.
But the same is more plain and evident of the
wine, that it remaineth, and is drunken at the
Lord's Supper, as well by the words that go be
fore, as by the words that follow after the con
secration. For before the words of consecration,
Christ took the cup of wine, and gave it unto
his disciples, and said, " Drink you all of this q."
And after the words of consecration followeth,
" they drank all of it r." Now I ask all the Pa
pists, what thing it was that Christ commanded
his disciples to drink, when he said, Drink ye all
of this ? The blood of Christ was not yet there,
by their own confession, for it was spoken be-
" Matt. xxvi. ** Ibid. r Mark xiv.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 47
fore the consecration : therefore it could be no
thing else but wine that he commanded them to
drink. Then I ask the Papists once again, whe
ther the disciples drank wine or not ? If they
say, yea, then let them recant their error, that
there was no wine remaining after the consecra
tion. If they say, nay, then they condemn the
apostles of disobedience to Christ's command
ment, which drank not wine as he commanded
them. Or rather they reprove Christ as a jug
gler, which commanded his apostles to drink
wine, and when they came to the drinking there
of, he himself had conveyed it away. Moreover,
before Christ delivered the cup of wine to his
disciples, he said unto them, "Divide this among
ybus." Here would I ask the Papists another
question, what thing it was that Christ. com
manded his disciples to divide among them ? I
am sure they will not say, it was the cup, except
they be disposed to make men laugh at them.
Nor I think they will not say, it was the blood
of Christ, as well because the words were spoken
before the consecration, as because the blood of
Christ is not divided, but spiritually given whole
in the sacrament. Then could it be understood
of nothing else but of wine, which they should
divide among them, and drink all together. And
when the communion was ended, Christ said
' Luke xxii.

48 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
unto his apostles, " Verily I say unto you, that
I will drink no more henceforth of this fruit of
the vine, until that day, that I shall drink it new
with you, in my Father's kingdom'." By these
words it is clear, that it was very wine that the
apostles drank at that godly supper. For the
blood of Christ is not the fruit of the vine, nor
the accidents of wine ; nor none other thing is
the fruit of the vine, but very wine only. How
could Christ have expressed more plainly, that
bread and wine remain, than by taking the bread
in his hands, and breaking it himself, and giving
it unto his disciples, commanding them to eat it?
And by taking the cup of wine in his hands, and '
delivering it unto them, commanding them to
divide it among them, and to drink it, and caU*
ing it the fruit of the vine? These words of
Christ be so plain, that if an angel of heaven
would tell us the contrary, he ought not to be
believed. And then much less may we believe
the subtle lying Papists. If Christ would have
had us to believe (as a necessary article of our
faith) that there remaineth neither bread nor
wine, would he have spoken after this sort, using
all such terms and circumstances as should make
us believe, that still there remaineth bread and*
wine ? What manner of teacher make they of
Christ, that say he meant one thing, when his
' Matt. xxvi. Mark xiv,

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. ,49
word's be clean contrary ? What Christian heart
can 'patiently suffer this contumely of Christ ?
But what crafty teachers be these Papists, who
devise fantasies of their own heads, directly con
trary to Christ's teaching, and then set the same
abroad to Christian people, to be most assuredly
believed as God's own most holy word ! Stk
Paul did not so, but followed herein the manner
of Christ's speaking, in calling of bread, bread,
and wine, wine, and never altering Christ's words
herein. " The bread which we break," saith he,
" is it not the communion of Christ's body11?"
Now I ask again of the Papists, whether he
spake this ofthe bread consecrated or not con
secrated? They cannot say that he spake it of
the bread unconsecrated, for that is not the com
munion of Christ's body by their own doctrine.
And if St. Paul spake it of bread consecrated,
then they must needs confess, that after Conse«
cration such bread remaineth, as is broken bread,
which can be none other than very true material
bread. And straightways after St. Paul saith,
in the same place, " that we be partakers of
one bread and one cup\" And in the next
chapter, speaking more fully of, the same matter,
four times he nameth the bread and the cup,
never making mention of any transubstantiation,
or remaining of accidents without any sub-
: i. .' .. ' <"'j ' ''''III J'..
, -.,-.,.- » 1 Cor. x. -Jfj.S ,*>' * IT*

I i

50 AGAINST^THE ERROR OF
stance; which things he would have made some
mention of, if it had been a necessary article of
our faitli to believe that -there remaineth no
bread nor wine. Thus it is5 evident and plain,
by the words of the Scripture, that after conse
cration remaineth bread and wine, and that the
Papistical doctrine of Transubstantiation is di
rectly contrary to God's word. "¦ , -f/'i
chap, <* Let us now consider also, how the same is
agains*!, natural reason and natural operation,

hi.

Ja^foXtne which although they prevail not against God's
reasral18' word, yet when they be joined withGod's, word,
they be of great moment to confirm any truth.
Natural reason abhorreth vacuum, that is to say;
that there should be any empty place, wherein
no subsfence should be, But if there remain-no
bread nor wine, the place where they were be*
fore, and where their accidents be, is filled with
no substance, but remaineth vacuum, clean con*
trary to the order of nature. We see 'also that
Ihe wine, though it be consecrated, yet will it
turn to vinegar, and the bread will mould, which
then be nothing else but sour wine and mouldext
bread, which could not wax sour nor mouldyj
if there were no * bread nor wine there at all.
And if the sacraments were now burnt, (as in the
old church they burned all that remained un
eaten,) let the Papists tell what is burnt. They
must needs say, that it is either bread, or the
body of Christ. But bread (say they) is none

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 51
there. Then must they needs burn the body of
Christ, and be called Christ-burners, (as hereto
fore they have burned many of his members,)
except they will say, that accidents burn alone
without any substance, contrary to all the eourse
of nature*. The sacramental bread and wine also
will nourish, which nourishment naturallycom-
eth ofthe substance of the meats and drinks, and
not of the accidents. The wine also willpoison,
(as divers bishops of Rome have had experi
ences, both in poisoning of others, and being
poisoned themselves,) which poisoning .they
cannot ascribe' to the most wholesome blood of
our Saviour Christ, but only to the poisoned
wine. And most of all it-is against the nature of
accidents, to be in nothing. For the definition
of accidents is to be in some substance, so that
if they be, they must heeds be in something.
And if they be in nothing, then they be not:
And a thousand things more of like foolishness
do the Papists affirm by their Transubstantiationy
contrary to all nature and reason; as that two
bodies be in one place, and one body in many
places at one timer and that substances be gen
dered of accidents only, and accidents converted
into substances, and a body to be in a place
and occupy no room, and generation to be with
out corruption, and corruption without genera
tion, with many such like things, against all
order and principles of nature and reason.
e 2

52 AGAINST THE ERROR OF

chap. The Papistical doctrine is also against all our
outward senses, called our five wits. For our

IV.

is also
agains our senses.

Jaid^trine'eyes say, they see there bread and wine, our
aginst aii noses smell bread and wine, our mouths taste,
and our hands feel bread and wine. And al
though the article of our faith be above all our
outward senses, so that we believe things which
we can neither see, feel, hear, smell, nor taste,
yet they be not contrary to our senses, at the
least so contrary, that in such things which we
from time to time do see, smell, feel, hear, and
taste, we shall not trust our senses, but believe
clean contrary. Christ never made no such ar
ticle of our faith. Our faith teacheth us to be^
lieve things that'we see not; but it doth not bid
us, that we shall not believe that we see daily
with our eyes, and hear with our ears, and grope
with our hands. For although our senses can
not reach so far as our faith doth, yet so far as
the compass of our senses doth usually reach,
our faith is not contrary to the same, but rather
our senses do confirm our faith. Or else what
availeth it to St. Thomas, for the confirmation of
Christ's resurrection, that he did put his hand
into Christ's side, and felt his wounds, if he
might not trust his senses, nor give no credit
thereto ? And what a wide door is here opened
to Valentinus, Marcion, and other hereticks,
which said that Christ was not crucified, but
that Simon Cyrenreus was crucified for him, al-

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 53
though to the sight of the people it seemed that
Christ was crucified ? Or to such hereticks as
said, that Christ was no man, although to men's
sights he appeared in the form of man, and
seemed to be hungry, dry, weary; to weep,
sleep, eat, drink, yea and to die like as other
men do ? For if we once admit this doctrine,
J;hen no credit is to be given to our senses, we
open a large field, and give a great occasion unto
an innumerable rabblement of most heinous he
resies. And if there be no trust to be given to
our senses in this matter of the sacrament, why
then do the Papists so stoutly affirm, that the
accidents remain after the consecration, which
cannot be judged but by the senses ? For the
Scripture speaketh no word of the accidents of
bread and wine, but of the bread and wine
themselves. And it is against the nature and
definition of accidents to be alone without any
substance. Wherefore if we may not trust our
senses in this matter of the sacrament, then if
the substance of the bread and wine be gone,
why may we not then say, that the accidents be
gone also ? And if we must needs believe our
senses, as concerning the accidents of bread and -
wine, why may we not do the like of the sub
stance, and that rather than of the accidents ?
Forasmuch as after the consecration, the Scrip
ture saith in no place, that there is no substance
of bread nor of wine, but calleth them still by

54 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
such names, as signify the substances, and not
the accidents. And finally, if our senses be
daily deceived in this matter, then is the sensible
sacrament nothing else, but an illusion of our
senses. And so we make much for their pur
pose, that said that Christ was a crafty juggler,
that made things to appear to men's sights, that
indeed were no such things, but. forms only,
figures and appearances of them. But to con
clude in few words this process of our senses,
let all the Papists lay their heads together, and
they shall never be able; to shew one article of
our faith, so directly contrary to our senses, that
all our senses by daily experience shall affirm a
thing to be, and yet our faith shall teach us the
contrary thereunto.
Now forasmuch as it is declared,. how this Pa
pistical opinion of Transubstantiation is against
cdtefrW tne word of God, against nature, against reason,
totheS and against all our senses, we shall shew furr
authors of thermore, that it is against the faith and doe-
church." trine of the old authors of Christ's church, be
ginning at those authors, which were nearest
unto Christ's time, and therefore might best
justinus. know the truth herein. First, Justinus, a great
learned man, and an holy martyr, the oldest au
thor that this day is known to write any treatise
upon the sacraments, and wrote not much
above one hundred years after Christ's ascen?-
sion.

chap. v.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 55
He writeth in his second Apology, " That the
bread, water, and wine in this sacrament, are
not to be taken as other common meats and
drinks be, but they be meats ordained purposely
to giye thanks; to God,' and therefore be palled
Eucharistia, and be called also the body and
blood of Christ. And that it is lawful for none
to eat or .-drink of them, .but that profess Christ,
and live according to the- same.. And yet the
same meat and drink," ,saith.he, " is changed
into pur flesh and blood, and nourisheth our bo
dies." By whichsaying it is evident, that Jus
tinus thought, that the bread and wine; remained
still, for else it could not have been turned into
our flesh and blood, to nourish our bodies.
Next to him was IrenSeus y, above one hundred
and fifty years after Christ, who (as it is to be
supposed) Could not be deceived in the neces
sary points of our faith, for he was a disciple of
Polycarpus, which was disciple to St. John the
Evangelist. :This Irenaeus followeth the sense
of Justinus wholly in this; matter,, and almost
also his words, saying, " That the-bread wherein
we give thanks unto God,: although it be of the
es**rth, yet when the name of God is called upon
it, it is not then commori bread, but the bread
ot thanksgiving, having two things: in it, one
earthly and the other heavenly. What meant
"¦ Irenseus contra Valentia. li. 4. cap.. 34.

56 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
he by the heavenly thing, but the sanctification
which cometh by the invocation of the name of
God ? And what by the earthly thing, but the
very bread, which (as he said before) is of the
earth, and which also (he saith) doth nourish
our bodies, as other bread doth which we do
use? Shortly after Irenaeus was Origen, about two
hundred years after Christ's ascension; who
also affirmeth, that the material bread remain*
eth, saying, " That the nature of the bread avail-
eth nothing, but goeth down into the belly, and
is voided downward; but the word of God,
spoken upon the bread, is it that availeth**."
After Origen came Cyprian the holy martyr;
about the year of our Lord 250, who writeth
against them that ministered this sacrament with
water only, and without wine. " Forasmuch,"
saith he, " as Christ said, I am a true vine,
therefore the blood of Christ is not water, but
wine ; nor it cannot be thought that his blood
(whereby we be redeemed and have life) is in
the cup, when wine is not in the cup, whereby
the blood of Christ is shewed a."
What words could Cyprian have spoken more
plainly, to shew that the wine doth remain, than
to say thus ; " If there be no wine, there is no

2 Origenes in Math. cap. 15.
* Cyprian, ad Cseciliuin, li, 2. Epistola 3.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 57
blood of Christ." And yet he speaketh shortly
after, as plainly, in the same Epistle : "«Christ,"
saith he, " taking the cup, blessed it, and gave
it to his disciples, saying, ' Drink you all of this,
for this is the bloodof the New Testament, which
shall be shed for many, for the remission of sins.
I say unto you, that from henceforth I will not
drink of this creature of the vine, until I shall
drink with you new wine in the kingdom of my
Father.' By these words of Christ," says St.
Cyprian, " we perceive, that the cup which the
Lord offered, was not only water, but also wine ;
and that it was wine, that Christ called his
blood ; whereby it is clear, that Christ's blood is
not offered, if there be no wine in the chalice."
And after it followeth : " How shall we drink
with Christ new wine ofthe creature of the vine,
if in the sacrifice of God the Father and of Christ
we do not offer wine ?" In these words of St.
Cyprian appeareth most manifestly, that in this
sacrament is not only offered very wine, that is
made of grapes that come of the vine, but also
that we drink the same. And yet the same giv
eth us to understand, that if we drink that wine
worthily, we drink also spiritually the very blood
of Christ, which was shed for our sins.
Eusebius Emissenus, a man of singular fame Eusebius
Emisseuus.
in learning, about three hundred years after
Christ's ascension, did in few words set out this
matter so plainly, (both how the bread and wine

58 AGAINST THE ERROR OF*
be converted into the body and blood of Christ,
and yet remain still in their nature, and also
how, besides the outward receiving of bread and
wine, Christ is inwardly by faith received in our
hearts,) all this, I say, he doth so plainly set
out, that more plainness cannot be reasonably
desired in this matter. For he saith, that the
conversion of the visible creatures- of bread and
wine, into the body and blood of Christ, is like
unto our conversion in baptism, where out
wardly nothing is changed,; but remaineth the
same that was before, but all the^ alteration is
inwardly and spiritually, o "If thou wilt know,"
saith he b, " how it ought not to seem tothee a
new thing, and impossible, that earthly and cor
ruptible things be turned into the substance- of
Christ, look upon thyself, which art made new
in baptism, when thou wast far from life, and
banished as a ^stranger from mercy, and from ihe
way, of salvation, ;and: inwardly wast dead, yet
suddenly thou beganst another life in Christ,
and wast made new by wholesome m*y*steri$&
and wast; turned into the body of the church, not
by seeing, but by believing; and ofthe child of
damnation, by a secret pureness, thou wast made
the chosen iSon of God, Thou visibly, didst re
main in the same measure, that thou hadst be
fore, but invisibly thou wast made greater, with-
De Gonsecr, Distinct.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 59
out any increase of thy body. Thou wast the
self-same person, and yet by increase of faith
thou wast made another man. Outwardly nor
thing was added, but all the change was in^
wardiy. And so was, man-made., the son of
Christ, and Christ formed in the mind of man.
Therefore as thou (putting away thy former vile-
ness) didst receive a new dignity, not, feeling
any change in thy body; and as the curing of
thy disease, the putting -away of thine infection,
the wiping away of thy ¦fllthiness, be not seen
with thine eyes, -but believed in thy mind : so
likewise, when thou dost go up to the reverend
altary totfeed upon spiritual meat, in thy faith
look upon the body and blood of him that is thy
God, honour; him, touch him with, thy ? mind,
take him in the hand of thy heart, and- chiefly
drink him with the draught of thy inward man."
Hitherto have I rehearsed the sayings Of. Euse
bius, -Which be so plain, that no man can wish
mortB plainly to be declared, that this mutagen
of the bread and wine into the body and blood
of Christ, is a spiritual mutation, and, that out
wardly nothing is changed; o But as. outwardly
We eat the bread and drink the wine With our
mouths, so inwardly by faith we spiritually eat
the very flesh, and drink the very blood, n of
Christ-; Hilarius also, in few words, saith the , same". Hilarius.
" There is a figure," saith he; " for bread and

60 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
wine be outwardly seen. And there is also a
truth of that figure ; for the body and blood of
Christ be of a truth' inwardly believed." And
this Hilarius was within less than three hundred
and fifty years after Christ^
And Epiphanius, shortly after the same time,
saith", that the bread is meat, but the virtue that
is in it, is it that giveth life. But if there were
no bread at all, how could it be meat ?
About the same time, or shortly after, about *
the year of our Lord 400, St. John Chrysos-
tome writeth thus, against them that used only
water in the sacrament. " Christ," saith he,
"minding to pluck up that heresy by the roots,
used wine, as well before his resurrection, when
he gave the mysteries, as after at his table with
out mysteries. For he saith, ofthe fruit of the
vine; which surely bringeth forth no water, but
wined." These words of Chrysostome declare
plainly, that Christ in his holy table both drank
wine, and gave wine to drink, which had not
been true, if no wine had remained after the con
secration,- as the Papists feign. And yet more
plainly St. Chrysostome6 declareth this matter
in another place, saying, " The bread before it
be sanctified, is called bread, but when it is
¦ ¦
c Epiphanius contra kereses, lib. 3. 10. 2. Et in Anace-
phaleosi. 4 Chrysost. in Mat; ca.^U. hour. S3,
I Ad Csesariurn monachum.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 61
sanctified by the means of the priest, it is deli
vered from the name of bread, and is exalted to
the name of the Lord's body, although the na
ture of bread doth still remain;" The nature of
bread (saith he) doth still remain, to the utter
and manifest confutation of the Papists, which
say, that the accidents of bread do remain, but
not the nature and substance. At the same
time was St. Ambrose, who declareth the alter- Ambrosius.
ation of bread and wine into the body and blood
of Christ, not to be such, that the nature and
substance of bread and wine be gone, but, that
through grace there is a spiritual mutation by
the mighty power of God, so that he that wor
thily eateth of that bread doth spiritually eat
Christ, and dwelleth in Christ, and Christ in
him. " For," saith St. Ambrose f, speaking of
this change of bread into the body of Christ,
" if the word of God be of that force that it can
make things of nought, and those things to be
which never were before, much more it can
make things that were before still to be, and
also to be changed into other things." And he
bringeth, for example hereof, the change of ua
in baptism, wherein a man is so changed, (as is •
before declared in the words of Eusebius,) that
he is made a new creature, and yet his substance
' De iis qui mysteriis initiantur, cap. ultim. et de sacramentis,
li. 4. ca. 4.

62 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
remaineth the same that Was before.' ^And St.:
Augustinus. Augustine g, about the same time, wrote thus :
"That Which you see in the altar, is the bread
and the cup, which also your eye's do shew you,
But faith sheweth further, that bread is the body
of Christ, and the cup his blood." Here he de
clareth four things to be in the sacrament : two
that we see, which be bread and wine; and
other two, which we see not, but by faith only,
which be the body and blood of Christ.' And
the same thing he declareth also as plainly in
another place1*, saying,' " The sacrifice of the
church consisteth of two things; of the visible
kind of the element, and of' the invisible flesh
and blood of our Lord Jesu Christ, both of tlie
Sacrament, and of the thing signified by the sa4
cratnent *J' even as the person of Christ consist^
eth of God and man, forasmuch as he is very
God and very man. M For everything containetli
in it the very nature of those things, whereof it
consisteth. Now the sacrifice of the church
consisteth of two things ; of the sacrament, and
ofthe thing thereby signified,- that is to say,«the
body of Christ.'* Therefore there is both the
sacrament, and the thing of the saafSfament, which
is Christ's body." What can be devised to be
spoken more plainly against the error ofthe Pa-

* Augustinus in sermone ad infantes.
h In lib. sententiarum Prosperi.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION.' * C3
pists, which say that no bread nor wine remain-*-
eth in the sacrament ? For as the person of
Christ consisteth of twb natures, that is to say,
of his manhood, and of his Godhead,' (and there
fore both those natures remain in Christ,) even
so (saith St. Augustine) the sacrament consist
eth of two natures ; of the elements of bread and
wine, and of the body and blood of Christ ; and
therefore both these natures must needs remain
in the saerament.
For the more plain understanding hereof, it is
to be noted, that there -were certain hereticks, as
Simon, Menander, Marcion, Valentinus, Basi-*
lides, Cerdon, Manes, Eutyches Manicheeus,
Apollinaris, and divers other of like sorts, which
said, that Christ was very God, but not a very
man, although in eating, drinking, sleeping, and
all other operations of man, to men's j udgments
he -appeared like unto a man. Others there
Were, as Artemon, Theodoras, Sabellius, Paulus
Samosathenus, Marcellus, Photinus, Nestorius,
and many others of the same sects, which said,
that he was a very natural man, but not very
God, although in giving the blind their sight,
the dumb their speech, the deaf their, hearing,
in healing suddenly with his word all diseases,
in raising to life them that were dead, and in all
other works of God, he shewed himself as he
had been God. Yet other there were which,
seeing the Scripture so plain in those two mat-

64 AGAINST THE" ERROR OF
ters, confessed that he was both God and maft,
but not both at one time. For before his incar
nation (said they)' he was God only, and not
man ; and after his incarnation he ceased from
his Godhead, and became a man only, and not
God, until his resurrection or ascension, and
then (said they) he left his manhood, and was
only God again, as he was before his incarnation.
So that when he was man, he was not God, and
when he was God, he was not man. But against
these vain heresies, the Catholick faith, by the
express word of God, holdeth and believeth,
that Christ after his incarnation left not his di
vine nature, but remained still God, as he was
before, being together at one time (as he is still)
both perfect God and perfect man. And for a
plain declaration hereof, the old ancient authors
give two examples ; one is of man, which is made
of two parts, of a soul and of a body, and each
of these two parts remain in man at one time *>
so that when the soul, by the almighty power
of God, is put into the body, neither the body
nor soul perisheth thereby, but thereof is made
a perfect man, having a perfect soul and a per}
feet body remaining in him both at one time*
The other example, which the old authors do
bring in for this purpose, is of the holy supper
of our Lord, which consisteth (say they) of two
parts; of the sacrament, or visible, element of
bread and wine, and of the body and blood of

TRANSUBSTANTIATION* 65
Christ. And as iri them that duly receive the
sacrament the very natures of bread and wine
cease not to be there, but remain there still, and
be eaten corporally, as the body and blood of
Christ be eaten spiritually : so likewise doth the
divine nature of Christ remain still with his hu
manity. Let now the Papists avaunt themselves
of their Transubstantiation, that there remaineth
no bread nor wine in the ministration of the sa
crament, if they will defend the wicked heresies
before rehearsed, that Christ is not God and
man both together. But to prove that this was
the mind of the old authors, beside the saying of
St. Augustine here recited, I shall also rehearse
divers other.
St. John Chrysostome' writeth against the
pestilent error of Apollinaris, which affirmed
that the godhead and manhood in Christ were
so mixed and confounded together, that they
both made but one nature. Against whom St.
John Chrysostome writeth thus : " When thou
speakest of God, thou must consider a thing
that in nature is single, without composition,
without conversion, that is invisible, immortal,
incircumscriptible, incomprehensible, with such
like. And when thou speakest of man, thou
meanest a nature that is weak, subject to hun
ger, thirst, weeping, fear, sweating, and such
) Chrysost, ad Caesarium Monachum.
F

66 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
like passions, which cannot be in the divine na
ture. And when thou speakest of Christ, thou
joinest two natures together in one person, who
is both passible and impassible : passible, as
concerning his flesh, and impassible in his
deity." And after, he concludeth, saying,
" Wherefore Christ is both God and man. God
by his impassible nature, and man because he
suffered. He himself being one person, one son,
one lord, hath the dominion and power of two
natures joined together, which be not of one sub
stance, but each of them hath his properties dis
tinct from the other. And therefore remaineth
there two natures, distinct, and not confounded.
For as before the consecration of the bread, we
call it bread, but when God's grace hath sancti
fied it by the priest, it is delivered from the name
of bread, and is exalted to the name of the body
of the Lord, although the nature of the bread
remain still in it, and it is not called two bodies,
but one body of God's son; so likewise here, the
divine nature resteth in the body of Christ, and
these two make one son, and one person."
These words of St. John Chrysostome declare,.
and that not in obscure terms, but in plain
Words, that after the consecration the nature of
bread remaineth still, although it have an higher
name, and be called the body of Christ ; to sig
nify unto the godly eaters of that bread, that they
spiritually eat the supernatural bread of the body

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 67
of Christ, who -spiritually is there present, and
dwelleth in them, and they in him, although
corporeally he sitteth in heaven, at the right
hand of his Father.
Hereunto accordeth also Gelasius k, writing
against Eutyches and Nestorius, of *#hom the
one said, that Christ was a perfect man, but not
God, and the other affirmed clean contrary, that
he was very God, but not man. But against
these two heinous heresies Gelasius proveth, by
most manifest Scriptures, that Christ is botj*i
God and man, and that after his incarnation
remained in him [as well] the nature of his
Godhead, [[as the nature of his manhood ;3 so
that he hath iii him two natures with their na
tural properties, and yet he is but one Christ.
And for the more evident declaration hereof, he
bringeth two examples ; the one is of man, who
being but one, yet he is made of two parts, and
hath in him two natures, remaining both toge
ther in him, that is to say, the body and the soul
with their natural properties. The other exam
ple is of the sacrament of the body and blood of
Christ; " which," saith he, " is a godly thing,
and yet the substance or nature of bread and
wine do not cease to be there still." Note well
thesSe words against all the Papists of our time,
that Gelasius (which was bishop of Rome more
than a thousand years past) writeth of this sa-
E Gelasius contra Eutychen et Nestorium.
F 2

68 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
crament, that the bread and wine cease not to
be there still, as Christ ceased not to be God
after his incarnation, but remained still perfect
God as he was before.
¦Theodoretus ' also affirmeth the same, both in
his first and in his second dialogue. In the first
he saith thus : " He that called his natural body
wheat and bread, and also called himself a vine;
the self-same called bread and wine his body
and blood, and yet changed not their natures."
And in his second dialogue he saith more plainly'.
" For," saith he, " as the bread and wine after
the consecration lose not their proper nature,
but keep their former substance, form, and figure,
which they had before, even so the body of
Christ, after his ascension, was changed into the
godly substance." Now let the Papists choose
which of these two they will grant, (for one of
them they must needs grant,) either that the na
ture and substance of bread and wine remain
still in the sacrament after the consecration,
(and then must they recant their doctrine of
•Transubstantiation,) or else that they be of the
error of Nestorius and others, which did say,
that the nature of the Godhead remained not in
Christ after his incarnation. For all these old
authors agree, that it is in the one, as it is in
the other.
1 Theodoretus in Dialogis.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 69

Now forasmuch as it is proved sufficiently, chap.
(as well by the holy Scripture, as by natural;

VI.

operation, by natural reason, by all our senses, stantiation
and by the most old and best learned authors, R^eT'
and holy martyrs of Christ's church,) that the
substance of bread and wine do remain, and be
received of faithful people in the blessed sacra
ment, or supper of the Lord ; it is a thing wor
thy to be considered and well weighed, what
moved the school authors of late years to defend
the contrary opinion, not only so far from all ex
perience of our senses, and so far from all reason,
but also clean contrary to the old church of
Christ, and to God's most holy word.
Surely nothing moved them thereto so much,
as did the vain faith which they had in the
church and see of Rome. For Johannes Scotus"1,
otherwise called Duns, (the subtlest of all the
school authors,) in treating of this matter of
Transubstantiation, sheweth plainly the cause
thereof. " For," saith he, " the words of the
Scripture might be expounded more easily and
more plainly without Transubstantiation; but
the church did choose this sense, (which is more
hard,) being moved thereto, as it seemeth, chiefly
because that of the sacraments men ought to
hold, as the holy church of Rome holdetb. But
it holdeth, that bread is transubstantiate, or
™ Septus, sup. 4, sen. distinct, 11.

70 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
turned into the body, and wine into the blood,
as it is shewed De summa Trinitate, etflde Catho->
lica,firmiter credimus."
Gabriel. And Gabriel CBiel] also, (who of all others
Wrote most largely upon the canon of the Mass,)
saith thus : " It is to be noted, that although it be
taught in the Scripture, that the body of Christ
is truly contained and received of Christian peo
ple under the kinds of bread and wine, yet how
the body of Christ is there, whether by conver
sion of any thing into it, or without conversion
the body is there with the bread, both the sub
stance and accidents of bread remaining there
still, it is not found expressed in the Bible. Yet
forasmuch as of the sacraments men must hold
as the holy church of Rome holdeth, as it is
written, De heereticis, ad abolendam; and that
church holdeth, and hath determined, that the
bread is transubstantiated into the body of
Christ, and the wine into his blood ; therefore is
this opinion received of all them that be catho
lick, that the substance of bread remaineth not,
but really and truly is turned, transubstantiated,
and changed into the substance of the body of
Christ."
chap. Thus you have heard the cause, wherefore this
opinion of Transubstantiation at this present is
holden and defended among Christian people,
that is to say, because the church of Rome hath
so determined, although the contrary, by the

VII.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 71
Papists' own confession, appear to be more easy,
more true, and more according to the Scripture.
But because our English Papists (who speak
more grossly herein than the Pope himself,
affirming that the natural body of Christ is natu
rally in the bread and wine,) cannot, nor dare
not, ground their faith, concerning Transub
stantiation, upon the church of Rome; which
although in name it may be called most holy,
yet indeed it is the most stinking dunghill of all
wickedness that is under heaven, and the very
synagogue of the devil, which whosoever follow
eth, cannot but stumble, and fall into a pit full
of errors ; because, I say, the English Papists
dare not now establish their faith upon that
foundation of Rome, therefore they seek fig-
leaves, that is to say, vain reasons, gathered of
their own brains, and authorities wrested from
the intent and mind of the authors, wherewith
to cover and hide their shameful errors. Where
fore I thought it good somewhat to travel herein,
to take away those fig-leaves, that their shame
ful errors may plainly to every man appear.
The greatest reason and of most importance, chap
and of such strength, as they think, or at the

VIII.

least as they pretend, that all the world cannot reason ofthe
. ^ Papists to
answer thereto, is this : Our Saviour Christ tak- prove their
...... Transub-
ing the bread, brake it, and gave it to his disci- stantiation.
pies, saying, This is my body: Now (say they)
as soon as Christ had spoken these words, the

72

AGAINST THE ERROR OF

bread wa* straightway altered and changed,*
and the substance thereof was converted into
the substance of his precious body. But what
The answer. Christian ears can patiently hear this doctrine,
that Christ is every day made anew, and made
of another substance than he was made of in his
mother's womb 1 For whereas, at his incarna
tion, he was made of the nature and substance
of his blessed mother ; now, by these Papists'
opinion, he is made every day of the nature aud
substance of bread and wine, which (as they
say) be turned into the substance of his Body
and blood. O, what a marvellous metamorpho
sis and abominable heresy is this; to say that
Christ is daily made anew, and of a new matter :
whereof it followeth necessarily, that they make
us every day a new Christ, and not the same that
was born of the Virgin Mary, nor that was cru^
cified upon the cross, as it shaU be plainly proved
by these arguments following.
First, thus : if Christ's body that was cruci
fied was not made of bread, but the body that
was eaten in the supper was made of bread, (as
the Papists say,) then Christ's body that was
eaten was not the same that was crucified.
And again ; if Christ's body that was* cruci
fied, was not made of bread, and Christ's body
that was crucified was the same that was eaten
at his last supper, then Christ's body that was
paten was not made of bread.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 73
#. And moreover, if Christ's body that was eaten
at the last supper was the same that was crucis
fied, and Christ's body that was eaten at the
supper was made of bread, (as the Papists
feign,) then Christ's body that was crucified was
made of bread.
And in like manner it followeth, if the body of
Christ in the sacrament, be made of the sub
stance of bread and wine, and the same body
was conceived in the Virgin's womb, then the
body of Christ in the Virgin's womb was made
of bread and wine. Or else turn the argument
thus : the body of Christ in the Virgin's womb
was not made of bread and wine, but this body
of Christ in the sacrament is made of bread and
wine; then this body of Christ is not the same
that was conceived in the Virgin's womb.
Another argument. Christ that was born in
the Virgin's womb, as concerning his body, was
made of none other substance but of the sub
stance of his blessed mother ; but Christ in the
sacrament is made of another substance ; then
he is another Christ. And so the Antichrist of
Rome, the chief author of all idolatry, would
bring faithful Christian people from the true
worshipping of Christ, that was made and born
of the blessed Virgin Mary, through the opera
tion of the Holy Ghost, and suffered for us upon
the cross, to worship another Christ made of
bread and wine, through the consecration of a _

74 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
Popish priest. And thus the Popish priests,
make themselves the makers of God'. For (say
they) the priest by the words of consecration
maketh that thing which is eaten and drunken
in the Lord's Supper; and that (say they) is
Christ himself both God and man, and so they
take upon them to make both God* and man.
But let all true worshippers worship one God,
one Christ, once corporeally made, of one only
corporeal substance, that is to say, of the blessed
Virgin Mary, that once died, and rose once
again, once ascended into heaven, and there sit-
teth and shall sit at the right hand of his Father
evermore, although spiritually he be every day
amongst us, and whosoever come together in his
name, he is in the midst among them. And he
is the spiritual pasture and food of our souls, as
meat and drink is of our bodies, which he signi
fieth unto us by the institution of his most holy
supper in bread and wine, declaring that as the
bread and wine corporally comfort and feed our
bodies, so doth he with his flesh and blood spiri
tually comfort and feed our souls. And now
may be easily answered the Papists' argument,
whereof they do so much boast. For brag they
never so much of the conversion of bread and
wine into the body and blood of Christ, yet that
conversion is spiritual, and putteth not away the
corporal presence ofthe material bread and wine.
But forasmuch as the same is a most holy sa-

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 75
crament of our spiritual nourishment, (which we
have by the body and blood of our Saviour
Christ,) there must needs remain the sensible
element, that is to say, bread and wine, without
the which there can be no sacrament : as in our
spiritual regeneration there can be no sacrament
of baptism, if there be no water. For as bap
tism is no perfect sacrament of spiritual regene*
ration, without there be as well the element of
water, as the Holy Ghost, spiritually regene
rating the person that is baptized, (Which is sig
nified by the said water,) even so the supper of
our Lord can be no perfect sacrament of spiritual
food, except there be as well bread and wine, as
the body and blood of our Saviour Christ, spiri
tually feeding us, which by the said bread and
wine is signified. And howsoever the body and
blood of OUr Saviour Christ be there present,
they may as well be present there with the sub
stance of bread and Wine, as with the accidents
of the same, as the school authors do confess
themselves ; and it shall be well proved if the
adversaries will deny it.
Thus you see the strongest argument of the
Papists answered unto ; and the chief foundation,
¦whereupon they build their error of Transub
stantiation, Utterly subverted and overthrown.
Another reason have they of like strength. If chap.
the bread should remain (say they) then should

IX.

The second

follow many absurdities, and chiefly, that Christ argumentfor

76 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
Transub- hath taken the nature of bread, as he took the
stantiation.
nature of man, and so joined it to his substance..
And then as we have God verily incarnate for
our redemption, so should we have him impa-
nate.
The answer. Thou mayst consider, good reader, that the
rest of their reasons be very weak and feeble,
when these be the chief and strongest. Truth
it is indeed, that Christ should have been impa-
nate, if he had joined the bread unto his sub
stance in unity of person, that is to say, if he had
joined the bread unto him in such sort, that he
had made the bread one person with himself.
But forasmuch as he is joined to the bread but
sacramentally, there followeth no impanation
thereof, no more than the Holy Ghost is ina-
quate, that is to say, made water, being sacra
mentally joined to the water in baptism. Nor
he. was not made a dove, when he took upon him
the form of a dove, to signify that he, whom St.
John did baptize, was very Christ. But rather
of the error of the Papists themselves, (as one
error draweth another after it,) should follow the
great absurdity, which they speak upon, that is
to say, that Christ should be impanate and invi-
nate. For if Christ do use the bread in such,
wise, that he doth not annihilate ,and make no
thing of it, (as the Papists say,) but maketh of
it his own body, then is the bread joined to his
body in a greater unity, than is his humanity to

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 77
hisiGodhead. For his Godhead is adjoined unto
his humanity iri unity of person, and riot of na
ture : but our Saviour Christ (by their saying)
adjoineth bread unto his body in unity both of
nature and person. So that the bread and the
body of Christ be but one thing, both in nature
and person. And so is there a morerentire
union between Christ and bread, than between
his Godhead and manhood, or between his soul
and his body. And thus these arguments ofthe
Papists return (like rivetted nails) upon their
own heads. r>
Yet a third reason they have, which they ga^ chap.
ther out of the sixth of John, where Christ saith, .

"I am lively bread, which came from heaven, reason'!'
If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for
ever. And the bread which I will give is my
flesh, which I will give for the life ofthe world."
Then they reason after this fashion. If the bread
which Christ gave, be his flesh, then it cannot
also be material bread ; and so it must needs
follow, that the material bread is gone, and that
none other substance remaineth, but the flesh
of Christ only.
To this is soon made answer, that Christ, in The anSwe
that place of John, spake not of the material
and sacramental bread, nor of the sacramental
eating, (for that was spoken two or three years
before the sacrament was first ordained,) but he
spake of spiritual bread (many times repeating,

78 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
" lam the bread of life, which came from hea
ven,") and of spiritual eating by faith, after which
sort he was at the same present time eaten of
as many as believed on him, although the sacra
ment was not at that time made and instituted.
And therefore he said, " Your fathers did eat
manna in the desert, and died ; but he that eat
eth this bread shall live for ever/' Therefore
this place of St. John can in no wise be under
stood of the sacramental bread, which neither
came from heaven, neither giveth life to all that
eat it. Nor of such bread Christ could have
then presently said, This is my flesh, except
they will say that Christ did then consecrate,
so many years before the institution of his Holy
Supper.
chap. Now that I have made a full, direct, and plain"
 !!!"  answer to the vain reasons and cavillations of
wrested by the Papists ; order requireth- to make likewise
fortherT*8 answer unto their sophistical allegations and
staSion. wresting of authors unto their fantastical pur
poses. There be chiefly three places, which at
the first shew seem much to make for their in
tent, but When they shall be thoroughly weigh
ed, they make nothing for them at all.
The first is a place of Cyprian n, in his sermon
of the Lord's Supper, where he saith, as is al
leged in the detection of the devil's sophistry,
*
* Cyprianus de Coena Domini.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 79
" This bread, which our Lord gave to his disci
ples, changed in nature, but not in outward
form, is, by the omnipotency of God's word,
made flesh." Here the Papists stick tooth and
nail to these words, " changed in nature." Ergo
(say they) the nature of the bread is changed.
Here is one chief point of the devil's sophistry The answer.
used, who in allegation of Scripture useth ever,
either to add thereto, or to take away from it, or
to alter the sense thereof. And so have they, in
this author, left out those words which would
open plainly all the whole matter. For next the
words, which be here before of them recited, do
follow these words : " As in the person of Christ
the humanity was seen, and the divinity was hid,
even so did the divinity ineffably put itself into
the visible sacrament." Which words of Cy
prian do manifestly shew, that the sacrament
doth still remain with the divinity; and that, sa-
cramentally, the divinity is poured into the bread
and wine, the same bread and wine still remain
ing : like as the same divinity, by unity of per
son, was in the humanity of Christ, the same
humanity still remaining with the divinity. And
yet the bread is changed, not in shape, nor sub
stance, but in nature, (as Cyprian truly saith,)
not meaning that the natural substance of bread
is clean gone, but that, by God's word, there is
added thereto another higher property, nature,
and condition, far passing the nature and condi-

80 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
tion of common bread, that is to say, that the
bread doth shew unto us, (as the same Cyprian
saith,) that we be partakers of the Spirit of God,
and most purely joined unto Christ, and spiri
tually fed with his flesh and blood; so that now
the said mystical bread is both a corporal food
for the body, and a spiritual food. for. the soul.
And likewise is the nature of the water changed-
in baptism ; forasmuch as beside his common
nature, (which is to wash and make clean the
body,) it declareth unto us, that our souls be
also washed and made clean by the Holy Ghost.
And thus is answered the chief authority of the
doctors, which the Papists take for the principal
defence of their error. But for further declara
tion of St. Cyprian's mind herein, read the place
of him before recited, fol.. 78.
chap. Another authority they have of St.JohnChry-'
x"' sostome, which they boast also to be invincible:
chrysosto- chrySOStome (say they) writeth us, in a certain
homely De Eucharistia: " Dost thou see bread?
Dost thou see wine ? Do they void beneath, as
other meats do ? God forbid ; think not so. For
as wax, if it be put into the fire, it is made like
the fire, no substance remaineth, nothing is left:
so here also think thou that the mysteries be
consumed by the substance of the body." At
these words of Chrysostome the Papists do tri
umph, as though they had won the field. Lo,-
(say they,) doth not Chrysostomus, the great

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 81
clerk, say most plainly, that we see neither bread
nor wine ? but that, as wax in the fire, they be
consumed to nothing, so that no substance re
maineth ? But if they had rehearsed no more The answer
but the very next sentence that followeth in
Chrysostome, (which craftily and maliciously
they leave out,) the meaning of St. John Chry
sostome would easily have appeared, and yet
will make them blush, if they be not utterly past
shame. For after the foresaid words of Chry
sostome, ^ immediately follow these words :
" Wherefore," saith he, " when ye come to
these mysteries, do not think that you receive
by a man the body of God, but that with
tongues you receive fire by the angels sera
phim." And straight after it followeth thus i
" Think that the blood of salvation floweth out
of the pure and godly side of Christ, and so
coming to it receive it with pure lips. Where
fore, brethren, I pray you and beseech you, let
us not be from the church, nor let us not be oc
cupied there with vain communication, but let
us stand fearful and trembling, casting down our
eyes, lifting up our minds, mourning privily
without speech, and rejoicing in our hearts."
These words of Chrysostome do follow immedi
ately after the other words, which the Papists
before rehearsed. Therefore if the Papists will
gather of the words by them recited, that there
is neither bread nor wine in the sacrament, I
G

3^ AGAINST THE ERROR OF
may as well gather of the words that follow, that
there is neither priest nor Christ's body. For
as in the former sentence Chrysostome saith,
that we may not think that we see bread and
.wine : so in the second sentence he saith, that
we may not think that we receive the body of
Christ of the priest's hands. Wherefore if upon
the second sentence, (as the Papists themselves
will say,) it cannot be truly gathered, that in
the holy communion there is not the body of
Christ ministered by the priest : then must they
confess also, that it cannot be well and truly ga
thered upon the first sentence, that there is no
bread nor wine. But there be all these things
together in the holy communion : Christ himself
spiritually eaten and drunken, and nourishing
the right believers ; the bread and wine as a sa
crament declaring the same ; and the priest as a
minister thereof. Wherefore St. John Chrysos
tome meant not absolutely to deny that there is
bread and wine, or to deny utterly the priest
and the body of Christ to be there; but he useth
Negatives a speech which is no pure negative, but a nega-
rison. tive by comparison; which fashion of speeches
commonly used, not only in the Scripture, and
among all good authors, but also in all manner
of languages. For when two things be compared
together, in the extolling of the more excellent,
or abasing of the more vile, is many times used
a negative by comparison, which nevertheless is

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 83
no pure negative, but only in the respect of the
more excellent, or the more base. As by exam
ple : when the people, rejecting the prophet Sa
muel, desired to have a king, Almighty God said
to Satriuel, " They have not rejected thee, but
me "." Not meaning by this negative absolutely
that they had not rejected Samuel, (in whose
place they desired to have a king,) but by that
one negative by comparison he understood two
affirmatives, that is to say, that they had reject
ed Samuel, and not him alone, but also that they
had chiefly rejected God. And when the pro
phet David said in the person of Christ, " I am
a worm, and not a manp ;" by this negative he
denied not utterly that Christ was a man, but
(the more vehemently to express the great humi
liation of Christ) he said, that he was not abased
only to the nature of man, but was brought so
low, that he might rather be called a worm than
a man. This manner of speech was familiar and
usual to St. Paul, as when he said, " It is not I
that do it, but it is the sin that dwelleth in me*1."
And in another place he saith, " Christ sent me
not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel r."
And again he saith, " My speech and preaching
was not in words of man's persuasion, but in ma
nifest declaration of the spirit and power5."
And he saith also, " Neither he that grafteth,
• 1 Sam. viii. * Psal. xxii. ** Rom. vii. r 1 Cor. i. ' Ibid.
* G 2

8*"* AGAINST THE ERROR OF
nor he that watereth, is any thing ; but God that
giveth the increase*." And he saith moreover,
'¦' It is not I that live, but Christ liveth within
me V— And " God forbid that I should rejoice
in any thing, but in the cross of our Lord Jesu
Christ V And further, "We do not wrestle
against flesh and blood, but against the spirits
of darkness y." In all these sentences, and many
other like, although they be negatives, never
theless St. Paul meant not clearly to deny that
he did that evil whereof he spake, or utterly to
say that he was not sent to baptize, (who indeed
did baptize at certain times, and was sent to do
all things that pertained to salvation,) or that in
his office of setting forth God's word he used no
witty persuasions, (which indeed he used most
discreetly,) or that the grafter and waterer be
nothing, (which be God's creatures made to his
similitude, and without whose work there should
be no increase,) or to say that he was not alive,
(who both lived and ran through all countries, to
set forth God's glory,) or clearly to affirm that he
gloried and rejoiced in no other thing than in
Christ's cross, (who rejoiced with all men that
were in joy, and sorrowed with all that were in
sorrow,) or to deny utterly that we wrestle
against flesh and blood, which cease not daily
to wrestle and war against our enemies, the
world, the flesh, and the devil. ,
' 1 Cor. iii. » Gal. ii. x Gal. vi. y Ephes. VL»

TRANSUBSTANTIATION.* 85
In all these sentences, St. Paul (as I said)
meant not clearly to deny these things, which
undoubtedly were all true, but he meant, that
in comparison of other greater things, these
smaller were not much to be esteemed; but
that the greater things were the chief things
to be considered : as that sin, committed by his
infirmity, was rather to be imputed to original
sin, or corruption of nature, which lay lurking
within him, than to his own will and consent.
And that although he was sent to baptize, yet
he was chiefly sent to preach God's word. And
that although he used wise and discreet persua
sions therein, yet the success thereof came prin
cipally of the power of God, and of the working
of the Holy Spirit. And that although the
grafter and waterer of the garden be some things,
arid do not a little in their offices, yet it is God
chiefly that giveth the increase. And that al
though he lived in this world, yet his chief life;
concerning God, was by Christ, whom he had
living within him. And that although he gloried
in many other things, yea, in his own infirmities,
yet his greatest joy was in the redemption by
the cross of Christ. And that although our spi
rit daily fighteth agamst our flesh, yet our chief
and principal fight is against our ghostly ene
mies, the subtle and puissant wicked spirits and
devils. The same manner of speech used also St.

®® AGAINST THE ERROR OF
Peter, in his first Epistle, saying, " That ihe
apparel of women should not be outwardly, with
braided hair, and setting on of gold, nor in put
ting on of gorgeous apparel, but that the inward
man of the heart should be without corrup
tion**." In which manner of speech he intended
not utterly to forbid all braiding of hair, all gold
and costly apparel, to all women ; for every one
must be apparelled according to their condition,
state, and degree ; but he meant hereby clearly
to condemn all pride and excess in apparel, and
to move all women that they should study to
deck their souls inwardly with all virtues,, and
not to be curious outwardly to deck and adorn
their bodies with sumptuous apparel. And our
Saviour Christ himself was full of such manner
of speeches. " Gather not unto you," saith he,
" treasure upon earth" :" willing us thereby ra
ther to set our minds upon heavenly treasure,
which ever endureth, than upon earthly trea
sure, which, by many sundry occasions, perish-
Cth, and is taken away from us. And yet
worldly treasure must needs be had, and pos
sessed of some men, as the person, time, and
occasion doth serve. Likewise he said, " When
you be brought before kings and princes, think
not what and how you shall answer":" not will
ing us by this negative, that we should negli-
* 1 Pet. iii. » Matt. vi. '¦ Matt, x.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 87
gently and unadvisedly answer we care not what;
but that we should depend on our Heavenly Fa
ther, trusting that by his Holy Spirit He will
sufficiently instruct us of answer, rather than to
trust to any answer to be devised by our wit and
study. And in the same manner he spake, when
he said, " It is not you that speak, but it is the
Spirit of God that speaketh within youc." For
the Spirit of God is he, that principally putteth
godly words into our mouths, and yet neverthe
less we do speak according to his moving. And
to be short, in all these sentences following, that
is to say, " Call no man your father upon
earth d." — " Let no man call you lord or mas
ter1'." — " Fear not them that kill the bodyf." —
"I came not to send peace upon earth g." — " It
is not in me to set you at my right hand or left-
hand h." — " You shall not worship the Father
neither in this mount, nor in Jerusalem '." — " I
take no witness at no mank." — " My doctrine is
not mine1." — " I seek not my glory m." In all
these negatives, our Saviour Christ spake not
precisely and utterly to deny all the foresaid
things, but in comparison of them to prefer other
things : as to prefer our Father and Lord in hea
ven, above any worldly father, lord, or master
in earth, and his fear above the fear' of any crea
ture, and his word and gospel above all worldly
c Matt. x. 4 Matt, xxiii. e Ibid. ' Matt. x. E Ibid.
"Matt. xx. -Johniv. "John v. 'John vii. ra John viii.

88 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
peace ; also to prefer spiritual and inward ho
nouring of God in pure heart and mind, above
local, corporal, and outward honour, and that
Christ preferred his Father's glory above his
. own. ; Now forasmuch as I have declared at length
the nature and kind of these negative speeches,
(which be no pure negatives but by comparison,)
it is easy hereby to make answer to St. John
Chrysostome, who used this phrase of speech
most of any author. For his meaning in his
foresaid homily, was not that in the celebration
of the Lord's Supper is neither bread nor wine,
neither priest, nor the body of Christ, (which
the Papists themselves must needs confess,) but
his intent was, to draw our minds upwards to
heaven, that we should not consider so much the
bread, wine, priest, and body of Christ, as we
should consider his divinity and Holy Spirit
given unto us to our eternal salvation. And
therefore in the same place he useth so many
times these words, "Think, and think not;"
willing us by those words, that we should not
fix our thoughts and minds upon the bread, wine,
priest, nor Christ's body ; but to lift up our
hearts higher unto his spirit and divinity, with
out the which his body availeth nothing, as he
said himself:," It is the spirit that giveth life,
the flesh availeth nothing"." And as the san\e
" John vi.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 89
Chrysostome in many places moveth us not to
consider the water in baptism, but rather to
have respect to the Holy Ghost, received in bap
tism, and represented by the water: even so
doth he in this homily of the holy communion
move us to lift up our minds, from all visible and
corporal things, to things invisible and spiritual.
Insomuch, that although Christ was but once
crucified, yet would Chrysostome have us to
think that we see him daily whipped and scourg
ed before our eyes, and his body hanging upon
the cross, and the spear thrust into his side, and
the most holy blood to flow out of his side into
our mouths. After which manner St. Paul wrote
to the Galatians ", that Christ was painted and
crucified before their eyes. Therefore, saith
Chrysostome, in the same homily, a little before chrysosto-
the place rehearsed, " What dost thou, O man ? m"
didst not thou promise to the priest, which said,
Lift up your minds and hearts ; and thou didst
answer, We lift them up unto the Lord ? Art
not thou ashamed and afraid, being at that same
hour found a liar ? A wonderful thing : the table
is set forth furnished with God's mysteries, the
Lamb of God is offered for them, the priest is
careful for them, spiritual fire cometh out of that
heavenly table, the angels seraphim be there
present, covering their faces with six wings. All
the angelical powers, with the priest, be means
° Galat. iii.

90

AGAINST THE ERROR OF

and intercessors for you, a spiritual fire cometh
down from heaven, blood in the cup is drunk
out of the most pure side unto thy purification.
And art not thou ashamed, afraid, and abashed,
not endeavouring thyself to purchase God's
mercy ? O man, doth not thine own conscience
condemn thee ? There be in the week one hunr
dred and sixty-eight hours, and God asketh but
one of them to be given wholly unto him, and
thou consumest that in worldly business, in tri
fling and talking; with what boldness then shalt
thou come to these holy mysteries, O corrupt
conscience?" Hitherto I have rehearsed St.
John Chrysostome's words, which do shew how
our minds should be occupied at this holy table
of our Lord, that is to say, withdrawn from the
consideration of sensible things, unto the con
templation of most heavenly and godly things.
And thus is answered this place of Chrysostome,
which the Papists took for an insoluble, and a
place that no man was able to answer. But for
a further declaration of Chrysostome's mind in
this matter, read the place of him before re
hearsed, fol. 60 and 65.
chap. Yet there is another place of St. Ambrose p,
xm- which the Papists think maketh much for their
purpose ; but, after due examination, it shall
' plainly appear how much they be deceived.
They allege these words of St. Ambrose, in a
p Ambros. de iis qui mysteriis initiantur.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION.'-. 91
book entitled De Us qui initiantur mysteriis:
" Let us prove that there is not that thing which
nature formed, but which benediction did con
secrate, and that benediction is of more strength
than nature. For by the blessing, nature itself
is also changed. ' Moses held a rod, he cast it
from him, and it was made a serpent. Again
he took the serpent by the tail, and it was turn
ed again into the nature of a rod p.' Wherefore
thou seest, that by the grace of the prophet, the
nature of the serpent and rod was twice chang
ed. ' The floods of Egypt ran pure water, and
suddenly blood began to burst out of the veins
of the springs, so that men could not drink of
the flood ; but, at the prayer of the prophet, the
blood of the flood went away, and the nature of
water came again V— ' The people of the He
brews were compassed about, on the one side
with the Egyptians, and on the other side with
the sea. Moses lifted up his rod, the water di
vided itself, and stood up like a wall, and be
tween the waters was left a way for them to pass
on foot. And Jordan, against nature, turned
back to the head of his spring V Doth it not
appear now that the nature of the sea floods, or
of the course of fresh water, was changed?
' The people was dry, Moses touched a stone;
and water came out of the stone V Did not

p Exod. vii. 1 1bid. ' Exod. xiv-. - ¦ ¦• Exod.

XVII.

92

AGAINST THE ERROR OF
grace here work above nature, to make the
stone to bring forth water, which it had not of
nature ? ' Marath was a most bitter flood, so
that the people being dry, could not drink
thereof'.' Moses put wood into the water, and
the nature of the water lost his bitterness, which
grace infused did so suddenly moderate. ' In
the time of Elisha the prophet, an axe had fallen
from one of the prophet's servants into the wa
ter ; he that lost the iron, desired the prophet
Elisha's help, who put the helve into the water,
and the iron swam above *¦.' Which thing we
know was done above nature, for iron is heavier
than the liquor of water. Thus we perceive that
grace is of more force than nature, and yet hi
therto we have rehearsed but the grace of the
blessing of the prophets. Now if the blessing
of a man be of such value, that it may change
. nature, what do we say of the consecration of
God, wherein is the operation of the words of
our Saviour Christ 1 For this sacrament which
thou receivest, is done by the word of Christ.
Then if the word of Elijah was of such power
that it could bring fire down from heaven, shall
not the word of Christ be of that power to
change the kinds of the elements ? Of the mak
ing ofthe whole world thou hast read, 'That
God spake, and the things were done; he com-
' Exod. xv. * 3 Kings vi.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 93
manded, and they were created V The word
then of Christ, that could of nothing make
things that were not, can it not change those
things that be into that thing which before they
were not ? For it is no less matter to give to
things new natures, than to alter natures."
Thus far have I rehearsed the words of St. Am
brose, if the said book be his, (which they that
be of greatest learning and judgment do not
think,) by which words the Papists would prove
that in the supper of the Lord, after the words
of consecration, as they be commonly called,
there remaineth neither bread nor wine, because
that St. Ambrose saith in this place, that the
nature of the bread and wine is changed.
But to satisfy their minds, let us grant, for The answer.
their pleasure, that the foresaid book was St.
Ambrose's own work ; yet the same book maketh
nothing for their purpose, but quite against them.
For he saith not that the substance of bread and
wine is gone, but he saith that their nature is
changed, that is to say, that in the holy commu
nion we ought not to receive the bread and wine
as other common meats and drinks, but as things
clean changed into a higher estate, nature, and
condition, to be taken as holy meats and drinks,
whereby we receive spiritual feeding and super
natural nourishment from heaven, of the very
* Psal, cxlviii.

94 AGAINST THE ERROR OT
true body and blood of our Saviour Christ,
through the omnipotent power of God and the
wonderful working of the Holy Ghost. Which
so well agreeth with the substance of bread and
wine still remaining, that if they were gone away,
and not there, this our spiritual feeding could
not be taught unto us by them.
And therefore in the most part ofthe examples
which St. Ambrose allegeth for the wonderful
alteration of natures, the substances did still re
main, after the natures and properties were
changed. As when the water of Jordan, con
trary to his nature, stood still like a wall, or
flowed against the stream towards the head and
spring, yet the substance of the water remained
the same that it was before. Likewise the stone,
that above his nature and kind flowed water,
was the self-same stone that it was before. And
the flood of Marath, that changed his nature of
bitterness, changed, for all that, no part of his
substance. No more did that iron, which, con
trary to his nature, swam upon the water, lose
thereby any part of the substance thereof.
Therefore as in these alterations of natures, the
substances nevertheless remained the same that
they were before the alterations : even so doth
the substance of bread and wine remain in the
Lord's Supper, and be naturally received and
digested into the body, notwithstanding the sa
cramental mutation of the same into the body
4

TRANSUBSTANTIATION.
and blood of Christ. Which sacramental muta
tion declareth the supernatural, spiritual, and
inexplicable eating and drinking, feeding and
digesting, ofthe same body and blood of Christ,
in all them that godly, and according to their
duty, do receive the said sacramental bread and
wine. And that St. Ambrose thus meant, that
the substance of bread and wine remain still after
the consecration, it is most clear by three other
examples of the same matter, following in the
same chapter.
One, is of them that be regenerated, in whom
after their regeneration doth still remain their
former natural substance. Another is of the
incarnation of our Saviour Christ, in the which
perished no substance, but remaineth as well the
substance of his godhead, as the substance which
he took of the blessed Virgin Mary. The third
example is of the water in baptism, where the
water still remaineth water, although the Holy
Ghost come upon the water, or rather upon him
that is baptized therein.
And although the same St. Ambrose, in ano
ther book, entitled De Sacramentis, doth say,
<• That the bread is bread before the words of
consecration; but when the consecration is done,
of bread is made the body of Christ7:" yet in
the same book, and in the same chapter, he tell-
y In libro 4. De Sacramentis, cap. 4.

95

96 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
eth in what manner and form the same is done
by the words of Christ : not by taking away the
substance of the bread, but adding to the bread
the grace of Christ's body, and so calling it the
body of Christ. And hereof he bringeth four
examples ; the first, of the regeneration of a
man ; the second is of the standing of the water
of the Red Sea ; the third is of the bitter water
of Marath ; and the fourth is of the iron that
swam above the water. In every of the which
examples, the former substance remained still,
notwithstanding alteration of the natures. And
he concludeth the whole matter in these few
words : " If there be so much strength in the
words of the Lord Jesu, that things had their
beginning which never were before, how much
more be they able to work, that those things that
were before should remain, and also be changed
into other things !" Which words do shew ma
nifestly, that notwithstanding this wonderful,
sacramental, and spiritual changing of the bread
into the body of Christ, yet the substance ofthe
bread remaineth the same that it was before.
Thus is a sufficient answer made unto three
principal authorities, which the Papists use to
allege, to establish their error of Transubstan
tiation : the first of Cyprian, the second of St.
John Chrysostome, and the third of St. Am
brose. Other authorities and reasons some of
them do bring for the same purpose ; but foras-

TRANSUBSTANTrATlOtf. 97
much as they be of small moment and weight,
and easy to be answered unto, I will pass them
over at this time, and not trouble . the reader
with them, but leave them to be weighed by his
discretion. And now I will rehearse divers difficulties, ab- CHAP*
surdities, and inconveniences, which must needs

XIV.

„ ... . . Absurdities
follow upon this error ot transubstantiation; that follow
1 -i-i of Transub*
whereof not one doth follow of the true and right stantiation.
faith, which is according to God's word.
First, if the Papists be demanded, what thing
it is that is broken, what is eaten, what is
drunken, and what is chewed with the teeth,
lips, and mouth in this sacrament, they have no
thing to answer, but the accidents. For (as
they say) bread and wine be not the visible ele^
ments in this sacrament, but only their accidents ;
and so they be forced to say, that accidents be
broken, eaten, drunken, chewed, and swallowed,
without any substance at all : which is not only
against all reason, but also against the doctrine
of all ancient authors.
Secondly, these transubstantiators do say,
(contrary to all learning,) that the accidents of
bread and wine do hang alone in the air without
any substance, wherein they may. be stayed.
And what can be said more foolishly ?
Thirdly, that the substance of Christ's body
is there really, corporally, and naturally present,
without any accidents of the same. And so the
H

98 AGAINST THE ERROR OF
Papists make accidents to be without substances,
and substances to be without accidents.
Fourthly, they say, that the place where the
bread and wine be, hath no substance there to
fill that place, and so must they needs be granted
vacuum, which nature utterly abhorreth.
Fifthly, they are not ashamed to say the sub
stance is made of accidents, when the bread
mouldeth, or is turned into worms, or when the
wine soureth.
Sixthly, that substance is nourished without
substance by accidents only, if it chance any
cat, mouse, dog, or any other thing, to eat the
sacramental bread, or drink the sacramental wine.
These inconveniences and absurdities do fol
low of the fond Papistical Transubstantiation,
with a number of other errors as evil or worse
than these, whereunto they be never able to an
swer, as many of them have confessed them
selves. And it is a wonder to see, how in many
of the foresaid things, they vary among them
selves. Whereas the other doctrine of the Scrip
ture, and of the old Catholick church, (but not
of the lately corrupted Romish church,) is plain
and easy, as well to be understood, as to answer
to all the foresaid questions, without any absur
dity or inconvenience following thereof : so that
every answer shall agree with God's word, with
the old church, and also with all reason and true
philosophy.

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 99
For as touching the first point, what is broken,
what is eaten, what drunken, and what chewed
in this sacrament, it is easy to answer, the bread
and wine, as St. Paul saith : the bread which we
break. And as concerning the second and third points,
neither is the substance of bread and wine with*
out their proper accidents, nor their accidents
hang alone in the air without any substance, but
according to all learning the substances of the
bread and wine reserve their own accidents, and
the accidents do rest in their own substances.
And also as concerning the fourth point, there*!
is no place left void after consecration, (as the
Papists dream,) but bread and wine fulfil theif
places, as they did before.
And as touching the fifth point, (whereof the
worms or moulding is engendered, and whereof
the vinegar cometh,) the answer is easy to make,
according to all learning and experience, that
they come, according to the course of nature, of
the substance of the bread and wine too long
kept, and not of the accidents alone, as the Pa
pists do fondly fancy. And likewise the sub
stances of the bread and wine do feed and nou
rish the body of them that eat the same, and not
the only accidents.
In these answers is no absurdity nor inconve
nience, nothing spoken either contrary to holy
Scripture, or to natural reason, philosophy, of'
h2

100 AGAINST THE ERROR, &C.
experience, or against any old ancient author,
or the primitive or Catholick church ; but only
against the malignant and Papistical church of
Rome. Whereas on the other side, that cursed
synagogue of Antichrist hath defined and deter
mined in this matter so many things contrary to
Christ's word, contrary to the old Catholick
church, and the holy martyrs and doctors of the
same, and contrary to all natural reason, learn
ing, and philosophy. And the final end of all
this Antichrist's doctrine is none other, but by
subtlety and craft to bring Christian people, from
the true honouring of Christ, unto the greatest
idolatry that ever was in this world devised : as,
by God's grace, shall be plainly set forth here
after.

THUS ENDETH THE SECOND BOOK.

THE THIRD BOOK

TEACHETH THE MANNER HOW

CHRIST IS PRESENT IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.

Now this matter of Transubstantiation being, as chap.
I trust, sufficiently resolved, (which is the first.

The pre-

part before rehearsed, wherein the Papistical senclof
doctrine varieth from the Catholick truth,) order sacrament.6
requireth next to treat of the second part, which
is ofthe manner ofthe presence ofthe body and
blood of our Saviour Christ in the sacrament
thereof, wherein is no less contention than iri
the first part. For a plain explication whereof,
it is not unknown to all true faithful Christian
people, that our Saviour Christ, being perfect
God, and in all things equal and co-eternal with
his Father, for our sakes became also a perfect
man, taking flesh and blood of his blessed mo
ther and virgin Mary, and, saving sin, being in
all things like unto us ; adjoining unto his divi
nity a most perfect soul and a most perfect
body; his soul being endued with life, sense, will,

102 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
reason, wisdom, memory, and all other things
required to the perfect soul of man; and his
body being made of very flesh and bones, not
only having all members of a perfect man's body
in due order and proportion, but also being sub
ject to hunger, thirst, labour, sweat, weariness,
cold, heat, and all other like infirmities and pas
sions of man, and unto death also, and that the
most vile and painful, upon the cross. And
after his death he rose again, with the self-same
visible and palpable body, and appeared there
with, and shewed the same unto his apostles,
and especially to Thomas, making him to put
his hands into his side and to feel his wounds.
Christ cor- And with the self-same body he forsook this
as^nded world, and ascended into heaven, (the apostles
seeing and beholding his body when it ascend
ed,) and now sitteth at the right hand of his Fa
ther, and there shall remain until the last day,
when he shall come to judge the quick and the
dead \ This is the true Catholick faith, which
the Scripture teacheth, and the universal church
of Christ hath ever believed from the beginning
until within these four or five hundred years
last past, that the bishop of Rome, with the as
sistance of his Papists, hath set up a new faith
and belief of their own devising, that the same
body really, corporally, naturally, and sensibly,
• Acts iii.

into heaven.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 103
is in this world still, and that in an hundred
thousand places at one time, being enclosed in
every pix and bread consecrated.
And although we do^ affirm, (according to chap.
God's word,) that Christ is in all persons that "'
truly believe in him, in such sort, that with his eohcVb£er~
flesh and blood he doth spiritually nourish them, traeeandethe
and feed them, and giveth them everlasting life, doctrine"
and doth assure them thereof, as well by the the presence
J of Christ's
promise of his word, as by the sacramental- bread hody-
and wine in his holy supper, which he did insti
tute for the same purpose, yet we do not a little
vary from the heinous errors of the Papists : for
they teach, that Christ is in the bread and wine :
but we say, according to the truth, that he is in
them that worthily eat and drink the bread and
wine. They say, that when any man eateth the
bread and drinketh the cup, Christ goeth into
his mouth or stomach with the bread and wine,
and no further : but we say, that Christ is in the
whole man, both in the body and soul of him
that worthily eateth the bread and drinketh the
cup, and not in his mouth or stomach only.
They say, that Christ is received in the mouth,
and entereth in with the bread and wine : we
say, that he is received in the heart, and entereth
in by faith. They say, that Christ is really in
the sacramental bread, being reserved an whole
year, or so long as the form of bread remaineth ;
but after the receiving thereof, he flyeth up (say

104

OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
they) from the receiver unto heaven, as soon as
the bread is chewed in the mouth, or changed in
the stomach : but we say, that Christ remaineth
in the man that worthily receiveth it, so long as
the man remaineth a member of Christ.
They say, that in the sacrament, the corporal
members of Christ be not distant in place one
from another, but that wheresoever the head is,
there be the feet, and wheresoever the arms be,
there be the legs ; so that in every part of the
bread and wine is altogether whole head, whole
feet, whole flesh, whole blood, whole heart,
whole lungs, whole breast, whole back, and al
together whole, confused, and mixt without dis
tinction or diversity. O, what a foolish and an
abominable invention is this, to make of the
most pure and perfect body of Christ such a
confused and monstrous body ! And yet can the
Papists imagine nothing so foolish, but all Chris
tian people must receive the same as an oracle
of God, and as a most certain article of their
faith, without whispering to the contrary.
Furthermore the Papists say, that a dog or a
cat eat the body of Christ, if they by chance do
eat the sacramental bread: we say, that no
earthly creature can eat the body of Christ, nor
drink his blood, but only man. They say, that
every man, good and evil, eateth the body of
Christ : we say, that both do eat the sacramental
bread and drink the wine, but none do eat the

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 105
very body of Christ, and drink his blood, but
only they that be lively members of his body.
They say, that good men eat the body of
Christ, and drink his blood, only at that time
when they receive the sacrament : we say, that
they eat, drink, and feed of Christ continually,
so long as they be members of his body.
They say, that the body of Christ that is in
the sacrament, hath his own proper form and
quantity : we say, that Christ is there sacra-
mentally and spiritually, without form or quan
tity. They say, that the fathers and prophets of the
Old Testament did not eat the body nor drink
the blood of Christ : we say, that they did eat
his body and drink his blood, although he was
not yet born nor incarnated.
They say, that the body of Christ is every day
many times made as often as there be masses
said, and that then and there he is made of bread
and wine : we say, that Christ's body was never
but once made, and then not of the nature and
substance of bread and wine, but of the sub
stance of his blessed mother.
They say, that the mass is a sacrifice satisfac
tory for sin, by the devotion of the priest that
offereth, and not by the thing that is offered : but
we say, that their saying is a most heinous lie
and detestable error against the glory of Christ.
For the satisfaction for our sins is not the devo-.

106 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
tion nor offering of the priest ; but the only host
and satisfaction for all the sins of the world is
the death of Christ, and the oblation of his body
upon the cross, that is to say, the oblation that
Christ himself offered once upon the cross, and
never but once, nor never none but he. And
therefore that oblation, which the priests make
daily in their Papistical masses, cannot be a sa
tisfaction for other men's sins by the priest's de
votion, but it is a mere elusion and subtle craft of
the devil, whereby Antichrist hath many years
blinded and deceived the world.
They say, that Christ is corporally in many
places at one time, affirming that his body is
corporally and really present in as many places
as there be hosts consecrated : we say, that as
the Son corporally is ever in heaven, and no
where else ; and yet by his operation and virtue,
the Son is here on earth, by whose influence
and virtue all things in the world be corporally
regenerated, encreased, and grow to their per
fect state ; so likewise our Saviour Christ bodily
and corporally is in heaven, sitting at the right
hand of his Father,. although spiritually he hath
promised to be present with us upon earth unto
the world's end. And whensoever two or three
be gathered together in his name, he is there in
the midst among them, by whose supernal grace
all godly men be first by him spiritually regene
rated, and after increase and grow to their spiri-

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. * 107
tual perfection in God, spiritually by faith eating
his flesh and drinking his blood, although the
same corporally be in heaven, far distant from
our sight.
Now to return to the principal matter, lest it CHAr-
might be thought a new device of us, that Christ .

m.

as concerning his body and his human nature is hereof™
.,„ our profes-
in heaven, and not in earth : therefore by God s sion in our
common
grace, it shall be evidently proved, that this is creed.
no new devised matter, but that it was ever the
old faith of the Catholick church, until the Pa
pists invented a new faith, that Christ really,
corporally, naturally, and sensibly is here still
with us in earth, shut up in a box, or within the
compass of bread and wine. This needeth no
better nor stronger proof, than that which the
old authors bring for the same, that is to say,
the general profession of all Christian people in
the common Creed, wherein, as concerning
Christ's humanity, they be taught to believe
after this sort: that he was conceived by the
Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary ; that he
suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified,
dead, and buried ; that he descended into hell,
and rose again the third day ; that he ascended
into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of his
almighty Father, and from thence shall come to
judge the quick and the dead. This hath been
ever the Catholick faith of Christian people, that
Christ, as concerning his body and his manhood,

108

OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST

is in heaven, and shall there continue until he
come down at the last judgment. And foras
much as the Creed maketh so express mention
of the article of his ascension, and departing
hence from us ; if it had been another article of
our faith, that his body tarrieth also here with us
in earth, surely in this place of the Creed was so
urgent an occasion given to make some mention
thereof, that doubtless it would not have been
passed over in our Creed with silence. For if
Christ, as concerning his humanity, be both
here and gone hence, and both those two be ar
ticles of our faith, when mention was made of
the one in the Creed, it was necessary to make
mention of the other, lest, by professing the one,
we should be dissuaded from believing the other,
being so contrary the one to the other.
chap. To this article of our Creed accordeth holy
Scripture, and all the old ancient doctors of

IV.

bereofby Christ's church. For Christ himself said, " I
ture. leave the world, and go to my Father \" And
also he said, " You shall ever have poor folks
with you, but you shall not ever have me with
you c." And he gave warning of this error be
fore hand, saying, " That the time would come
when many deceivers should be in the world,.
and say, Here is Christ, and there is Christ ; but
believe them not, said Christ**." And St. Mark
" John xvi. <> Matt. .xxvi. * Matt. xxiv. •

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 109
writeth in the last chapter of his Gospel, " That
the Lord Jesus was taken up into heaven, and
sitteth at the right hand of his Father V And
St. Paul exhorteth all men " to seek for things
that be above in heaven, where Christ," saith
he, " sitteth at the right hand of God his Fa
ther f." Also he saith, " That we have such a
bishop, that sitteth in heaven at the right hand
of the throne of God's majesty8." And " that
he having offered one sacrifice for sins, sitteth
continually at the right hand of God, until his
enemies be put under his feet, as a footstool \"
And hereunto consent all the old doctors of the
church. First, Origen* upon Matthew reasoneth this CHAP-
matter, how Christ may be called a stranger ¦

V.

that is departed into another country, seeing thereof by
..... anuient au-
that he is with us alway unto the world s end, thors.
and is among all them that be gathered together
in his name, and also in the midst of them that
know him not. And thus he reasoneth : "If he
be here among us still, how can he' be gone
hence as a stranger departed into another coun
try ? Whereunto he answereth, that Christ is
both God and man, having in him two natures.
And as a man he is not with us unto the world's
end, nor is present with all his faithful that be
' Mark vii. ' Coloss. iii. *" Heb. viii. h Heb. x.
1 Origen. in Mat. Tract. 33.

110 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
gathered together in his name; but his divine
power and spirit is ever with us. Paul (saith
he) was absent from the Corinthians in his body,
when he was present with them in his spirit.
So is Christ (saith he) gone hence, and absent
in his humanity, which in his divine nature, is
every where. And in this saying (saith Origen)
we divide not his humanity ; for St. John writ
eth, that no spirit that divideth Jesus can be of
God ; but we reserve to both his natures their
own properties." In these words Origen hath
plainly declared his mind, that Christ's body is
not both present here with us, and also gone
hence and estranged from us. For that were to
make two natures of one body, and to divide the
body of Jesus ; forasmuch as one nature cannot
at one time be both with us and absent from us.
And therefore, saith Origen, that the presence
must be understood of his divinity, and the ab
sence of his humanity.
And according hereunto, St. Augustine writ
eth thus, in an Epistle Ad Dardanum k. " Doubt
not but Jesus Christ, as concerning the nature
of his manhood, is now there, from whence he
shall come ; and remember well and believe the
profession of a Christian man, that he rose from
death, ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right
hand of his Father, and from that place, and
k August, ad Dardanum, Epist, 57.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. Ill
none other, shall he come to judge the quick
and the dead. And he shall come (as the angels
said) as he was seen go into heaven, that is to
say, in the same form and substance, unto the
which he gave immortality, but changed not na
ture. After this form, (saith he,) meaning his
man's nature, we may not think that he is every
where. For we must beware, that we do not so
establish his divinity, that we take away the
verity <if his body." These be St. Augustine's
plain words. And by and by, after, he addeth
these words : " The Lord Jesus as God is every
where, and as man is in heaven." And, finally,
he concludeth this matter in these few words :
" Doubt not but our Lord Jesus Christ is every
where as God ; and as a dweller he is in man
that is the temple of God, and he is in a certain
place in heaven, because of the measure of a
very body." And again St. Augustine writeth
upon the Gospel of St. John * : " The Lord Je
sus," saith he, " is above, but yet the truth of
his word is here. His body wherein he arose is
in one place, but the truth of his word is spread
every where." And in another place of the
same book m, St. Augustine, expounding these
words of Christ, " You shall ever have poor men
with you, but me you shall not ever have," saith,
" That Christ spake these words of the presence
1 In Joan. Tract. 30. " Tract. 50.

112 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
of his body. For (saith he) as concerning his
Divine Majesty, as concerning his providence,
as concerning his infallible and invisible grace,
these words be fulfilled which he spake, ' I am
with you unto the world's end.' But. as con
cerning the flesh which he took in his incarna
tion, as concerning that which was born of the
Virgin, as concerning that which was appre
hended by the Jews, and crucified upon a tree,
and taken down from the cross, lapped in linen
clothes, and buried, and rose again, and appeared
after his resurrection ; as concerning that flesh
he said, ' You shall not ever have me with you.
Wherefore seeing, that as concerning his flesh,
he was conversant with his disciples forty days,
and they accompanying, seeing, and following
him, he went up into heaven, both he is not
here, (for he sitteth at the right hand of his Fa
ther,) and yet he is here, for he departed not
hence, as concerning the presence of his Divine
Majesty. As concerning the presence of his
Majesty, we have Christ ever with us ; but as
concerning the presence of his flesh, he said
truly to his disciples, ' Ye shall not ever have
me with you.' For as concerning the presence
of his flesh, the church had Christ but a few
days ; yet now it holdeth him fast by faith,
though it see him not with eyes." All these be
St. Augustine's words.

IN HIS HOXY SUPPER. 113
Also in another book", entitled to St. Augus
tine, is written thus : " We must believe and
confess, that the Son of God, as concerning his
divinity, is invisible, without a body, immortal,
and incircumscriptible ; but, as concerning his
humanity, we ought to believe and confess, that
he is visible, hath a body, and is contained in a
certain place, and hath truly all the members of
a man." Of these words of St. Augustine, it is
most clear, that the profession of the Catholick
faith is, that Christ, as concerning his bodily
substance and nature of man, is in heaven, and
not present here with us in earth. For the na
ture and property of a very body is to be in one
place, and to occupy one place, and not to be
every where, or in many places at one time.
And though the body of Christ, after his resur
rection and ascension, was made immortal, yet
the nature thereof was not changed ; for then,
as St. Augustine saith, it were no very body.
And further, St. Augustine sheweth both the
manner and form, how Christ is here present
with us in earth, and how he is absent, saying,
that he is present by his divine nature and ma
jesty, by his providence, and by his grace ; but
by his human nature and very body, he is ab
sent from this world, and present in heaven.
" De Essentia Divinitatis.
I

114 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Cyrillus ° likewise, upon the Gospel of St,
John, agreeth fully with St. Augustine, saying,
" Although Christ took away from hence the
presence of his body, yet in the majesty of his
Godhead he is ever here, as he promised to his
disciples at his departing, saying, ' I am with
you ever unto the world's end.' " And in ano
ther place p of the same book, St. Cyril saith
thus : " Christian people must believe, that al
though Christ be absent from us, as concerning
his body, yet by his power he governeth us and
all things, and is present with all them that love
him. Therefore he said, ' Truly, truly I say
unto you, wheresoever there be two or three ga
thered together in my name, there am I in the
midst of them.' For like as when he was con
versant here in earth as a man, yet then he filled
heaven, and did not leave the company of an
gels : even so being now in heaven with his flesh,
yet he filleth the earth, and is in them that love
him. And it is to be marked, that although
Christ should go away only as concerning his
flesh, (for he is ever present in the power of his
divinity,) yet for a little time he said he would
be with his disciples." These be the words of
St. Cyril.
St. Ambrose also saith q, " That we must not
" Cyrillus in Joan. lib. 6. cap. 14. "* Libro 6. cap. 21.
"• Ambrosius in Lucam. lib. 10. cap. 24.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 115
seek Christ upon earth, nor in earth, but in hea
ven, where he sitteth at the right hand of his
Father." And likewise St. Gregory r writeth thus :
" Christ," saith he, " is not here by the pre
sence of his flesh, and yet he is absent no where
by the presence of his majesty." What subtlety
thinkest thou, good reader, can the Papists now
imagine, to defend their pernicious error, that
Christ in his human nature is bodily here in
earth, in the consecrated bread and wine ; see
ing that all the old churph of Christ believed the
contrary, and all the old authors wrote the con
trary ? For they all affirmed and believed, that
Christ, being one person, hath nevertheless in
him two natures or substances, that is to say,
the nature of his Godhead ,s and the nature of his
manhood. They say furthermore, that Christ is
both gone hence from us unto heaven, and is
also here with us in earth, but not in his human
nature, as the Papists would have us to believe ;
but the old authors say, that he is in heaven, as
concerning his manhood, and nevertheless both
here and there, and every where, as concerning
his Godhead. For although his divinity be such
that it is infinite, without measure, compass, or
place ; so that, as concerning that nature, he is
circumscribed with no place, but is every where,
' Gregorius In Horn. Paschat.-
i 2

116 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
and filleth all the world : yet as concerning his
human nature, he hath measure, compass, and
place ; so that when he was here upon earth, he
was not at the same time in heaven ; and now
that he is ascended into heaven, as concerning
that nature, he hath now forsaken the earth, and
is only in heaven.
chap. For one nature, that is circumscribed, com-
**' _ passed, and measured, cannot be in divers places

c^obt°be'in at one time. This is the faith of the old Catho-
piaces at lick church, as appeareth as well by the authors
before rehearsed, as by these that hereafter
follow. St. Augustine speaking, that a body must
needs be in some place, saith, " That if it be not
within the compass of a place, it is no where.
And if it be no where, then it is not 3."
And St. Cyril, considering the proper nature
of a very body, said, " That if the nature of the
Godhead were a body, it must needs be in a
place, and have quantity, greatness, and circum
scription'." If then the nature of the Godhead must needs
be circumscribed, if it were a body, much more
must the nature of Christ's manhood be circum
scribed and contained within the compass of a
certain place.
Didymus also ", in his book De Spiritu Sancta,
• Ad Dardanum. * Cyrillus de Trin. lib. 2.
u Didymus de Spiritu Sancto, lib. 1. cap. 1.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 117
(which St. Jerome did translate,) proveth, that the
Holy Ghost is very God ; because he is in many
places at one time, which no creature can be.
"For," saith he, " all creatures, visible and invi
sible, be circumscribed and environed either with
in one place, (as corporeal and visible things be,)
or within the propriety of their own substance,
(as angels and invisible creatures be,) so that no
angel," saith he, " can be at one time in two places.
And forasmuch as the Holy Ghost is in many
men at one time, therefore," saith he, "the Holy
Ghost must needs be God.'' The same affirm
eth St. Basil alsox, " That the angel, which was
with Cornelius, was not at the same time with
Philip; nor the angel, which spake to Zachary
in the altar, was not the same time in his proper
place in heaven. But the Holy Ghost was at
one time in Habakkuk, and in Daniel in Baby
lon, and with Jeremy in prison, and with Eze
kiel in Chober; whereby he proveth, that the
Holy Ghost is God," Wherefore the Papists,
which say that the body of Christ is in an infi
nite number of places at one time, do make his
body to be God, and so confound the two na
tures of Christ, attributing to his human nature
"that thing which belongeth only to his divinity,
which is a most heinous and detestable heresy,
Against whom writeth Fulgentius y in this wise,
** Basilius de Spiritu Sancto, cap. 22.
y Fulgentius ad Trasimundum Regem, lib. 2,

118 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
speaking of the distinction and diversity of the
two natures in Christ : " One and the self-same
Christ," saith he, " of mankind was made a man,
compassed in a place, who of his Father is God,
without measure or place. One and the self
same person, as concerning his man's substance,
was not in heaven, when he was in earth, and
forsook the earth when he ascended into heaven:
but as concerning his godly substance, which is
above all measure, he neither left heaven, when
he came from heaven, nor he left not the earth
when he ascended into heaven," which may be
known by the most certain word of Christ him
self, who, to shew the placing of his humanity,
said to his disciples, ' I ascend up to my Father
and your Father, to my God and your God.'
Also when he had said of Lazarus, that he was
dead, he added, sayingi, , I am glad for your
sakes, that you may believe ; for I was not there.'
But to shew the unmeasurable compass of his
divinity, he said to his disciples, ' Behold, I am
with you always unto the world's end.' Now
how did he go up into heaven, but because he is
a very man, contained within a place ? Or how
is he present with faithful people, but because
he is very God, being without measure ?" Of
these Words of Fulgentius it is declared most
certainly, that Christ is not here with us in earth,
but by his Godhead, and that his humanity is in
heaven only, and absent from us.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 119
Yet the same is more plainly shewed, (if more
plainly can be spoken,) by Vigilius *¦, a bishop and
an holy martyr. He writeth thus against the he
retick Eutyches, which denied the humanity of
Christ, holding opinion that he was only God, and
not man. Whose error Vigilius confuting, proveth
that Christ had in him two natures joined toge
ther in one person, the nature of his Godhead
and the nature of his manhood. Thus he writ
eth: " Christ said to his disciples, ' If you loved
me, you would be glad, for I go unto my Father.'
And again he said, ' It is expedient for you that
I go, for if I go not, the Comforter shall not
come to you.' And yet surely the eternal word
of God, the virtue of God, the wisdom of God,
was ever with his Father, and in his Father, yea
even at the same time when he was with us and
in us. For when he did mercifully dwell in this
world, he left not his habitation in heaven, for
he is every where whole with his Father equal
in divinity, whom no place can contain, for the
Sonfilleth all things, and there is no place that
lacketh the presence of his divinity. From
whence then and whither did he say that he
would go ? Or how did he say that he went to
his Father, from whom doubtless he never de
parted ? But that to go to his Father, and from
us, was to take from this world that nature which
' Vigilius contra Eutychen, lib, I.

120 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
he received of us. Thou seest, therefore, that it
was the property of that nature to be taken
away and go from us, which in the end of the
world shall be rendered again to us, as the an
gels witnessed, saying, ' This Jesus, which is
taken from you, shall come again, like as you saw
him going up into heaven.' For look upon the
miracle, look upon the mystery, of both the.na-
tures. The Son of God, as concerning his hu
manity, went from us ; as concerning bis divi
nity, he said unto us, ' Behold I am with you
all the days unto the world's end.'"
Thus far have I rehearsed the words of Vigi
lius, and by and bye he concludeth thus : "He
is with us, and not with us. For those whom
he left and went from them, as concerning his
humanity, those he left not, nor forsook them
not, as touching his divinity. For as touching
the form of a servant, (which he took away from
us into heaven,) he is absent from us ; but by
the form of God, (which goeth not from us,) he
is present with us in earth : and nevertheless,
both present and absent, he is all one Christ." ;
Hitherto you have heard Vigilius speak, that
Christ as concerning his bodily presence, and
the nature of his manhood is gone from us, taken
from us, is gone up into heaven, is not with us,
hath left us, hath forsaken us. But as concern
ing the other nature of his Deity, he is still with
us; so that he is both with us> and not with us :

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 121
with us in the nature of his Deity, and not with
us in the nature of his humanity. And yet more
clearly doth the same Vigilius declare the same
thing in another place ", saying, " If the word
and the flesh were both of one nature, seeing
that the word is every where, why is not the
flesh then every where ? For when it was in
earth, then verily it was not in heaven; and now
when it is in heaven, it is not surely in earth.
And it is so sure that it is not in earth, that as
concerning it, we look for him to come from
heaven, whom, as concerning his eternal word,
we believe to be with us in earth. Therefore by
; your doctrine, (saith Vigilius unto Eutyches,
who defended that the divinity and humanity in
Christ was but one nature,) either the word is
contained in a place with his flesh, or else the
flesh is every where with the word. For one
nature cannot receive in itself two divers and
contrary things^ But these two things be divers
and far unlike, that is to say, to be contained in
a place, and to be every where. Therefore inas
much as the word is every where, and the flesh
is not every where, it appeareth plainly, that
one Christ himself hath in him two natures ;
and that by his divine nature he is every where,-
and by his human nature he is contained. in a
place ; that he is created, and hath no beginning,
* Contra Eutychen, lib. 4,

122 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
that he is subject to death, and cannot die.
Whereof one he hath by the nature of his word,
whereby he is God, and the other he hath by
the nature of his flesh, whereby the same God
is man also. Therefore one Son of God, the
self-same was made the son of man,^md he hath
a beginning by the nature of his flesh, and no
beginning by the nature of his Godhead. He is
created by the nature of his flesh, and not cre
ated by the nature of his Godhead. He is com
prehended in a place by the nature of his flesh,
and not comprehended in a place by the nature
of his Godhead. He is inferior to angels in the
nature of his flesh, and is equal to his Father in
the nature of his Godhead; He died by the na->
ture of his flesh, and died not by the nature of
his Godhead. This is the faith and Catholick
confession which the apostles taught, the mar
tyrs did corroborate, and faithful people keepv
unto this day." All these be the sayings of Vir
gilius, who, according to all the other authors
before rehearsed, and to the faith and Catholick
confession of the apostles, martyrs, and all faith
ful people unto his time, saith, that as concern
ing Christ's humanity, when he was here on
earth, he. was not in heaven; and now when h6
is in heaven, he is not in earth. For otte nature
cannot be both contained in a place in heaven,
and be also here in earth at one time. And for
asmuch as Christ is here with us in earth, and

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 123
also is contained in a place in heaven, he proveth
thereby, that Christ hath two natures in him,
the nature of a man, whereby he is gone from
us, and ascended into heaven ; and the nature of
his Godhead, whereby he is here with us in
earth. So that it is not one nature that is here
with us, and that is gone from us, that is as
cended into heaven, and there contained, and
that is permanent here with us in earth. Where
fore the Papists, which now of late years have
made a new faith, that Christ's natural body is
really and naturally present both with us here
in earth, and sitteth at the right hand of his Fa
ther in heaven, do err in two very horrible here
sies. The one, that they confound his two na
tures, his Godhead and his manhood, attributing
unto his humanity that thing which appertaineth
only to his divinity, that is to say, to be in hea
ven and earth and in many places at one time.
The other is, that they divide and separate his
human nature, or his body, making of one body
of Christ two bodies and two natures ; one which
is in heaven, visible and palpable, having all
members and proportions of a most perfect na
tural rhah ; and another, which they say is in
earth here with us, in every bread and wine that
is consecrated, having no distinction, form, nor
proportion of members : Which contrarieties and
diversities (as this holy martyr Vigilius saith)
cannot be together in one nature.

124 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
chap. But now seeing that it is so evident a matter,

VII,

both by the express words of Scripture, and also
An answer ,,,,,,, <>i l ^-<
to the Pa- by all the old authors of the same, that our Sa-
pists, alleg- ¦ i • 1 i"i
ing for tiem viour Christ (as concerning his bodily presence)
'bodhi"i8m' **s ascended into heaven, and is not here in earth;
and- seeing that this hath been the true confes
sion of the Catholick faith ever since Christ's
ascension ; it is now to be considered what moyed
the Papists to make a new and contrary faith,
and what Scriptures they have for their purpose.
What moved them I know not, but their own
iniquity, or the nature and condition of the see
of Rome, which is of all other most contrary to
Christ, and therefore most worthy to be called
the see of Antichrist. And as for Scripture,
ment'oS'the they allege none but only one, and that not truly
apists. uncierstood; but, to serve their purpose, wrested
out of tune, whereby they make it to jar and
sound contrary to all other Scriptures pertaining
to that matter.
The inter- Christ took bread, (say they,) blessed and
pretationof ' \ J J '
"Thir^m ' brake it, and gave it to his disciples, saying,
body.- « -jin-g ig my. *50(jy." These words they ever
still repeat and beat upon, that Christ said,
" This is my body." And this saying they make
their sheet-anchor, to prove thereby as well the
real and natural presence of Christ's body in the
sacrament, as their imagined Transubstantiation.
For these words of Christ (say they) be most
plain and most true, Then forasmuch as he said,

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 125
" This is my body," it must needs be true, that
that thing which the priest holdeth in his hands
is Christ's body. And if it be Christ's body,
then can it not be bread, whereof they gather
by their reasoning, that there is Christ's body
really present, and no bread. Now forasmuch
as all their proof harigeth only upon these words,
" This is my body," the true sense and meaning
of these words must be examined. But (say
they) what need they any examination ? What
words can be more plain than to say, " This is
my body ?"
Truth it is indeed, that the words be as plain The answer.
as may be spoken ; but that the sense is not so
plain, it is manifest to every man that weigheth
substantially the circumstances of the place.
For when Christ gave bread to his disciples, and
said, " This is my body," there is no man of any
discretion, that understandeth the English
tongue, but he may well know by the order of
the speech, that Christ spake those words of the
bread, calling it his body, as all the old authors
also do affirm, although many of the Papists
deny the same. Wherefore this sentence can
not mean as the words seem and purport, but
there must needs be some figure or mystery in
this speech, more than appeareth in the plain
words. For by this manner of speech, plainly
understood without any figure as the words lie,
can be gathered none other sense but that bread

126 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
is Christ's body, and that Christ's body is bread,
which all Christian ears do abhor to hear.
Wherefore in these words must needs be soiight
out another sense and meaning than the words
of themselves do bear.
chap. And although the true sense and understand-
— . — '— ing of these words be sufficiently declared ber
ed bread his fore, when I spake of Transubstantiation; yet to
body, and . . .
wine his make the matter so plain that no scruple or doubt
blood. ¦ i ¦ ¦
shall remain, here is occasion given more fully
to treat thereof. In which process shall be
shewed, that these sentences of Christ, " This is
my body," " This is my blood," be figurative
speeches. And although it be manifest enough
by the plain words of the Gospel, and proved
before in the process of Transubstantiation, that
Christ spake of bread when he said, " This is
my body ;" likewise that it was very wine which
he called his blood ; yet lest the Papists should
say that we suck this out of our own fingers,
the same shall be proved, by testimony of all the
old authors, to be the true and old faith of the
Catholick church. Whereas the school authors
and Papists shall not be able to shew so much
as one word of any ancient author to the con
trary. First, Irenaeus, writing against the Valenti-
nians, in his fourth bookb, saith, '* That Christ
b Irenreus contra Valen. lib. 4. cap. 32.

li! HIS HOLY SUPPER. 127
confessed bread, which is a creature, to be his
body, and the cup to be his blood." And in the
same book1-, he writeth thus also: " The bread,
wherein the thanks be given, is the body of the
Lord." And yet again, in the same book V he
saith, " That Christ taking bread of the same
sort that our bread is of, confessed that it was
his body. And that that thing which was tem
pered in the chalice, was his blood." And in
the fifth book e, he writeth further, " That of the
chalice, which is his blood, a man is nourished,
and doth grow by the bread, which is his body."
These words of Irenseus be most plain, that
Christ taking very material bread, a creature of
God, and of such sort as other bread is, which
we do use, called that his body, when he said,
" This is my body." And the wine also, which
doth feed and nourish us, he called his blood.
Tertullian likewise, in his book written against
the Jews', saith, " That Christ called bread his
body." And in his book against Marcion, he
oftentimes repeateth the self-same words. And
St. Cyprian, in the first book of his Epistles g,
saith the same thing, " That Christ called such
bread, as is made of many corns joined together,
his body : and such wine he named his blood, as
is pressed out of many grapes, and made into
c Irenaeus contra Valen. cap. 34. * d Cap. 57. " Lib! 5.
' Tertullianus adversus Judaeos.
* Cyprianus ad Magnum, lib. 1. epist. 6.

128 OF THE PRESENCE OE CHRIST
wine." And in his second book1*, he saith these
words, " Water is not the blood of Christ, but
wine." And again, in the same Epistle, he saith,
" That it was wine which Christ called his
blood ; and that if wine be not in the chalice,
then we drink not of the fruit of the vine." And
in the same Epistle he saith, " That meal alone,
or water alone, is not the body of Christ, except
they be both joined together to make thereof
bread." Epiphanius also saith ', " That Christ,
speaking of a loaf which is round in fashion, and
cannot see, hear, nor feel, said of it, * This is
my body.' " And St. Jerome, writing Ad Hedi-
biam, saith these words'1, " Let us mark, that
the bread which the Lord brake and gave to his
disciples, was the body of our Saviour Christ, as
he said unto them, ' Take and eat, this is my
body.' " And St. Augustine also saith ', " That
although we may set forth Christ by mouth, by
writing, and by the sacrament of his body and
blood, yet we call neither our tongue, nor words,
nor ink, letters, nor paper, the body and blood
of Christ ; but that we call the body and blood
of Christ, which is taken of the fruit ofthe earth,
and consecrated by mystical prayer." And also
he saith m, "Jesus called meat his body, and
drink, his blood."
¦* Cyprianus ad Magnum, lib. 2. epist. 3.
' Epiphan. in Ancorato. k Hieron. ad Hedibiam.
1 August, de Trinit. lib. 3. cap. 4.
" De verbis Apostoli, serm. 2.

if to his holy supper. 129
Moreover Cyril, upon St. John, saith", " That
Christ gave to his disciples pieces of bread, say-*-
ing, ' Take, eat* this is my body.' "
Likewise Theodoretus saith0, " When Christ
gave the holy mysteries, he called bread his
body ; and the cup mixt with wine and water,
he called his blood."
By all these foresaid authors and places, with
many more, it is plainly proved, that when our
Saviour Christ gave bread unto his disciples,
saying, " Take and eat, this is my body ;" and
likewise when he gave them the cup, saying,
" Divide this among you, and drink you all of
this, for this is my blood ;" he called then the
very material bread his body, and the very wine
his blood.
That bread (I say) that is one of the creatures
here in earth among us, and that groweth out of
the earth, and is made of many' grains of corn,
beaten into flour, and mixt with water, and so
baken and made into bread, of such sort as other
our bread is, that hath neither sense nor reason,
and finally that feedeth and nourisheth our bo
dies. Such bread Christ called his body, when
he said, "This is my body." And such wine as
is made of grapes pressed together, and thereof
is made drink which nourisheth the body, such
" Cyrillus in Joanem. lib. 4. cap. 14.
0 Theodoretus in Dialogo. 1.
K

130 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
wine he called his blood. This is the true doc
trine, confirmed as well by holy Scripture, as by
all ancient authors of Christ's church, both
Greeks and Latins, that is to say, that when our
Saviour Christ gave bread and wine to his disci
ples, and spake these words, " This is my body,"
" This is my blood," it was very bread and wine
which he called his body and blood.
Now let the Papists shew some authority for
their opinion, either of Scripture or of some an
cient author. And let them not constrain all
men to follow their fond devices, only because
they say it is so, without any other ground or
authority, but their own bare words. For in
such wise credit is to be given to God's word
only, and not to the word of any man. As many
of them as I have read (the bishop of Winchester
only excepted) do say, that Christ called not
the bread his body, nor wine his blood, when he
said, " This is my body, this is my blood."
And yet in expounding these words, they vary
among themselves : which is a token that they
be uncertain of their own doctrine. For some
of them say, that by this pronoun demonstra
tive, " this," Christ understood not the bread
nor wine, but his body and blood. And other
some say, that by the pronoun " this," he meant
neither the bread nor wine, nor his body nor
blood, but that he meant a particular thing un
certain, which they call imlividuum vagum, or

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 131
individuum in genere, I trow some mathematical
quiddity, they cannot tell what. But let all these
Papists together shew any one authority, either
of Scripture, or of ancient author, either Greek
or Latin, that saith as they say, that Christ
called not bread and wine his body and blood,
but individuum vagum ; and for my part I shall
give them place, and confess that they say true.
And if they can shew nothing for them of anti
quity, but only their own bare Words, then it is
reason that they give place to the truth con
firmed by so many authorities, both of Scripture
and of ancient writers, which is, that Christ called
very material bread his body, and very wine
made of grapes his blood.
Now this being fully proved, it must needs chap.
follow consequently, that this manner of speak-

IX.

ing is a figurative speech : for in plain and pro- body, "ine*
per speech it is not true to say that bread is be™gura°tiiri
Christ's body, or wine his blood. For Christ's spee"
body hath a soul, life, sense, and reason : but
bread hath neither soul nor life, sense nor rea
son. Likewise, in plain speech, it is not true
that we eat Christ's body, and drink his blood.
For eating and drinking, in their proper and
usual signification, is with the tongue, teeth, and
lips, to swallow, divide, and chew in pieces :
which thing to do to the flesh and blood of
Christ, is horrible to be heard of any Christian.
X 2

132 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST

CHAP. X.

So that these speeches, to eat Christ's body,
and drink his blood, to call bread his body, or
To eat . J
Christ's wine his blood, be speeches not taken in the
flesh, and A
bilod hbe ProPer signification of every word; but by trans-
sigeUereheT kit*011 0I" these words, " eating and drinking,"
from the signification of a corporeal thing to sig
nify a spiritual thing; and by calling a thing that
signifieth by the name of the thing which is
signified thereby: which is no rare nor strange
thing, but an usual manner and phrase in common
speech. And yet lest this fault should be im
puted unto us, that we do feign things of our own
heads without authority, (as the Papists be ac
customed to do,) here shall be cited sufficient
authority, as well of Scripture, as of old ancient
authors, to approve the same.
First, when our Saviour Christ, in the sixth of
John, said, " That he was the bread of life, the
which whosoever did eat, should not die, but live
for ever; and that the bread which he would
give us, was his flesh ; and, therefore, whosoever
should eat his flesh, and drink his blood, should
have everlasting life ; and they that should not
eat his flesh and drink his blood, should not
have everlasting life p." When Christ had
spoken these words, with many more of the eat-'
ing of his flesh and drinking of his blood, both
the Jews, and many also of his disciples, were

** Join

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 133
offended with his words, and said, " This is an
hard saying : for how can he give us his flesh to
be eaten?" Christ perceiving their murmuring
hearts, (because they knew none other eating of
his flesh, but by chewing and swallowing,) to
declare that they should not eathis body after
that sort, nor that he meant of any such carnal
eating, he said thus unto them, " What if you
see the Son of man ascend up where he was be
fore? It is the spirit that giveth life, the flesh
availeth nothing. The words, which I spake
unto you, be spirit and life." These words our
Saviour Christ spake, to lift up their minds from
earth to heaven, and from carnal to spiritual
eating, that they should not fancy that they
should with their teeth eat him presently here in
earth, for his flesh so eaten (saith he) should no
thing profit them. And yet so they should not
eat him, for he would take his body away from
them, and ascend with it into heaven: and
there by faith, and not with teeth, they should
spiritually eat him, sitting at the right hand of
his Father. " And therefore," saith he, " the
words which I do speak, be spirit and life:"
that is to say, are not to be understood that we
shall eat Christ with our teeth grossly and car
nally, but that we shall spiritually and ghostly
with our faith eat him, being carnally absent
from us in heaven, in such wise as Abraham and
other holy fathers did eat him, many years be-

134 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
fore he was incarnated arid born. As St. Paul
saith, "That they did eat the same spiritual
meat that we do, and drank the same spiritual
drink, that is to say, Christ q." For they spiri,
tiially by their faith were fed and nourished with
Christ's body and blood, and had eternal life by
him, before he was born, as We have now, that
come after his ascension. Thus have you heard,
by the declaration of Christ himself, and of St.
Paul, that the eating and drinking of Christ's
flesh and blood is not taken in the common sig
nification, with mouth and teeth to eat and chew
a thing being present, but by a lively faith in
heart and mind to chew and digest a thing being
absent, either ascended hence into heaven, or
else hot yet born upon earth.
And Origen' declaring the said eating of
Christ's flesh and drinking of his blood, not to
be understood as the words do sound, but figu
ratively, writeth thus upon these words of
Christ : " Except you eat my flesh and drink
my blood, you shall not have life in you."
" Consider," saith Origen, " that these things,
written in God's books, are figures ; and there
fore examine and understand them as spiritual
and not as carnal men. For if you understand
them as carnal men, they hurt you and feed you
not. For even in the Gospels is there found let-
<l 1 Cor. x. ' Origen. in Levit. Horn. 7.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 135
ter that killeth; and not only in the Old Testa
ment, but also in the New, is there found letter
that slayeth him that doth not spiritually under
stand that which is spoken. For if thou follow
the letter or words of this that Christ said, ' Ex
cept you eat my flesh and drink my blood,' this
letter killeth." Who can more plainly express
in any words, that the eating* and drinking of
Christ's flesh and blood are not to be taken in
common signification, as the words pretend and
sound, than Origen doth in this place? And St.
John Chrysostome affirmeth the same s, saying,
" That if any man understand the words of
Christ carnally, he shall surely profit nothing
thereby. For what mean these words, ' The
flesh availeth nothing?' He meant not of his
flesh, (God forbid,) but he meant of them that
fleshly and carnally understood those things
that Christ spake. But what is carnal under
standing ? To understand the words simply as
they be spoken, and nothing else. For we ought
not so to understand the things which we see,
but all mysteries must be considered with in
ward eyes, and that is, spiritually to understand
them." In these words St. John Chrysostome
sheweth plainly, that the words of Christ, con
cerning the eating of his flesh and drinking of
his blood, are not to be understood simply, as
¦ Chrysost. in Joannem. Horn. 26.

136 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
they be spoken, but spiritually and figuratively.
And yet most plainly of all other, St. Augustine
doth declare this matter in his book De Doctrina
Christiana \ in which book he instructeth Chris
tian people, how they should understand those
places of Scripture, which seem hard and ob
scure. " Seldom," saith he, " is any difficulty
in proper words, but either the circumstance of
the place, or the conferring of divers transla
tions, or else the original tongue wherein it was
written, will make the sense plain. But in words
that be altered from their proper signification,
there is great diligence and heed to be taken.
And specially we must beware, that we take not
literally any thing that is spoken figuratively.
Nor, contrariwise, we must not take for a figure
any thing that is spoken properly. Therefore
must be declared," saith St. Augustine, " the
manner how to discern a proper speech from a
figurative ; wherein," saith he, " must be ob
served this rule, that if the thing which is spoken
be to the furtherance of charity, then it is a pro
per speech, and no figure. So that if it be a
commandment that forbiddeth any evil or wick
ed act, or commandeth any good or beneficial
thing, then it is no figure. But if it command
any ill or wicked thing, or forbid any thing that
is good and beneficial, then it is a figurative
' Augustinus De Doctrina Christ, lib. 3.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.
speech. Now this saying of Christ, ' Except
you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink
his blood, you shall have no life in you,' seemeth
to command an heinous and a wicked thing ;
therefore it is a figure, commanding us to be
partakers of Christ's passion, keeping in our
minds, to our great comfort and profit, that his
flesh was crucified and wounded for us." This
is briefly the sentence of St. Augustine, in his
book De Doctrina Christiana. And the like he
writeth in his book De Catechisandis Rudibus u,
and in his book Contra Adversarium Legis et
Prophetarum **-, and in divers other places, which
for tediousness I pass over. For if I should re
hearse all the authorities of St. Augustine and
others which make mention of this matter, it
would weary the reader too much. Wherefore
to all them that by any reasonable means will
be satisfied, these things before rehearsed are
sufficient to prove that the eating of Christ's flesh
and drinking of his blood, is not to be under
stood simply and plainly, (as the words do pro
perly signify,) that we do eat and drink him
with our mouths ; but it is a figurative speech
spiritually to be understood, that we must deeply
print and fruitfully believe in our hearts, that his
flesh was crucified, and his blood shed, for our
redemption. And this our belief in him, is to
" De Catech. rudib. cap. 26.
" Contra advers. Legis et Prophet, cap. 9,

137

138 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
eat his flesh and to drink his blood, although
they be not present here with us, but be as
cended into heaven. As our forefathers, before
Christ's time, did likewise eat his flesh and drink
his blood, which was so far from them, that he
was not yet then born;
CHAP, The same authors do say also, that when Christ
XI* called the bread his body, and the wine his
bo™sthisn2 Mood, it was no proper speech that he then
be^gSlve usec** ' kut as all sacraments be figures of other
speeches, things, and yet have the very names ofthe things
which they do signify : so Christ, instituting the
sacrament of his most precious body and blood,
did use figurative speeches, calling the bread by
reperesrenteth tne name of his body, because it signifieth his
dy'andthr body ; and the wine he called his blood, because
blood.'5 it represented his blood.
Tertullian y, herein writing against Marcion,
saith these words: " Christ did not reprove
bread, whereby he did represent his very body."
And in the same book he saith, " That Jesus
taking bread, and distributing it amongst his
disciples, made it his* body, saying, 'This is my
body;' that is to say, (saith Tertullian,) a figure
of my body. And therefore, (saith Tertullian,)
that Christ called bread his body, and wine his
blood, because that, in the Old Testament, bread
and wine were figures of his body and blood."
1 Tertullianus contra Marcionem, lib. 1.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 139
And St. Cyprian, the holy martyr % saith of
this matter, " That Christ's blood is shewed in
the wine, and the people in the water, that is
mixt with the wine : so that the mixture of the
water to the wine, signifieth the spiritual com-
mixtion and joining of us unto Christ." By
which similitude Cyprian meant not that the
blood of Christ is wihe, or the people water ;
but as the water doth signify and represent the
people, so doth the wine signify and represent
Christ's blood : and the uniting of the water and
wine together, signifieth the uniting of Christian
people unto Christ himself. And the same St.
Cyprian, in another place a, writing hereof, saith,
?< That Christ, in his last supper, gave to his
apostles with his own hands bread and wine,
which he called his flesh and blood ; but in the
cross he gave his very body to be wounded with
the hands of the soldiers, that the apostles might
declare to the world how and in what manner
bread and wine may be the flesh of Christ. And
the manner he straightWays declareth thus: that
things which do signify, and those things which
be signified by them, may be both called by one
name." Here it is certain by St. Cyprian's
mind, wherefore and in what wise bread is called
Christ's flesh, and wine his blood ; that is to say,
because that every thing that representeth and
' Cyprianus, lib. 2. epist. 3. » De unctione Chrismatis.

140 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
signifieth another thing, may be called by name
of the thing which it signifieth.
And therefore St. John Chrysostome saith b,
" That Christ ordained the table of his holy sup
per for this purpose, that in that sacrament he
should daily shew unto us bread and wine for a
similitude of his body and blood."
St Jerome likewise saith c, upon the Gospel
of Matthew, " That Christ took bread, which
comforteth man's heart, that he might represent
thereby his very body and blood."
Also St. Ambrose*1 (if the book be his that is
entitled De hiis qui misteriis initiantur,) saith,
" That before the consecration another kind is
named ; but after the consecration the body of
Christ is signified. Christ said his blood ; before
the consecration, it is called another thing; but,
after the consecration, is signified the blood of
Christ. And in his book De Sacramentis", (if
that be also his,) he writeth thus : " Thou dost
receive the sacrament for a similitude of the flesh
and blood of Christ ; but thou dost obtain the
grace and virtue of his true nature ; and, receiv
ing the bread in that food, thou art partaker of
his godly substance." And in the same book f,
he saith, " As thou hast in baptism received the
similitude of death, so likewise dost thou in this
b Chrysost. in Psal. xxii. c Hieronym. in Matt. xxvi.
d Ambros. de hiis qui mysteriis initiantur. cap. ult.
• De sacramentis, lib. 6. cap. 10. f Lib. 4. cap. i.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 141
sacrament drink the similitude of Christ's pre
cious blood." And again he saith, in the said
book8, " The priest saith, make unto us this
oblation to be acceptable, which is the figure of
the body and blood of our Lord Jesu Christ."
And upon the Epistle of St. Paul to the Corin
thians h, he saith, " That in eating and drinking
the bread and wine, we do signify the flesh and
blood, which were offered for us. And the Old
Testament," saith he, ¦" was instituted in blood,
because that blood was a witness of God's bene
fit ; in signification and figure whereof, we take
the mystical cup of his blood, to the tuition of
our body and soul." Of these places of St.
Chrysostome, St. Jerome, and St. Ambrose, it
is clear, that in the sacramental bread and wine,
is not really and corporallythe very natural sub
stance, of the flesh and blood of Christ, but that
the bread and wine be similitudes, mysteries,
and representations, significations, sacraments, signs and
figures and signs of his body and blood ; and tlenlSnesof
therefore be called and have the name of his whichtfey
very flesh and blood.
And yet St. Augustine sheweth this matter
more clearly and fully than any of the rest, spe
cially in an Epistle which he wrote Ad Bonifa-
cium *, where he saith, "That a day or two before
* De sacramentis, lib. 4. cap. 5. h 1 Cor. xi.
' August, ad Bonifacium, Epist. 23.

142 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Good Friday, we used in common speech to say
thus: to-morrow, or this day two days, Christ
suffered his passion, where in very deed he never
suffered his passion but once, and that was many
years passed. Likewise upon Easter-day we
say, this day Christ rose from death, where in
very deed it is many hundred years since he rose
from death. Why then do not men reprove us
as liars, when we speak in this sort ? But be
cause we call these days so, by a similitude of
these days, wherein these .things were done in
deed. And so it is called that day, which is not
that day in deed, but by the course of the year
is a like day, and such things be said to be done
that day for the solemn celebration of the sacra
ment, which things in deed were not done that
day, but long before. Was Christ offered any\
more but once ? And he offered himself, and yet
in a sacrament or representation, not only every
solemn feast of Easter, but every day he is offer
ed to the people ; so that he doth not lie that
saith, he is every day offered. For if sacraments
had not some similitude or likeness of those
things, whereof they be sacraments, they could
in no wise be sacraments. And for their simili
tude and likeness, commonly they have the name
of the things, whereof they be sacraments.
Therefore, as after a certain manner of speech,
the sacrament of Christ's body, is Christ's body;
the sacrament of Christ's blood, is Christ's blood:

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.
so likewise the sacrament of faith, is faith. And
to believe, is nothing else but to have faith : and
therefore, when we answer for young children in
their baptism, that they believe, which have not
yet the mind to believe, we answer that they
have faith, because they have the sacrament of
faith. And we say also, that they turn unto
God, because of the sacrament of the conversion
unto God ; for that answer pertaineth to the ce
lebration of the sacrament. And likewise speak
eth the apostle of baptism, saying, ' That by
baptism we be buried with him into death :' he
saith not, that we signify burial ; but he saith
plainly, that we be buried.' So that the sacra
ment of so great a thing is not called but by the
name ofthe thing itself."
Hitherto I have rehearsed the answer of St.
Augustine unto Boniface, a learned bishop, who
asked of him, how the parents and friends could
answer for a young babe in baptism, and say in
his person, that he believeth and converteth unto
God, when the child can neither do nor think
any such thing. Whereunto the answer of St.
Augustine is this : that forasmuch as baptism is
the sacrament of the profession of our faith, and
of our conversion unto God, it becometh us so to
answer for young children coming thereunto, as
to that sacrament appertaineth, although the
children indeed have no knowledge of such
things. And yet in our said answers we ought

143

144 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
not to be reprehended as vain men or liars ; for
asmuch as in common speech we use daily to call
sacraments and figures by the names of the
things that be signified by them, although they
be not the same thing indeed. As every Good
Friday, (as often as it returneth from year to
year,) we call it the day of Christ's passion; and
every Easter-day we call the day of his resur
rection ; and every day in the year we say that
Christ is offered, and the sacrament of his body,
we call it his body, and the sacrament of his
blood, we call it his blood ; and our baptism St.
Paul calleth our burial with Christ. And yet in
very deed Christ never suffered but once, never
arose but once, never was offered but once; nor
in very deed in baptism we be not buried, nor
the sacrament of Christ's body is not his body,
nor the sacrament of his blood is not his blood.
But so they be called, because they be figures,
sacraments, and representations of the things
themselves which they signify, and whereof they
bear the name. Thus doth St. Augustine most
plainly open this matter in his Epistle to Boni-
facius. Of this manner of speech, (wherein a
sign is called by the name of the thing which it
signifieth,) speaketh St. Augustine also right
largely in his questions Super Leviticum et contra
Adamantium \ declaring how blood in Scripture
k Super Lev. quest. 57.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 145
is called the soul. " A thing which signifieth,"
saith he, " is wont to be called by the name of
the thing which it signifieth, as it is written in
the Scripture. The seven ears be seven years ;
the Scripture saith not signifieth seven years ;
and seven kine be seven years, and many other
like. And so said Paul, that ' the stone was
Christ,' and not that it signified Christ ; but
even as it had been he in deed, which neverthe
less was not Christ by substance, but by signifi
cation. Even so," saith St. Augustine, "because
the blood signifieth and representeth the soul,
therefore in a sacrament or signification it is
called the soul." And Contra Adamantium1, he
writeth much like, saying, " In such wise is
blood the soul, as the stone was Christ ; and yet
the apostle saith not, that the stone signified
Christ, but saith it was Christ. And this sen
tence, * blood is the soul,' may be understood to
be spoken in a sign or figure. For Christ did
not stick to say, ' This is my body,' when he
gave the sign of his body." Here St. Augustine
rehearsing divers sentences which were spoken
figuratively, that is to say, when one thing was.
called by the name of another, and yet was not
the other in substance, but in signification ; as
that blood, is- the soul, seven kine be seven years,
seven ears be seven years, the stone was Christ ;
' Contra Adamantium, cap. 12.
L

146 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
among such manner of speeches, he rehearsed
those words which Christ spake at his last sup
per, " This is my body," which declareth plainly
St. Augustine's mind that Christ spake those
words figuratively, not meaning that the bread
was his body by substance, but by signification.
And therefore St. Augustine saith, Contra Maxi-
minum m, " That in sacraments we must not con
sider what they be, but what they signify. For
they be signs of things, being one thing, and sig
nifying another." Which he doth shew specially
of this sacrament, saying, "The heavenly bread,
which is Christ's flesh, by some manner of speech
is called Christ's body, when in very deed it is
the sacrament of his body. And that offering
of the flesh, which is done by the priest's hands,
is called Christ's passion, death, and crucifying,
not in very deed, but in a mystical significa-
¦ tion"." And to this purpose it is both pleasant, com
fortable, and profitable, to read Theodoretus, in
his Dialogues", where he disputeth and sheweth
at length, how the names of things be changed
in Scripture, and yet the things remain still.
And for example, he proveth, that the flesh of
Christ is in the Scripture sometimes called a veil
of covering, sometimes a cloth, sometimes a
m Contra Maximinum, lib. 3. cap. 22.
" In lib. sententiarum Prosperi de consecr. diss. 2 Hoc est.
° Theodoret. in dialogis.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 147
vestment, and sometimes a stole : and the blood
of the grape is called Christ's blood, and the
names of bread and wine, and of his flesh and
blood, Christ doth so change, that sometimes he
calleth his body, corn or bread ; and sometimes
contrary, he calleth bread, his body. And like
wise his blood sometime he calleth wine, and
sometimes, contrary, he calleth wine his blood.
For the more plain understanding whereof, it
shall not be amiss to recite his own sayings in
his foresaid Dialogues, touching this matter of
the holy sacrament of Christ's flesh and blood.
The speakers in these Dialogues be Orthodoxus
the right believer, and Eranistes his companion,
but not understanding the right faith.
Orthodoxus saith to his companion, " Dost In the fir9t
1 Dialogue.
thou not know that God calleth bread his flesh?
Eranistes. " I know that.
Orthodoxus. " And in another place he calleth
his body corn ?
Eran. " I know that also ; for I have heard
him say, 'The hour is come that the Son of man
shall be glorified p;' and except the grain-corn
that falleth in the ground, die, it remaineth sole;
but if it die, then it bringeth forth much fruit.
Orth. " When he gave the mysteries or sacra
ments, he called bread his body ; and that which
was mixt in the cup, he called blood.
p John xii,
L 2

148 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Eran. " So he called them.
Orth. "But that also which was his natural
body, may well be called his body ; and his very
blood also, may be called his blood.
Eran. " It is plain.
Orth. " But our Saviour without doubt chang
ed the names, and gave to the body the name of
the sign or token, and to the token he gave the
name of the body. And so when he called him
self a vine, he called blood that, which was the
token of blood.
Eran. " Surely thou hast spoken the truth ;
but I would know the cause wherefore the names
were changed.
Orth. " The cause is manifest to them that be
expert in true religion. For he would that they
which be partakers of the godly sacraments,
should not set their minds upon the nature of the
things which they see, but, by the changing of
the names, should believe the things which be
wrought in them by grace. For he that called
that which is his natural body, corn and bread,
and also called himself a vine, he did honour the
visible tokens and signs with the names of his
body and blood, not changing the nature, but
adding grace to nature.
Eran. " Sacraments be spoken of sacrament-
ally, and also by them be manifestly declared
things which all men know not.
Orth. " Seeing* then that it is certain that the

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.

149

patriarch called the Lord's body ' a vestment
and apparel V and that now we be entered to
speak of godly sacraments, tell me truly of what
thing thinkest thou this holy meat to be a token
and figure ? Of Christ's divinity, or of his body
and blood ?
Eran. "Itis clear that it is the figure of those
things, whereof it beareth the name.
Orth. "Meanest thou of his body and blood ?
Eran. " Even so I mean.
Orth. " Thou hast spoken as one that loveth
the truth ; for the Lord, when he took the token
or sign, he said not, ' This is my divinity,' but
' This is my body,' and ' This is my blood.'
And in another place, ' The bread which I will
give, is my flesh, which I will give for the life of
the* world r.'
Eran. " The things be true, for they be God's
words." All this writeth Theodoretus in his first Dia
logue. And in the second he writeth the same in Dialogue 2.
effect, (and yet in some things more plainly,)
against such hereticks as affirmed, that after
Christ's resurrection and ascension his humanity
was changed from the very nature of a man, and
turned into his divinity. Against whom thus he
writeth. ' Gen. xlix. r John vi.

150 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Orth. " Corruption, health, sickness, and
death, be accidents ; for they go and come.
Eran. " It is meet they be so called.
Orth. " Men's bodies after their resurrection
be delivered from corruption, death, and morta
lity, and yet they lose not their proper nature.
Eran. " Truth itis.
Orth. " The body of Christ therefore did rise
quite clean from all corruption and death, and is
impassible, immortal, glorified with the glory of
God, and is honoured of the powers of heaven;
and yet it is a body, and hath the same bigness
that it had before.
Eran. " Thy sayings seem true, and according
to reason; but after he was ascended up into
heaven, I think thou wilt not say, that his body
was not turned into the nature of the Godhead.
Orth. " I would not so say for the persuasion
of man's reason ; nor am I so arrogant and pre
sumptuous to affirm any thing which Scripture
passeth over in silence ; but I have heard St.
Paul cry, « That God hath ordained a day, when
he will judge all the world in justice by that
man which he appointed before, performing his
promise to all men, and raising him from death '.'
I have learned also of the holy angels, ' That he
will come after that fashion, as his disciples saw
him go to heaven '. ' But. they saw a nature of a
• Ads xvii. ' Acts i.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 1.51
certain bigness, not a nature which had no big
ness. I heard furthermore the Lord say, ' You
shall see the Son of man come in the clouds of
heaven".' And I know that every thing that
men see, hath a certain bigness. For that na
ture that hath no bigness, cannot be seen.
Moreover to set in the throne of glory, and to set
the lambs upon his right hand, and the goats
upon his left hand, signifieth a thing that hath
quantity and bigness."
Hitherto I have rehearsed Theodoretus's
words, and shortly after Eranistes saith :
Eran. " We must turn every stone, (as the
proverb saith,) to seek out the truth, but speci
ally when godly matters be propounded.
Orth. " Tell me then the sacramental signs,
which be offered to God by his priests, whereof
be they signs which be offered to God by his
priest ; whereof be they signs, sayest thou ?
Eran. " Of the Lord's body and blood.
Orth. " Of a very body, or not of a very body?
Eran. " Of a very body.
Orth. " Very well, for an image must be made
after a true pattern ; for painters follow nature,
and paint the images of such things as we see
with our eyes.
Eran. " Truth it is.
Orth. " If therefore the godly sacraments re-

Matt.

152

OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
present a true body, then is the Lord's body yet
still a body, noJ converted into the nature of his
Godhead, but replenished with God's glory.
Eran. " It cometh in good time that thou
makest mention of God's sacraments ; for by the
same I shall prove, that Christ's body is turned
into another nature. Answer, therefore, unto
my questions.
Orth. " I shall answer.
Eran. " What callest thou that which is offer
ed before the invocation of the priest ?
Orth. " We must not speak plainly, for it is
like, that some be present, which have not pro
fessed Christ.
Eran. " Answer covertly.
Orth. " It is a nourishment made of seeds
that be like.
Eran. " Then how call we the other sign ?
Orth. " It is also a common name, that signi
fieth a kind of drink.
Eran. " But how dost thou call them after
the sanctification ?
Orth. " The body of Christ, and the blood of
Christ. Eran. " And dost thou believe that thou art
made partaker of Christ's body and blood ?
Orth. " I believe so.
Eran. " Therefore as the tokens of God's body
and blood be other things before the priest's in
vocation, but after the invocation they be chang-

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.
ed, and-be other things: so also the body of
Christ, after his assumption, is changed into his
divine substance.
Orth. " Thou art taken with thine own net.
For the sacramental signs go not from their own
nature after the sanctification, but continue in
their former substance, form, and figure, and
may be seen and touched as well as before ; yet
in our minds we do consider what they be
made, and do repute and esteem them, and have
them in reverence, according to the same things
that they be taken for. Therefore compare the
images to the pattern, and thou shalt see them
like. For a figure must be like to the thing it
self. For Christ's body hath his former fashion,
figure, and bigness; and, to speak at one word,
the same substance of his body. But after his
resurrection, it was made immortal, and of such
power, that no corruption nor death could come
unto it ; and it was exalted to that dignity, that
it was set at the right hand of the Father, and
honoured of all creatures, as the body of him
that is the Lord of nature.
Eran. " But the sacramental token changeth
his former name ; for it is no more .called as it was
before, but is called Christ's body. Therefore
must his body, after his ascension, be called
God, and not a body.
Orth. " Thou seemest to me ignorant ; for it
is not called his body only, but also the bread of

153

154 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
life, as the Lord called it. So the body of Christ
we call a godly body, a body that giveth life,
God's body, the Lord's body, our Master's body,
meaning that it is not a common body, as other
men's bodies be, but that it is the body of our
Lord Jesu Christ, both God and man."
This have I rehearsed of the great clerk and
holy bishop Theodoretus, whom some of the Pa
pists perceiving to make so plainly against therii
have defamed, saying that he was infected with
the error of Nestorius. Here the Papists shew
their old accustomed nature and condition, which
is, (even in a manifest manner,) rather to lie
without shame, than to give place unto the truth,
and confess their own error. And although his
adversaries falsely bruited such a fame against
him when he was yet alive, nevertheless he was
purged thereof by the holy council of Calcedon,
about eleven hundred years ago. And further?
more, in his book which he wrote against here
sies, he specially condemneth Nestorius by name.
And also all his three books of his Dialogues,
before rehearsed, he wrote chiefly against Nes
torius, and was never herein noted of error this
thousand year, but hath ever been reputed and
taken for an holy bishop, a great learned man.
and a grave author, until now at this present
time, when the Papists have nothing to answer
unto him, they begin in excusing of themselves,
to defame him.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 155
Thus much have I spoken for Theodoretus,
which I pray thee be not weary to read, good rea
der, but often and with delectation, deliberation,
and good advertisement to read. For it Con-
taineth plainly and briefly the true instruction of
a Christian man, concerning the matter which in
this book we treat upon.
First, that our Saviour Christ in his last sup- Kye princi-
x pal tilings to
per, when he gave bread and wine to his apos- denoted in
ties, saying, " This is my body, this is my blood," tas-
it was bread which he called his body, and wine
mixed in the cup, which he called his blood : so
that he changed the names of the bread and wine,
which were the mysteries, sacraments, signs,
figures, and tokens of Christ's flesh and blood,
and called them by the names of the things
which they did represent and signify, that is to
say, the bread he called by the name of his very
flesh, and the wine by the name of his blood.
Second, that although the names of bread and
wine were changed after sanctification, yet ne
vertheless the things themselves remained the
self-same that they were before the sanctifica
tion, that is to say, the same bread and wine in
nature, substance, form, and fashion.
The third, seeing that the substance of the bread
and wine benot changed, why be then their names
changed, and the bread called Christ's flesh, and
the Wine his blood ? Theodoretus sheweth, that
thecause thereof was this, that we shouldnot have

156 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
so much respect to the bread and wine, which
we see with our eyes and taste with our mouths,
as we should have to Christ himself, in whom we
believe with our hearts, and feel and taste him
by our faith, and with whose flesh and blood, hy
his grace, we believe that we be spiritually fed
and nourished. These things we ought to re
member and revolve in our minds, and to lift up
our hearts from the bread and wine unto Christ
that sitteth above. And because we should so
do, therefore after the consecration, they be no
more called bread and wine, but the body and
blood of Christ.
The fourth. It is in these sacraments of bread
and wine, as it is in the very body of Christ.
For as the body of Christ before his resurrection,
and after, is all one in nature, substance, bigness,
form, and fashion, and yet it is not called as
another common body, but with addition, for
the dignity of his exaltation, it is called a hea
venly, a godly, an immortal, and the Lord's
- body: so likewise the bread and wbe, before
the consecration and after, is all one in nature,
substance, bigness, form, and fashion, and yet it
is not called as other common bread, but for thO
dignity whereunto it is taken, it is called with
addition, heavenly bread, the bread of life, and
the bread of thanksgiving.
The fifth, that no man ought to be so arrogant
and presumptuous to affirm for a certain truth in

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 157
religion, any thing which is not spoken of in
holy Scripture. And this is spoken-to the great
and utter condemnation of the Papists, which
make and unmake new articles of our faith from
time to time, at their pleasure, without any
Scripture at all, yea quite and clean contrary to
Scripture. And yet will they have all men bound
to believe whatsoever they invent, upon peril of
damnation and everlasting fire. And they would
constrain with fire and faggot all men to consent,
contrary to the manifest words of God, to these
their errors in this matter Of the holy sacrament
of Christ's body and blood. First, that there
remaineth no bread nor wine after the consecra
tion, but that Christ's flesh and blood is made of
them. Second, that Christ's body is really, cor
porally, substantially, sensibly, and naturally in
the bread and wine. Thirdly, that wicked per
sons do eat and drink Christ's very body and
blood. Fourthly, that priests offer Christ every
day, and make of him a new sacrifice propitia
tory for sin.
Thus, for shortness of time, do I make an end
of Theodoretus, with other old ancient writers,
which do most clearly affirm, that to eat Christ's
body, and to drink his blood, be figurative
speeches. And so be these sentences likewise,
which Christ spake at his supper, " This is my
body, this is my blood."

158

OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST

chap. And marvel not, good reader, that Christ at
_ — 1_ that time spake in figures, when he did institute
Figurative ,
speeches be that sacrament, seeing that it is the nature of all
not strange. sacraments to be figures. And although the
Scripture be full of schemes, tropes, and figures,
yet specially it useth them when it speaketh of
sacraments. " When the ark," (which represented God's
majesty,) " was come into the army of the Is
raelites, the Philistines said that God was come
into the army \" And God himself said, by his
prophet Nathan, " That from the time that he
had brought the children of Israel out of Egypt,
he dwelled not in houses, but that he was carried
about in tents and tabernacles y." And yet was
not God himself so carried about, or went in
tents or tabernacles, but because the ark, which
was a figure of God, Was so removed from place
to place, he spake of himself that thing, which
was to be understood of the ark.
Christ hirq.- And Christ himself oftentimes spake in simi-
self used
figurative Htudes, parables, and figures, as when he said,
speeches. '
" The field is the world, the enemy is the devil,
the seed is the word of God z." — " John is Elias,
I am a vine, and you be the branches3." — " I am
bread of life b." — " My father is an husbandman,
and he hath his fan in his hand, and will make

1 Sam. iv. y 2 Sam. vii. * Matt. xiii.
" Matt. xi. and xvii. b John xvi,

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 159
clean his floor, and gather the wheat into his
barn ; but the chaff he will cast into everlasting
firec." — " I have a meat to eat, which you know
notd." — " Work not meat that perishefh, but that
endureth unto everlasting life"."' — "I am a good
shepherd f." — "The Son of man will set the sheep
at his right hand, and the goats at his left hand8."
— " I am a door"." — One of you is the devil1."
' * Whosoever doeth my Father's will, he is my
brother, sister, and mother V And when he
said to his mother and to John, " This is thy son,
this is thy mother '."
These, with an infinite number of like sen
tences, Christ spake in parables, metaphors,
tropes, and figures. But chiefly when he spake
of the sacraments, he used figurative speeches.
As when of baptism he said, " That we must be
baptized" with the Holy Ghost m :" meaning of
spiritual baptism. And like speech used St.
John#the Baptist, saying of Christ, " That he
should baptize with the Holy Ghost and firen."
And Christ said, " That we must be born again,
or else we cannot see the kingdom of God0."
And said also, " Whosoever shall drink of that
water which I shall give him, he shall never be
dry again. But the water which I shall give
c John vi. d John xv. Matt. iii. ' John iv,
' John vi. *" John x. h Matt. xxv. ' John x.
k John vi. ' Matt. xii. m Acts i. " Matt. iii.
° John iii.

160 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
him, shall be made within him a well, which
shall spring into everlasting life q." And St..
Paul saith, " That in baptism we clothe us with
Christ, anl be buried with him r."
This baptism, washing, and new birth by the,
fire and the Holy Ghost, and this water that,
springeth in a man, and floweth into everlasting.
life, cannot be understood of any material water,
material washing, and material birth, but by
translation of things visible into things invisible,
they must be understood spiritually and figura
tively. After the same sort the mystery of our re
demption, and the passion of our Saviour Christ
upon the cross, as well in the New as the Old
Testament, is expressed and declared by many.
figures and figurative speeches. As the pure
The paschal paschal Lamb without spot, signified" Christ..
The effusion of the Lamb's blood, signified the
effusion of Christ's blood. And the salvation of
the children of Israel from temporal death by the
Lamb's blood, signified our salvation from eter*
nal death by Christ's blood. And as Almighty
God, passing through Egypt, killed all the
Egyptians' heirs in every house, and left not one
alive ; and nevertheless he passed by the chil
dren of Israel's houses, where he saw the Lamb's
blood upon the doors, and hurted none of them,
q John iv. r Rom. vi. Galat. iii.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 161
but saved them all by the means of the Lamb's
blood : so likewise at the last judgment of the
whole world, none shall be passA^over and
saved, but that shall be found markla with the
blood of the most pure and immaculate Lamb
Jesus Christ. And forasmuch as the shedding
of that Lamb's blood, was a token and figure of The Lord's
Supper.
the shedding of Christ's blood then to come;
and forasmuch also as all the sacraments and
figures of the Old Testament ceased and had an
end in Christ : lest by our great unkindness we
should peradventure be forgetful of the great
benefit of Christ, therefore at his last supper,
(when he took his leave of his apostles to depart
out of the world,) he did make a new will and
testament, wherein he bequeathed unto us clean
remission of all our sins, and the everlasting in
heritance of heaven. And the same he con-*-
firmed the next day with his own blood and deathi
And lest we should forget the same, he ordained
not a*yearly memory, (as the paschal Lamb was
eaten but once every year,) but a daily remem
brance he ordained thereof in bread and wine,
sanctified and dedicated to that purpose, saying,
" This is my body; this cup is my blood, which
is shed for the remission of sins. Do this in the
remembrance of me." Admonishing us by these
words, spoken at the making of his last will and
testament, and at his departing out of the world,
(because they should be the better remember-
M

162 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
ed,) that whensoever we do eat the bread in his
holy supper, and drink of that cup, we should
remember how much Christ hath done for us,
and how he died for our sakes. Therefore, saith
St. Paul, " As often as ye shall eat of this bread
and drink the cup, you shall shew forth the
Lord's death until he come." And forasmuch as
this holy bread broken, and the wine divided, do
represent unto us the death of Christ now pass
ed, as the killing of the paschal Lamb did repre
sent the same yet to come : therefore our Saviour
Christ used the same manner of speech of the
bread and wine, as God before used of the pas
chal Lamb. For as in the Old Testament God
said, " This is the Lord's pass-by, or passover :"
even so saith Christ in the New Testament,
" This is my body, this is my blood." But in
the old mystery and sacrament, the Lamb was
not the Lord's very passover or passing-by, but
it was a figure which represented his passing by.
So likewise in the New Testament, the bread
and wine be not Christ's very body and blood,
but they be figures, which by Christ's institu
tion be, unto the godly receivers thereof, sacra
ments, tokens, significations, and representations
of his very flesh and blood : instructing their
faith, that as the bread and wine feed them cor
porally, and continue this temporal life ; so the
very flesh and blood of Christ feedeth them spi
ritually, and giveth them everlasting life.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 163
And why should any man think it strange to J^ fisu"
admit a figure in these speeches, " This is my ^^'"d at
body,' this is my blood?" seeing that the com-SjJ^?1"'
munication the same night (by the Papists' own
confessions) was so full of figurative speeches ?
For the apostles spake figuratively when they
asked Christ where he would eat his passover or
pass-by. And Christ himself used the same
figure when he said, " I have much desired to
eat this passover with you." Also to eat Christ's
body and to drink his blood, I am sure they will
not say that it is taken properly, to eat and drink
as we do eat other meats and drinks. And when
Christ said, " This cup is a new testament in
my blood ;" here, in one sentence, be two
figures, one in this word " cup," which is not
taken for the cup itself, but for the thing con
tained in the cup : another is in this word " tes
tament ;" for neither the cup, nor the wine con
tained in the cup, is Christ's testament, but is a
token, sign, and figure, whereby is represented
unto us his testament, confirmed by his blood.
And if thePapists will sayj (as they say indeed,)
that by this cup is neither meant the cup nor
the wine contained in the cup, but that thereby
is meant Christ's blood contained in the cup :
yet must they needs grant that there is a figure;
For Christ's blood is not in proper speech the
hew testament, but it is the thing that confirmed
the new testament. And yet by this strange in-
m 2

164

OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST

CHAP. XIII.

terpretation the Papists make a very strange
speech, more strange than any figurative speech
is. For this they make the sentence : this blood
is a new testament in my blood. Which saying
is so fond, and so far from all reason, that the
foolishness thereof is evident to every man.
Now forasmuch as it is plainly declared and
Answer to manifestly proved, that Christ called bread his
lie's and'a"- D°dy> and wine his blood, and that these sen-
thTpapis'ts. tences be figurative speeches ; and that Christ,
as concerning his humanity and bodily presence,
is ascended into heaven with his whole flesh and
blood, and is not here upon earth ; and that the
substance of bread and wine do remain still, and
be received in the sacrament ; and that although
they remain, yet they have changed their names,
so that the bread is called Christ's body, and the
wine his blood ; and that the cause why their
names be changed, is this, that we should lift
up our hearts and minds from the things which
we see unto the things which we believe, and be
above in heaven, whereof the bread and wine
have the names, although they be not the very
same things in deed. These things well consi
dered and weighed, all the authorities and argu
ments, which the Papists feign to serve for their
purpose, be clean wiped away.
chap. For whether the authors (which they allege)
say that we do eat Christ's flesh, and drink his

XIV.

,°„"werrtofaii. blood, or that the bread and wine is converted

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.
into the substance of his flesh and blood, or that
we be turned into his flesh, or that in the Locd's
Supper we do receive his very flesh and blood ;
or that in the bread and wine is received that
which did hang upon the cross, or that Christ
hath left his flesh with us, or that Christ is in us,
and we in him; or that he is whole here and
whole in heaven; or that the same thing is in the
chalice which flowed out of his side, or that the
same thing is received with our mouth which is
believed with our faith ; or that the bread and
wine, after the consecration, be the body and
blood of Christ ; or that we be nourished with
the body and blood of Christ; or that Christ is
both gone hence and is still here; or that Christ
at his last supper bare himself in his own hands:
• — These and all other like sentences may not be
understood of Christ's humanity literally and
carnally, as the words in common speech do pro
perly signify: for so doth no man eat Christ's
flesh, nor drink his blood ; nor so is not the bread
and wine turned into his flesh and blood, nor we
into him; nor so is the bread and wine after the
consecration his flesh and blood ; nor so is not his
flesh and blood whole here in earth, eaten with
our mouths ; nor so did not Christ take himself
in his own hands : But these and all other like
sentences, which declare Christ to be here in
earth, and to be eaten and drunken of Christian
people, are to be understood either of his divine

165

166 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
nature, whereby he is every where, or else they
must be understood figuratively or spiritually,
For figuratively he is in the bread and wine, and
spiritually he is in them that worthily eat and
drink the bread and wine; but really, carnally,
and corporally, he is only in heaven, from whence
he shall come to judge the quick and dead.
This brief answer will suffice for all that the
Papists can bring for their purpose, if it be aptly
applied. And for the more evidence hereof, I
shall apply the same to some such places as the
Papists think do make most for them : that, by
the answer to those places, the rest may be the
more easily answered unto.
chap. They allege St. Clement, whose words be
these, as they report. ' ' The sacraments of God's

XV.

tohcumlM, secrets are committed to three degrees, to a
pistoaa. prjes^ a (jeacon, and a minister ; which with fear
and trembling ought to keep the leavings of the
broken pieces of the Lord's body, that no cor
ruption be found in the holy place, lest by neg
ligence great injury be done to the portion ofthe
Lord's body." And by and by followeth: " Sq
many hosts must be offered in the altar, as will
suffice for the people : and if- any remain, they
must not be kept until the morning, but be
spent and consumed of the clerks with fear and
trembling. And they that consume the residue
of the Lord's body, may not by and by take
other common meats, lest they should mix that

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 167
holy portion with the meat which is digested by
the belly, and voided by the fundament. There
fore if the Lord's portion be eaten in the morn
ing, the ministers that consume it must fast unto
six ofthe clock; and if they do take it at three
or four of the clock, the minister must fast until
the evening." Thus much writeth Clement of
this matter, if the epistle which they allege were
Clement's, as indeed it is not. But they have
feigned many things in other men's names,
thereby to establish their feigned purposes. But
whose soever the epistle was, if it be thoroughly
considered, it maketh much more against the
Papists, than for their purpose. For by the same
epistle appeareth evidently three special things
against the errors ofthe Papists.
The first is, that the bread in the sacrament is
called the Lord's body, and the pieces of the
broken bread be called the pieces and fragments
of the Lord's body, which cannot be understood
but figuratively. The second is, that the bread
ought not to be reserved and hanged up, as the
Papists everywhere do use. The third is, that
the priests ought not to receive the sacrament
alone, (as the Papists commonly do, making a
sale thereof unto the people,) but they ought to
communicate with the people. And here it is
diligently to be noted, that we ought not un-
reverently and unadvisedly to approach unto the
meat of the Lord's table, as we do to other com-

168 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
mon meats and drinks, but with great fear and
dread ; lest we should come to that holy table
unworthily, wherein is not only represented,
but also spiritually given unto us, very Christ
himself. And therefore we ought to come to
that board of the Lord with all reverence, faith,
love and charity, fear and dread, according to
the same.
Here I pass over Ignatius" and Irenaeus',
which make nothing for the Papists' opinions,
but stand in the commendation of the holy com
munion, and in exhortation of all men to the
often and godly receiving thereof. And yet nei
ther they, nor no man else, can extol and com
mend the same sufficiently, according to the
dignity thereof, if it be godly used, as it ought
to be.
toDimfir Dionysius also, whom they allege to praise
HiCT*cap-3 an^ extol this sacrament, (as indeed it is most
worthy, being a sacrament of most high dignity
and perfection, representing unto us our most
perfect spiritual conjunction unto Christ, and
our continual nourishing, feeding, comfort, and
spiritual life in him,) yet he never said that the
flesh and blood of Christ was in the bread and
wine really, corporally, sensibly, and naturally,
(as the Papists would bear us in hand ;) but he

* Ignatius in Epist. ad Ephesianos.
' Irenaeus, lib. 5. contra Valentin.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 169
calleth ever the bread and wine signs, pledges,
and tokens, declaring unto the faithful receivers
of the same, that they receive Christ spiritually,
and that they spiritually eat his flesh and drink
his blood. And although the bread and wine
be the figures, signs, and tokens of Christ's flesh
and blood, (as St. Dionysius calleth them both
before the consecration as after,) yet the Greek
annotations upon the same Dionysius do say,
that the very things themselves be above in hea
ven. And as the same Dionysius maketh no
thing for the Papists' opinions in this point of
Christ's real and corporal presence ; so in divers
other things he maketh quite and clean against
them, and that specially in three points ; in
Transubstantiation, in reservation of the sacra
ment, and in the receiving of the same by the
priest alone.
Furthermore they do allege Tertullian, that The answer
i . . 1 <v> 1 1 • i to Tertullia-
he constantly affirmeth, that in the sacrament of ¦"*'*'?« **<*sur-
ii i iii it. reotionecar-
the altar we do eat the body and drink then«-
blood of our Saviour Christ. To whom we grant
that our flesh eateth and drinketh the bread and
wine, which be called the body and blood of
Christ, because (as Tertullian saith) they do re
present his body and blood, although they be
not really the same in very deed. And we grant
also, that our souls by faith do eat his very
body and drink his blood ; but that is, spiritu
ally, sucking out of the same everlasting life.

170 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
But we deny that unto this spiritual feeding is
required any real and corporal presence. And
therefore this Tertullian, speaketh nothing
against the truth of our Catholick doctrine, but
he speaketh many things most plainly for us,
and against the Papists, and specially in three
points. First in that he saith, that Christ called
bread his body. The second, that Christ called
it so, because it representeth his body. The
third, in that he saith, that by these words of
Christ, " This is my body," is meant, this is a
figure of my body.
The answer Moreover they allege for them Origen, be-
to Origenes ii ,
in Numer. cause they would seem to have many ancient
authors favourers of their erroneous doctrine;
which Origen is most clearly against them.
" For although he do say (as they allege) that
those things which before we signified by ob
scure figures, be now truly in deed, and in their
very nature and kind, accomplished and fulfill
ed ; and for the declaration thereof, he bringeth
forth three examples ; one of the stone that flow-
Cth water, another of the sea and cloud, and the,
third of manna, which in the Old Testament did
signify Christ to come, who is now come indeed,
and is manifested and exhibited unto us, as it
were, face to face, and sensibly, in his word, in
the sacrament of regeneration, and in the sacra
ments of bread and wine ;" — yet Origen meant
not, that Christ is corporally either in his word.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 171
or in the water of baptism, or in the bread and
wine, nor that we carnally and corporally be re
generated and born again, or eat Christ's flesh
and blood. For our regeneration in Christ is
spiritual, and our eating and drinking is a spiri
tual feeding, which kind of regeneration and
feeding requireth no real and corporal presence
of Christ, but only his presence in spirit, grace,
apd effectual operation. And that Origen thus
meant, that Christ's flesh is a spiritual meat, and
his blood a spiritual drink ; and that the eating
and drinking of his flesh and blood may not be
understood literally, but spiritually ; it is mani
fested by Origen's own words, in his seventh
homily upon the book called Leviticus, where he
sheweth, "That those words must be understood
figuratively, and whosoever understandeth them
otherwise, they be deceived, and take harm by
their own gross understanding u."
And likewise meant Cyprian, in those places The answer
which the adversaries of the truth allege for him, nns,*Ka.
concerning the true eating of Christ's very flesh
and drinking of his blood.
For Cyprian spake of no gross and carnal eat
ing with the mouth, but of an inward, spiritual,
and pure eating with heart and mind, which is
to believe in our hearts, that his flesh was rent
and torn f°r ns upon the cross, and his blood
v In Levit. Horn. 7.

172 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
shed for our redemption, and that the same flesh
and blood now sitteth at the right hand of the
Father, making continual intercession for us;
and to imprint and digest this in our minds, put
ting our whole affiance and trust in him, as
touching our salvation, and offering ourselves
clearly unto him, to love and serve him all the
days of our life : This is truly, sincerely, and
spiritually to eat his flesh and to drink his
blood. And this sacrifice of Christ upon the cross,
was that oblation which, Cyprian saith, was
figured and signified, before it was done, by the
wine which Noah drank, and by the bread and
wine which Melchisedec gave to Abraham, and
by many other figures which Cyprian there re-
hearseth. And now when Christ is come, and hath ac
complished that sacrifice, the same is figured,
signified, and represented unto us by that bread
and wine, which faithful people receive daily in
the holy communion : wherein like as with their
mouths carnally they eat the bread and drink
the wine ; so by their faith spiritually they eat
Christ's very flesh, and drink his very blood.
And hereby it appeareth that St. Cyprian clearly
affirmeth the most true doctrine, and is wholly
upon our side. And against the Papists he
teacheth most plainly, that the communion
ought to be received of all men under both the

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 173
kinds, and that Christ called bread his body and
wine his blood, and that there is no transub
stantiation, but that bread remaineth there as a
figure to represent Christ's body, and wine to
represent his blood ; and that those which be
not the lively members of Christ, do eat the
bread and drink the wine, and be nourished by
them, but the very flesh and blood of Christ
they neither eat nor drink.
Thus have you heard declared the mind of
Cyprian. But Hilarius (think they) is plainest for them The answer
in this matter, whose words they translate thus: ""TrSe,
" If the word was made verily flesh, and we ve
rily receive the word being flesh in our Lord's
meat, how shall not Christ be thought to dwell
naturally in us? who, being born man, hath
taken unto him the nature of our flesh, that can
not be severed, and hath put together the nature
of his flesh to the nature of his eternity, under
the sacrament of the communion of his flesh unto
us. For so we be all one, because the Father
is in Christ, and Christ in us. Wherefore who
soever will deny the Father to be naturally in
Christ, he must deny first either himself to be
naturally in Christ, or Christ to be naturally in
him. For the being of the Father in Christ, and
the being of Christ in us, maketh us to be one
in them. And therefore if Christ have taken
verily the flesh of our body, and the man that

174 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
was verily born of the Virgin Mary is Christ,
and also we receive under the true mystery the
flesh of his body, by means whereof we shall be
one, (for the Father is in Christ, and Christ ih
us,) how shall that be called the unity of will,
when the natural property, brought to pass by
the sacrament, is the sacrament of unity ?"
Thus do the Papists (the adversaries of God's
word and of his truth) allege the authority of Hila*
rius, either perversely and purposely, as it seem-
eth, untruly citing him, and wresting his words
to their purpose, or else not truly understanding
him. For although he saith that Christ is natu
rally in us, yet he saith also that we be naturally
in him. And nevertheless in so saying, he meant
not of the natural and corporal presence of the
substance of Christ's body and of ours ; for as
our bodies be not after that sort within his body,
so it is not his body after that sort within our
bodies ; but he meant that Christ in his incarna
tion received of us a mortal nature, and united
the same unto his divinity, and so be we natu
rally in him. And the sacraments of baptism
and of his holy supper, (if we rightly use the
same,) do most assuredly certify us, that we be
partakers of his godly nature, having given unto
us by him immortality and life everlasting, and
so is Christ naturally in us. And so be we one
with Christ, and Christ with us, not only in will
and mind, but also in very natural properties.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 175
And so concludeth Hilarius against Arius, that
Christ is one with his Father, not in purpose and
will only, but also in very nature. And as the
union between Christ and us in baptism is spi
ritual, and requireth no real and corporal pre
sence ; so likewise our union with Christ in his
holy supper is spiritual, and therefore requireth
no real and corporal presence. And therefore
Hilarius, speaking there of both the sacraments,
maketh no difference between our union with
Christ in baptism, and our union with him in his
holy supper; and saith further, that as Christ
is in us, so be we in him; which the Papists
cannot understand corporally and really, except
they will say, that all our bodies be corporally
within Christ's body. Thus is Hilarius answered
unto both plainly and shortly.
And this answer to Hilarius will serve also The answer
unto Cyril, whom they allege to speak after the ° *" ""
same sort that Hilarius doth, that Christ is na
turally in us. The words which they recite be
these : " We deny not," saith Cyril against the
heretick, " but we be spiritually joined to Christ
by faith and sincere charity ; but that we should
have no manner of conjunction in our flesh with
Christ, that we utterly deny, and think it utterly
discrepant from God's holy Scriptures. For who
doubteth, that Christ is so the vine tree, and we
so the branches, as we get thence our life. Hear
what St. Paul saith, ' We be all one body with

176 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Christ ; for though we be many, we be one in
him.' All we participate in one food. Thinketh
this heretick that we know not the strength and
virtue of the mystical benediction ? which, when
it is made in us, doth it not make Christ, by
communication of his flesh, to dwell corporally
in us ? Why be the members of faithful men's
bodies called the members of Christ 1 ' Know
you not, (saith St. Paul,) that your members be
the members of Christ ? And shall I make the
members of Christ parts of the whore's body ?
God forbid.' And our Saviour also saith, \ He
that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood,
dwelleth in me, and I in him.'"
Although in these words Cyril doth say, that
Christ doth dwell corporally in us, when we re
ceive the mystical benediction ; yet he neither
saith that Christ dwelleth corporally in the bread,
nor that he dwelleth in us corporally only at
such times as we receive the sacrament, nor that
he dwelleth in us, and not we in him ; but he
saith as well, that we dwell in him, as that he
dwelleth in us. Which dwelling is neither cor
poral nor local, but an heavenly, spiritual, and
supernatural dwelling, whereby, so long as we
dwell in him, and he in us, we have by him ever
lasting life. And therefore Cyril saith, in the
same place, that Christ is the vine, and we the
branches, because that by him we have life.
For as the branches-receive life and nourishment

IN Hts HOLY SUPPER. 177
ofthe body of the vine, so receive we by him the
natural property of his body, which is life and
immortality ; and by that means we, being his
members, do live, and are spiritually nourished.
And this meant Cyril by this word corporally,
when he saith, that Christ dwelleth corporally in
us. And the same meant also St. Hilarius by
this word naturally, when he said that Christ
dwelleth naturally in us. And as St. Paul, when
he said that in Christ dwelleth the full divinity
corporally, by this word corporally, he meant not
that the divinity is a body, and so by that body
dwelleth bodily in Christ. But by this word
corporally, he meant that the divinity is not in
Christ accidentally, lightly, and slenderly, but
substantially and perfectly, with all his might
and power: so that Christ was not only a mortal
man, to suffer for us ; but also he was immortal
God, able to redeem us. So St. Cyril, when he
said that Christ is in us corporally, he meant
that we have him in us, not lightly and to small
effect and purpose, but that we have him in us
substantially, pithily, and effectually, in such
wise that we have by him redemption and ever-;
lasting life. And this I suck not out of mine
own fingers, but have it of Cyril's own express
words, where he saith, " A little benediction
draweth the whole man to God, and filleth him
with his grace; and after this manner Christ
N

178 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRTST
dw»lleth in us, and we in Christ \" But as for
corporal eating and drinking with our mouths,
and digesting with our bodies, Cyril never meant
that Christ doth so dwell in us, as he plainly
declareth. " Our sacrament," saith hey, " doth not affirm
the eating of a man, drawing wickedly Christian
people to have gross imaginations and carnal
fantasies of such things as be fine and pure, and
received only with a sincere faith. But as two
waxes that be molten and put together, they
close so in one, that every part of the one is
joined to every part of the other: even so, (saith
Cyril z,) he that receiveth the flesh and blood of
the Lord, must needs be so joined with Christ,
that Christ must be in him, and he in Christ/'
By these words of Cyril appeareth his mind
plainly, that we may not grossly and rudely
think of the eating of Christ with our mouths,
but with our faith, by which eating, although he
be absent hence bodily, and be in the eternal
life and glory with his Father, yet we be made
partakers of his nature, to be immortal and have
eternal life and glory with him. And thus is
declared the mind as well of Cyril as of Hila
rius. And here may be well enough passed over
Nvss'nus Basilius; Gregorius Nyssenus, and Gregorius
Nazian- Nazianzenus, partly because they speak little of
* In Johan. lib. 4. cap. 17. y Anathematismo. 11.
* In Johan. lib. 4. cap. 1 7.

Nyssenus
and "*

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER, r ., 179
this matter, and because they may be easily an
swered unto, by that which is before declared
and often, repeated, which is, that a figure hath
the name of the thing whereof it is the figure,
and therefore of the figure may be spoken the
same thing that may be spoken of the thing it
self And as concerning* the, eating of Christ's
flesh and drinking of his blood, they spake of
the spiritual eating and drinking thereof by faith,
and not of corporal eating and 'drinking with the
mouth and teeth. ¦•<:'& .--:>: * v • *
Likewise Eusebius Emissenus is shortly- am The answer
- to Emisse-
swered unto ; for he speaketh not of any real and ™*-
corporal conversion of bread and wine into
Christ's body and blood, nor of any cOrporal
and real eating and drinking ofthe same, but he
speaketh of a sacramental conversion of bread
and wine, and of a spiritual eating and drinking
of the body and blood. After which sort,
Christ is aswell present in baptism (as the same
Eusebius plainly there declareth) as he is in the
Lord's table: which is not carnally and corpo4
rally, but by faith, and spiritually. But of this
author is spoken before more at large in the
matter of Transubstantiation.'
And now I will come to the saving of St. Am*- The answer
i i-i-i • i • 7 -nr- <°Arabrd-
brose, which is always in their mouths. Before sins de sa-
, cramentis,
the consecration, saith he, (as they allege,) it isI'b-4-caP-4<
bread ; but after the words of consecration it is
n2

180 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
the body of Christ. For answer hereunto, it
must be first known what consecration is.
tion.secra" Consecration is the separation of any thing
from a profane and worldly use unto a spiritual
and godly use.
And therefore when usual and common water
is taken from other uses, and put to the use of
baptism in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost, then it may rightly
be called consecrated water, that is to say, wa
ter put to an holy use. Even so when common
bread and wine be taken and severed from other
bread and wine, to the use of the holy commu
nion, that portion of bread and wine, although it
be ofthe same substance that .the other is from
the which it is severed, yet it is now called con
secrated or holy bread and holy wine. Not that
the bread and wine have or can have any holi
ness in them, but that they be used to an holy
work, and represent holy and godly things.
And therefore St. Dionyse * calleth the bread
holy bread, and the cup an holy cup, as soon as
they be set upon the altar to the use ofthe holy
communion. But specially they may be called holy and
consecrated, when they be separated to that holy
use by Christ's own words, which he spake for
that purpose, saying ofthe bread, " This is my
* De Eccl. Hierar. cap. 3.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 181
body1*;" and ofthe wine, " This is my blood0."
So that commonly the authors, before those
words be spoken, do take the bread and wine
but as other common bread and wine ; but after
those words be pronounced over them, then they
take them for consecrated and holy bread and
wine. Not that the bread and wine can be par
takers of any holiness or godliness, or can be the
body and blood of Christ ; but that they repre
sent the' very body and blood of Christ, and the
holy food and nourishment which we have by
him. And so they be called by the names of
the body and blood of Christ, as the sign, token,
and figure is called by the name of the very
thing which it sheweth and signifieth. And
therefore as St. Ambrose, in the words before
cited by the adversaries, saith, that before the
consecration it is bread, and after the consecra
tion it is Christ's body : so in other places he
doth more plainly set forth his meaning, saying
these words : " Before the benediction of the
heavenly words, it is called .another kind of
thing; but, after the consecration, is signified
the body of Christ. Likewise before the conse
cration, it is called another thing ; but, after the
consecration, it is named the blood of Christ*1."
And again he saith : " When 1 treated of the
b Matt. xxvi. Matt. xiv. c Lute xxii.
a De his qui mysteriis initiantur cap. ult.

182 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
sacraments, I told you, that that thing which is
offered before the words of Christ, is called
bread ; but when the words of Christ be pro
nounced, then it is not called bread, but it is
called by the name of Christ's body6."
By which words of St. Ambrose, it appeareth
plainly, that the bread is called by the name of
Christ's body after the consecration; and al
though it be still bread, yet after consecration it
is dignified by the name of the thing which it
representeth, as at length is declared before in
the process of Transubstantiation, and specially
in the words of Theodoretus.
And as the bread is a corporal meat, and cor
porally eaten, jso, saith St. Ambrose f, is the body
of Christ a spiritual meat, and spiritually eaten,
and that requireth no corporal presence.
The answer Now let us examine St. John Ghrysostome,
¦omus.y who, in sound of words, maketh most for the ad
versaries of the truth : but they that be familiar
and acquainted with Chrysostome's manner of
speaking, how in all his writings he is full of al
lusions, schemes, tropes, and figures, shall soon
perceive, that he helpeth nothing their purposes,
as it shall well appear by the discussing of those
places, which the Papists do allege of him ; which
be speciaUy two : One is In Sermone de Eucha
ristia in Encceniis ; and the other is, De Proditione
* De sacramentis, lib. 5. cap. 4. ' Ibid, lib. 6. cap. 1.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 183
Judce. And as touching the first, no man can
speak more plainly against them than St. John
Chrysostome speaketh in that sermon. Where
fore it is to be wondered why they should allege
him for their party, unless they be so blind in
their opinion that they can see nothing, hor dis
cern what maketh for them, nor what against
them. For there he hath these words : " When
you come to these mysteries, (speaking of the
Lord's board and holy communion,) do not think
that you receive by a man the body of God,"
meaning of Christ g. These be St. John Chry
sostome's own words in that place.
Then if we receive not the body of Christ at
the hands of a man, Ergo, the body of Christ is
not really, corporally, and naturally in the sacra
ment, and so given to us by the priest. And
then it followeth that all the Papists be liars, be
cause they feign and teach the contrary.
But this place of Chrysostome is touched be
fore more at .length in answering to the Papists'
Transubstantiation. Wherefore now shall be answered the other
place \ which they allege of Chrysostome in
these words : " Here he is present in the sacra
ment and doth consecrate, which garnished the
table at the maundy or last supper. For it is

g In sermone de Eucharistia in Enceeniis.
h De proditione Judas.

184 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
not man, which maketh of the bread and wine,
being set forth to be consecrated, the body and
blood of Christ ; but it is Christ himself (which
for us is crucified) that maketh himself to be
there present. The words are uttered and pro
nounced by the mouth ofthe priest, but the con
secration is by the virtue, might, and grace of
God himself : and as this saying of God, ' In
crease, be multiplied, and fill the earth V once
spoken by God, took always effect towards ge
neration : even so the saying of Christ, ' This
is my body\' being but once spoken, doth
throughout all churches to this present, and shall
to his last coming, give force and strength to
this sacrifice."
Thus far they rehearse of Chrysostome's words.
Which words, although they sound much for
their purpose, yet if they be thoroughly consi
dered, and conferred with other places of the
same author, it shall well appear, that he meant
nothing less than that Christ's body should be
corporally and naturally present in the bread
and wine ; but that in suoh sort he is in heaven
only, and in our minds by faith we ascend up
into heaven, to eat him there, although sacra-
mentally as in a sign and figure, he be in the
bread and wine, and so is he also in the water of
baptism ; and in them that rightly receive the
' C"e'i» i. *¦ Matt. xxvi. Matt. xiv. Luke xxii,

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER* 185
bread and wine, he is in a much more perfection
than corporally, which should avail them no
thing ; but in them he is spiritually with his
divine power, giving them eternal life.
And as in the first creation of the world all
living creatures had their first life by God's only
word ; for God only spake his word, and all
things were created by and by accordingly;
and after their creation he spake these words,
" Increase and multiply1 ;" and, by the virtue of
those words, all things have gendered and in
creased ever since that time : even so after that
Christ said, " Eat, this is my body, and drink,
this is my blood, do this hereafter in remem
brance of me m ;" by virtue of these words, and
not by virtue of any man, the bread and wine be
so consecrated, that whosoever with a lively faith
doth eat that bread and drink that wine, doth
spiritually eat, drink, and feed upon Christ, sit
ting in heaven with his Father. And this is the
whole meaning of St. Chrysostome.
And therefore doth he so often say, that we
receive Christ in baptism ; and when he hath
spoken of the receiving of him in the holy Com
munion, by and by he speaketh of the receiving
of him in baptism, without declaring any diver
sity of his presence in the one, from his presence
in the other.
1 Gen. i. ¦" Matt. xxvi. Mark xiv. Luke xxii,

186 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
He saith also in many places ", " That we as
cend into heaven, and do eat Christ sitting there
above." And where St. Chrysostome and other authors
do speak of the wonderful operation of God in
his sacraments, passing all man's wit, senses,
and reason, he meaneth not of the working of
God in the water, bread, and wine, but of the
marvellous working of God in the hearts of them
that receive "the sacraments, secretly, inwardly,
and spiritually transforming them; renewing,
feeding, comforting, and nourishing them with
his flesh and blood, through his most Holy Spi
rit, the same flesh and .blood still remaining in
heaven. Thus is this place of Chrysostome sufficiently
answered unto ; and if any man require any
more, then let him look what is recited of the
same author before, in the matter of Transub
stantiation.
toTteophy- Yet furthermore they bring for them Theophi-
Marki'iv. lus- Alexandrinus, who (as they allege) saith
thus : " Christ giving thanks did break, (which
also we do,) adding thereto prayer: And be
gave unto them, saying, 'Take, this is my
body ;' this that I do now give, and that which
ye now do take. For the bread is not a figure
only of Christ's body, but it is changed into the
** Ad populum Antiochenum, hom. 61. et in Joan. hom. 45.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER.'
very body of Christ ; for Christ saith, ' The
bread which I will give you, is my flesh ".' Ne
vertheless the flesh of Christ is not seen for our
weakness, but bread and wine are familiar unto
us. And surely if we should visibly see flesh
and blood, we could not abide it. And there
fore our Lord, bearing with our weakness, doth
retain and keep the form and appearance of
bread and wine ; but he doth turn the very
bread and wine into the very flesh and blood of
Christ." These be the words which the Papists do cite
out of Theophilus upon the Gospelof St. Mark.
But by this one place it appeareth evidently,
either how negligent the Papists be in searching
out and examining the sayings of the authors,
which they allege for their purpose ; or else how
false and deceitful they be, which willingly and
wittingly have made in this one place, and, as it
were with one breath, two loud and shameful
lies. The first is, that because they would give the
more authority to the words by them alleged,
they, (like false apothecaries that sell quid pro quo)
falsify the author's name, fathering such sayings
upon Theophilus Alexandrinus, an old and an
cient author, which were indeed none of his
words, but were the words of Theophylactus,
• John vi.

187

188 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
who was many years after Theophilus Alexan-
drinus. But such hath ever been the Papistical
subtleties, to set forth their own inventions,
dreams, and lies, under the name of antiquity and
ancient authors.
The second lie or falsehood is, that they falsify
the author's words and meaning, subverting the
truth of his doctrine. For where Theophylactus
(according to the Catholick doctrine of ancient
authors) saith, that Almighty God, condescend
ing to our infirmity, reserveth the kind of bread
and wine, and yet turneth them into the virtue of
Christ's flesh and blood, they say that he re
serveth the forms and appearances of bread and
wine, and turneth them into the verity of his
flesh and blood, so turning and altering kinds
into forms and appearances, and virtue into ve
rity, that of the virtue of the flesh and blood they
make the verity of his flesh and blood. And
thus have they falsified as well the name as the
words of Theophylactus, turning verity into plain
and flat falsity.
But to set forth plainly the meaning of Theo
phylactus in this matter : As hot and burning iron
is iron still, and yet hath the force of fire; and
as the flesh of Christ, still remaining flesh, givr
eth life, as the flesh of him that is God : so the
sacramental bread and wine remain still in their
proper kinds; and yet to them that worthily eat
and drink them, they be turned not into the cor-

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 189
poral presence, but into the virtue of Christ's
flesh and blood.
And although Theophylactus spake of the eat
ing of the very body of Christ, and the drinking
of his very blood, (and not only of the figures of
them,) and of the conversion of the bread and
wine into the body and blood of Christ, yet he
meaneth not of a gross, carnal, corporal, and
ffensible conversion of the bread and wine, nor
of a like eating and drinking of his flesh and
blood ; for so not only our stomachs would yearn
and our hearts abhor to eat his flesh and to drink
his blood; but also such eating and drinking
could nothing profit and avail us : but he spake
of the celestial and spiritual eating of Christ,
and of a sacramental conversion of the bread,
calling the bread not only a figure, but also the
body of Christ, giving us by those words to un
derstand, that in the sacrament we not only eat
corporally the bread, which is a sacrament and
figure of Christ's body ; but spiritually we eat
also his very body, and drink his very blood.
And this doctrine of Theophylactus is both true,
godly, and comfortable.
Besides this our adversaries do allege St. Je- The answer
" to Hierony-
rome, upon the Epistle Ad Titum, that there is ^tTT
as great difference between the loaves called ™am'
panes propositionis, and the body of Christ, as
there is between a shadow of a body, and the
body itself, and as there is between an image

190 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
and the thing itself, and between an example of
things to come and the things that be prefigured
by them."
These words of St. Jerome, truly understood^
serve nothing for the intent of the Papists. For
he meant that the shew-bread of the law was
but a dark shadow of Christ fo come ;; but ths
sacrament of Christ's body is a clear testimony
that Christ is already come, and that he hath
performed that which was promised, and doth
presently comfort and feed us spiritually with
his precious body and blood, notwithstanding
that corporally he is ascended into heaven.
Augustinus, And the same is to be answered unto all that
Sedulius,
LeentiMCas tne adversaries bring of St. Augustine, Sedulius,
Gre°oriM ^eo> Fulgentius, Cassiodorus, Gregorius, and
others, concerning the eating of Christ in the
sacrament. Which thing cannot be understood plainly as
the words sound, but figuratively and spiritually,
as before is sufficiently proved, and hereafter
shall be more fully declared in the fourth part
of this book.
But here John Damascene p may in no wise
be passed over, whom for his authority the ad
versaries of Christ's true natural body do reckon
as a stout champion sufficient to defend all the
whole matter alone. But neither is the autho-
'' Damascenus de fide orth. lib. 4. cap. 14.

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 191
rity of Damascene so great, that they may op
press us thereby, nor his words so plain for
them, as they boast and untruly pretend. For
he is but a young new author in the respect of
those which we have brought in for our party.
And in divers points he varieth from the most
ancient authors, (if he mean as they expound
him,) as when he saith, that the bread and wine
be not figures, which all the old authors call
figures, and that the bread and wine consume
not, nor be voided downward, which Origen and
St. Augustine affirm, or that they be notcalled
the examples of Christ's body after the consecra
tion, which shall manifestly appear false by the
Liturgy ascribed unto St. Basil.
And moreover the said Damascene was one
of the bishop of Rome's chief proctors against
the emperors, and as it were his right hand, to
set abroad all idolatry by his own hand- writing.
And therefore if he lost his hand (as they say he
did) he lost it by God's most righteous judg
ment, whatsoever they feign and fable of the
miraculous restitution of the same. And yet
whatsoever the said Damascene writeth in other
matters, surely in this place which the adversa
ries do allege, he writeth spiritually and godly,
although the Papists either of ignorance mistake
him, or else willingly wrest him and writhe him
to their purpose, clean contrary to his meaning.
The sum of Damascene's doctrine in this mat-

192 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
ter is this : that as Christ, being both God and
man, hath in him two natures ; so hath he two
nativities, one eternal and the other temporal.
And so likewise we, being as it were double men,
or having every one of us two men in us, the new
man and the old man, the spiritual man and the
carnal man, have a double nativity : one of our
first carnal father, Adam, by whom as by ancient
inheritance cometh unto us malediction and
everlasting damnation; and the other of our hea
venly Adam, that is to say, of Christ, by whom
we be made heirs of celestial benediction and
everlasting glory and immortality.
And because this Adam is spiritual, therefore
our generation by him must be spiritual, and our
feeding must be likewise spiritual. And our spi
ritual generation by him is plainly set forth in
baptism, and our spiritual meat and food is set
forth in the holy communion and supper of the
Lord. And because our sights be so feeble that
we cannot see the spiritual water wherewith we
be washed in baptism, nor the spiritual meat
Wherewith we be fed at the Lord's table; there
fore to help our infirmities, and to make us the
better to see the same with a pure faith, our Sa
viour Christ hath set forth the same as it were
before our eyes by sensible signs and tokens,
which we be daily used and accustomed unto. (
And because the common custom of men is to j
wash in water, therefore our spiritual regenera*

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 193
tion in Christ, or spiritual washing in his blood,
is declared unto us in baptism by water. Like-
Wise our spiritual nourishment and feeding in
Christ, is set before our eyes by bread and wine,
because they be meats and drinks which chiefly
and usually we be fed withal ; that as they feed
the body, so doth Christ with his flesh and blood
spiritually feed the soul.
And therefore the bread and wine be called
examples of Christ's flesh and blood, and also
they be called his very flesh and blood, to sig
nify unto us that as they feed us carnally, so do
they admonish us that Christ with his flesh and
blood doth feed us spiritually and most truly
unto everlasting life. And as Almighty God by
his most mighty word and his Holy Spirit and
infinite power brought forth all creatures in the
beginning, and ever since hath preserved them ;
even so by the same word and power he work
eth in us from time to time this marvellous spiri
tual generation and wonderful spiritual nourish
ment and feeding, which is wrought only by
God, and is comprehended and received of us
by faith.
And as bread and drink by natural nourish
ment be changed into a man's body, and yet the
body is not changed, but the same that it was
before ; so although the bread and wine be sa--
cramentally changed into Christ's body, yet his
)5bdy is the same and in the same place that it

194 OF THE PRESENCE 0F CHRIST
was before, that is to say, in heaven, without
any alteration of the same.
And the bread and- wine be not so changed
into the flesh and blood of Christ, that they be
made one nature, but they remain still distinct
in nature, so that the bread in itself is not his
flesh, and the wine his blood, but unto them
that worthily eat and drink the bread and wine,
to them the bread and wine be his flesh and
blood, that is to say, by things natural and which
they be accustomed unto, they be exalted unto
things above nature. For the sacramental bread
and wine be not bare and naked figures, but so
pithy and efficacious, that whosoever worthily
eateth them, eateth spiritually Christ's flesh and
blood, and hath by them everlasting life.
Wherefore whosoever cometh to the Lord's
table, must come with all humility, fear, reve
rence, and purity of life, as to receive not only
bread and wine, but also our Saviour Christ both
God and man, with all his benefits, to the relief
and sustentation both of their bodies and souls.
This is briefly the sum and true meaning of
Damascene, concerning this matter.
Wherefore they that gather of him either the
natural presence of Christ's body in the sacra
ments of bread and wine, or the adoration of the
outward and visible sacrament, or that after the
consecration there remaineth no bread nor wine
nor other substance, but only the substance of

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 195
the body and blood of Christ; either they under
stand not Damascene, or else of wilful froward-
ness they will not understand him ; which rather
seemeth to be true, by such collections as they
have unjustly gathered and noted Out of him.
For although he say, that Christ is the Spiri
tual meat, yet as in baptism the Holy Ghost is
not in the water, but in him that is unfeignedl'y
baptized; so Damascene meant not that Christ
is in the bread, but in him that worthily eateth
the bread. >
And though he say, that the bread is Christ's
body, and the wine his blood, yet he meant not
that the bread considered in itself, or the wine
in itself being not received, is his flesh and
blood.; but to such as by unfeigned faith wor
thily receive the bread and iwine, to such the
bread and wine are called by Damascene the
body and blood of Christ, because that such
persons through the working of the Holy Ghost
be so knit and united spiritually to Christ's flesh
and blood, and to his divinity also, that they be
fed with them unto everlasting life.
Furthermore Damascene saith not that the sa
crament should be worshipped and adored, as
the Papists term it, which is plain idolatry, but
that we must worship Christ, God and man.
And yet we may not worship him in bread and
wine, but sitting in heaven with his Father, and
being spiritually within ourselves.
o 2

]96 OF THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST
Nor he saith not, that there remaineth no bread
nor wine, nor none other substance, but only the
substance of the body and blood of Christ ; but
he saith plainly, that as a burning coal is not
wood only, but fire and wood joined together ;
so the bread of the communion is not bread
only, but bread joined to the divinity. But
those that say, that there is none other substance
but the substance of the body and blood of
Christ, do not only deny that thei?e is bread and
wine, but by force they must deny also that
there is either Christ's divinity or his seul. For
if the flesh and blood, the soul and divinity of
Christ be four substances, and m the sacrament
be but two of them, that is to say, his flesh and
blood, then where be his soul and divinity ? And
thus these men divide Jesus, separating his divi
nity from his humanity : of whom St. John saith,
" Whosoever divideth Jesus, is not of God, but
he is Antichrist q."
And moreover these men do so separate
Christ's body from his members in the sacra
ment, that they leave him no man's body at all.
For as Damascene saith, " That the distinction
of members pertain so much to the nature of a
man's body, that where there is no such distinc
tion, there is no perfect man's body \" But by
these Papists' doctrine, there is no such, distjnc-
*" 1 John iv. ' In libro de duabus in Christo voluntatibus;

IN HIS HOLY SUPPER. 197
tion of members in the sacrament; for either
there is ne head, feet, hands, arms, legs, mouth,
eyes, and nose at all ; or else all is head, all feet,
all hands, all arms, all legs, all mouth, all eyes,
and all nose. And so they make of Christ's
body no man's body at all.
Thus being confuted the Papists' errors as
well concerning Transubstantiation, as the real,
corporal, and natural presence of Christ in the
sacrament, which were two principal points pur
posed in the beginning of this work ; now it is
time something to speak of the third error of
the Papists, which is concerning the eating of
Christ's very body and drinking of his blood.

THUS ENDETH THE THIRD BOOK. ,

THE FOURTH BOOK

IS OF TUE

EATING AND DRINKING OF THE BODY AND BLOOD

OUR SAVIOUR CHRIST.

chap. The gross error of the Papists, is of the carnal
eating and drinking of Christ's flesh and blood

i.

Whether ill •, i , i
men do eat With OUr mouths.
Christ"1 For they say, that whosoever eat and drink
the sacraments of bread and wine, do eat and
drink also with their mouths Christ's very flesh
and blood, be they never so ungodly and wicked
persons. But Christ himself taught clean con
trary in the sixth of John, that we eat not him
carnally with our mouths, but spiritually with
Th. godiy our faith, saying, " Verily, verily I say unto you,
Christ. he that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. I
am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna
in the wilderness, and died. This is the bread
that came from heaven, that whosoever shall eat
thereof, shall not die. I am the lively bread that
came from heaven ; if any man eat of this bread,

OF THE EATING AND DRINKING, &C 199
he shall live for ever. And the bread which I
will give, is my flesh, which I will give for the
life of the world."
This is the most true doctrine of our Saviour
Christ, that whosoever eateth him, shall hav»
everlasting life. And by and by it followeth in
the same place of John more clearly : " Verily,
verily I say unto you, except you eat the flesh
of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall
not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh
and drinketh my blood, hath life everlasting, and
I will raise him again at the last day : for my
flesh is very meat, and my blood is very drink.
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood,
dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Far
ther hath sent me, and I live by the Father ;
even so he that eateth me, shall live by me.
This is the bread which came down from hea
ven, not as your fathers did eat manna, and are
dead ; he that eateth of this bread, shall live for
ever1." . ,.'
This taught our Saviour Christ as well his
disciples as the Jews at Capernaum, that the
eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood was
not like to the eating of manna. For both good
and bad did eat manna, but none do eat his flesh
and drink his blood, but they have everlasting
life. For as his Father dwelleth in him, and he

John

200 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
in his Father, and so hath life by his Father : so
he that eateth Christ's flesh and drinketh his
blood, dwelleth in Christ, and Christ in him,
and by Christ he hath eternal life.
What need we any other witness, when Christ
himself doth testify the matter so plainly, that
whosoever eateth his flesh and drinketh his
blood, hath everlasting life ? And that to eat his
flesh and to drink his blood, is to believe in him?
And whosoever believeth in him, hath everlast
ing life ? Whereof it followeth necessarily, that
ungodly persons, being limbs of the devil, do not
eat Christ's flesh nor drink his blood : except
the Papists would say, that such have everlast
ing life.
But as the devil is the food of the wicked,
which he nourisheth in all iniquity, and bringeth
up unto everlasting damnation : so is Christ the
very food of all them that be the lively members
of his body, and them he nourisheth, feedeth,
bringeth up, and cherisheth unto everlasting
life.
chap. And every good and faithful Christian man
feeleth in himself how he feedeth of Christ, eat-

n.

Wtb^oVheing his flesh, and drinking his blood. For he
fles™Md putteth the whole hope and trust of his redemp-
bisnb*ooci?f tion and salvation in that only sacrifice, which
Christ made upon the cross, having his body
there broken-, and his blood there shed for the
remission of his sins. And this great benefit pf

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 201
Christ the faithful man earnestly considereth in
his mind, cheweth and digesteth it with the sto
mach of his heart, spiritually receiving Christ
wholly into him, and giving again himself wholly
unto Christ.
And this is the eating of Christ's flesh and
drinking of his blood, the feeling whereof is to
every man the feeling how he eateth and drink
eth Christ, which none evil man nor member of
the devil can do.
For as Christ is a spiritual meat, so is he spi- CHAP-
rituallv eaten and digested with the spiritual 
•' . l • Christisnot
part of us, and giveth us spiritual and eternal life, eaten with
and is not eaten, swallowed, and digested with with fait1*-
our teeth, tongues, throats, and bellies. " There
fore," saith St. Cyprian b, " he that drinketh of
the holy cup, remembering this benefit of God,
is more thirsty than he was before. And lifting
up his heart unto the living God, is taken with
such a singular hunger and appetite, that he ab
horreth all gaily and bitter drinks of sin ; and all
savour of carnal pleasure is to him, as it were,
sharp and sour vinegar. And the sinner being
converted, receiving the holy mysteries of the
Lord's Supper, giveth thanks unto God, and
boweth down his head, knowing that his sins be
forgiven, and that he is made clean and perfect;
and his soul (which God hath sanctified) he ren-
b Cyprianus de coena Domini.

202 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
dereth to God again as a faithful pledge, and
then he glorieth with Paul, and rejoiceth, saying,
' Now it is not I that live, but it is Christ that
liveth within me.' These things be practised
and used among faithful people ; and to pure
minds the eating of his flesh is no horror but
honour, and the spirit delighteth in the drinking
of the holy and sanctifying blood. And doing
this, we whet not our teeth to bite, but with pure
faith we break, the holy bread." These be the
words of Cyprian.
And according unto the same, St. Austin saith,
" Prepare not thy jaws, but thy heart0." And
in another place d, (as it is cited of him,) he
saith, " Why dost thou prepare thy belly and
thy teeth ? believe, and thou hast eaten." But
of this matter is sufficiently spoken before, where
it is proved, that to eat Christ's flesh and drink
his blood be figurative speeches.
chap. And now to return to our purpose, that only*
IV' the Uvely members of Christ do eat hisfleshand
oniylaf drink his blood, I shall bring forth many other
places of ancient authors before not mentioned.
First, Origen" writeth plainly after this manner:
" The word was made flesh and very meat, which
whoso eateth, shall surely live for ever ; which
no evil man can eat. For if it could be that he

c August, de verbis Domini, serm. 33.
* In Joan, tract. 25. e Origenes in Math. cap. 15,

Christ.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 203
that continueth evil, might eat the word made
flesh, seeing that he is the word and bread of
life, it should not have been written* ' Whoso
ever eateth this bread, shall live for ever."
These words be scplain, that I need say nothing
for the more clear declaration of them. Where
fore you shall hear how Cyprian agreeth with
him. Cyprian, in his sermon ascribed unto him
ofthe Lord's Supper f, saith, " The author of
this tradition said, that except we eat his flesh
and drink his blood, we should have no life in
us ; instructing us with a spiritual lesson, and
Opening to us a way to understand so privy a
thing, that we should know that the eating is
our dwelling in him, and our drinking is as it
were an incorporation in him, being subject
unto him in obedience, joined unto him in our
wills, and united in our affections. The eating
therefore of this flesh, is a certain hunger and
desire to dwell in him." Thus writeth Cyprian
ofthe eating and drinking of Christ. And a little
after he saith, "That none do eat of this lamb,
but such as be true Israelites, that is to say,
pure Christian men, without colour or dissimu
lation." And Athanasius8, speaking of the eating of
Christ's flesh, and drinking of his blood, saith,
f Cyprianus in sermo. de ccena Domini.
s Athanasius de peccato in Spiritum Sanctum.

204 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
" That for this cause he made mention of his as
cension into heaven, to pluck them from corporal
fancy, that they might learn hereafter that his
flesh was called the celestial meat that came
from above, and a spiritual food which he would
give. For those things tb,at I speak to you
(saith he) be spirit and life. Which is as much
to say, as that thing which you see shall be slain,
and given for the nourishment of the world, that
it may be distributed to every body spiritually,
and be to all men a conservation unto the resur
rection of eternal life.
In these words Athanasius declareth the cause
why Christ made mention of his ascension into
heaven, when he spake of the eating and drink
ing of his flesh and blood. The cause after Atha-
nasius's mind was this, that his hearers should
not think of any carnal eating of his body with
their mouths ; for as concerning the presence of
his body, he should be taken from them, and as
cend into heaven; but that they should under
stand him to be a spiritual meat, and spiritually
to be eaten, and by that refreshing to give eter
nal life, which he doth to none but to such as
be his lively members.
And of this eating speaketh also Basilius b,
" That we eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood,
being made, by his incarnation awd sensible life,
h Basilius, epistola. 141.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST.
partakers of his word and wisdom. For his
flesh and blood be called all his mystical con
versation here in his flesh and his doctrine, con
sisting of his whole life, pertaining both to his
humanity and divinity, whereby the soul is nou
rished and brought to the contemplation of
things eternal." Thus teacheth Basilius how
we eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood, which
pertaineth only to the true and faithful members
of Christ.
St. Jerome also saith1, "All that love pleasure
more than God, eat not the flesh of Jesu, nor
drink his blood, of the which himself saith, ' He
that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood,
hath everlasting life.' "
And in another place1*, St. Jerome saith,
" That hereticks do not eat and drink the body
and blood ofthe Lord."
And moreover he saith1, " That hereticks eat
not the flesh of Jesu, whose flesh is the meat of
faithful men."
Thus agreeth St. Jerome with the other before
rehearsed, that hereticks and such as follow
worldly pleasures, eat not Christ's flesh nor drink
his blood, because that Christ said, " He that
eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath
everlasting life."

205

k

1 Hieronimus in Esaiam, cap. 66.
In Hieremiam. ' In Oseam. cap. 8.

206 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
And St. Ambrose saith ra, " That Jesus is the
bread which is the meat of saints ; and that he
that taketh this bread, dieth not a sinner's death;
for this bread is the remission of sins."
And in another book to him entitled", he writ
eth thus : " This bread of life which came from
heaven, doth minister everlasting life ; and who7
soever eateth this bread, shall not die for ever ;
and is the body of Christ."
And yet in another book" set forth in his name,
he saith on this wise : " He that did eat manna
died, but he that eateth this body shall have re
mission of his sins, and shall not die for ever."
. And again he saith p, " As often as thou drink-
est, thou hast remission of thy sins."
These sentences of St. Ambrose be so plain
in this matter, that there needeth no more but
only the rehearsal of them.
But St. Augustine in many places*1 plainly
discussing this matter, saith: " He that agreeth
not with Christ, doth neither eat his body nor
drink his blood, although to the condemnation of
his presumption he receive every day the sacra^
ment of so high a matter."
And moreover St. Augustine most plainly
resolveth this matter in his book De civitate
m Ambrosius de benedictione patriarcharum, cap. 9.
" De his qui mysteriis initiantur.
" De sacramentis, lib. 4. cap. 5. r Lib. 5. cap. 3,
, Augustinus in sentcntiis ex Prosper-o decerptis, cap. 339.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 207
Dei \ disputing against two kinds of hereticks :
" Whereof the one said, that as many as were
christened and received the sacrament of Christ's
body and blood, should be saved, howsoever
they lived or believed ; because that Christ said,
* This is the bread that came from heaven ; that
whosoever shall eat thereof, shall not die. I am
the bread of life, which came from heaven; who
soever shall eat of this bread, shall live for
ever.' Therefore (said these hereticks) all such
men must needs be delivered from eternal death,
and at length be brought to eternal life."
" The other said, that hereticks and schis-
maticks might eat the sacrament of Christ's body,
but not his very body; because they be no
members of his body. And therefore they pro
mised not everlasting life to all that received
Christ's baptism and the sacrament of his body,
but all such as professed a true faith, although
they lived never so ungodly. For such (said
they) do eat the body of Christ, not only in a
sacrament, but also in deed, because they be
members of Christ's body."
But St. Augustine, answering to both these
heresies, saith, " That neither hereticks, nor
such as profess a true faith in their mouths and
in their living shew the contrary, have either a
true faith, (which worketh by charity and doth
r De civitate Dei, lib, 21. cap. 85.

208 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
none evil,) or are to be counted among the mem
bers of Christ. For they cannot be both mem
bers of Christ and members of the devil. There
fore (saith he) it may not be said, that any of
them eat the body of Christ. For when Christ
saith, ' He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my
blood, dwelleth in me and I in him ;' he sheweth
what it is (not sacramentally, but in deed) to eat
his body and drink his blood : which is, when a
man dwelleth so in Christ, that Christ dwelleth
in him. For Christ spake those words, as if he
should say, ' He that dwelleth not in me, and in
whom I dwell not, let him not say or think, that
he eateth my body or drinketh my blood.' '
These be the plain words of St. Augustine1'
that such as live ungodly, although they may
seem to eat Christ's body, (because they eat
the sacrament of his body,) yet indeed they
neither be members of his body, nor do eat his
body. Also upon the Gospel of St. John s he saith,
" That he that doth not eat his flesh and drink
his blood, hath not in him everlasting life. And
he that eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood,
hath everlasting life. But it is not so in those
meats, which we take to sustain our bodies; for
although without them we cannot live, yet it is
not necessary that whosoever receiveth them
• In Johan. tract. 26.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 209
shall live, for they may die by age, sickness, or
other chances. But in this* meat and drink of
the body and blood of our Lord, it is otherwise ;
for both they that eat and drink them not, have
not everlasting life : and, contrariwise, whoso
ever eat and drink them, have everlasting life."
Note and ponder well these words of St. Au
gustine, that the bread and wine and other meats
and drinks, which nourish the body, a man may
eat, and nevertheless die ; but the very body
and blood of Christ no man eateth but that hath
everlasting life. So that wicked men cannot eat
nor drink them, for then they must needs have
by them everlasting life.
And in the same place St. Augustine saith fur
ther : " The sacrament of the unity of Christ's
body and blood, is taken in the Lord's table of
some men to life, and of some men to death ; but
the thing itself (whereof it is a sacrament) is
taken of all men to life, and of no man to death."
And moreover he saith, " This is to eat that
meat, and drink that drink, to dwell in Christ,
and to have Christ dwelling in him. And for
that cause, he that dwelleth not in Christ, and
in whom Christ dwelleth not, without doubt he
eateth not spiritually his flesh nor drinketh his
blood, although carnally and visibly with his
teeth he bite the sacrament of his body and
blood." Thus writeth St. Augustine in the twenty-sixth

210 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
Homily of St. John. And in the next Homily
following1, he writeth thus: " This day our
sermon is of the body of the Lord, which he said
he would give to eat for eternal life. And he
declared the manner of his gift and distribution,
how he would give his flesh to eat, saying, ' He
that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood,
dwelleth in me, and I in him.' This therefore is
a token or knowledge, that a man hath eaten and
drunken, that is to say, if he dwell in Christ, and
have Christ dwelling in him ; if he cleave so to
Christ, that he is not severed from him. This
therefore Christ taught and admonished by these
mystical or figurative words, that we should be
in his body under him our head, among his mem
bers, eating his flesh, not forsaking his unity."
And in his book De Doctrina Christiana",
St. Augustine saith, (as before is at length de
clared,) " That to eat Christ's flesh and to drink
his blood, is a figurative speech, signifying the
participation of his passion, and the delectable
remembrance to our benefit and profit, that his
flesh was crucified and wounded for us."
And in another sermon also, De verbis Apos
toli x, he expoundeth what is the eating of Christ's
body, and the drinking of his blood, saying,
" The eating is to be refreshed, and the drinking
' In Johan. tract. 27.
" De Doctrina Christiana, lib. 3. cap. 14.
* Dp verbis Apostoli, serm. 20.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHREST. 211
what is it but to live ? Eat life, drink life. And
that shall be, when that which is taken visibly
in the sacrament, is in very deed eaten spiritually
and drunken spiritually."
By all these sentences of St. Augustine, it is
evident and manifest, that all men, good and
evil, may with their mouths visibly and sensibly
eat the sacrament of Christ's body and blood ;
but the very body and blood themselves be not
eaten but spiritually, and that of the spiritual
members of Christ, which dwell in Christ, and
have Christ dwelling in them, by whom they be
refreshed and have everlasting life.
And therefore, saith St. Augustine7, that when
the other apostles did eat bread that was the
Lord, yet Judas did eat but the bread of the
Lord, and not the bread that was the Lord. So
that the other apostles, with the sacramental
bread, did eat also Christ himself, whom Judas
did not eat. And a great number of places more
hath St. Augustine for this purpose, which for
eschewing of tediousness I let pass for this time,
and will speak something of St. Cyril.
Cyril, upon St. John's Gospel z, saith, " That
those which eat manna died, because they re
ceived thereby no strength to live ever, (for it
gave no life, but only put away bodily hunger ;)
but they that receive the bread of life shall be
, In Johan. tract. 59. z Cyrillus in Johan. lib. 4. cap. 10.
P 2

212

OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
made immortal, and shall eschew all the evils
that pertain to death, living with Christ for
ever." And in another place8 he saith : " For
asmuch as the flesh of them to Christ doth natu
rally give life, therefore it maketh them to live
that be partakers of it. For it putteth death
away from them, and utterly driveth destruction
Out of them."
And he concludeth the matter shortly in ano
ther place b in few words, saying, " That when
we eat the flesh of our Saviour, then have we
life in us. For if things that were corrupt were
restored by only touching of- his clothes, how
can it be that we shall not live that eat his
flesh?" And further1* he saith, " That as two
waxes that be molten together, do run every part
into other : so he that receiveth Christ's flesh
and blood, must needs be joined so with him,
that Christ must be in him, and he in Christ."
Here St. Cyril declareth the dignity of Christ's
flesh, being inseparably annexed unto his divi
nity, saying, that it is of such force and power,
that it giveth everlasting life. And whatsoever
occasion of death it findeth, or let of eternal life,
it putteth out and driveth clean away all the
same from them that eat that meat and receive
that medicine. Other medicines or plasters
sometimes heal, and sometimes heal not; but
* Cyrillus in Johan. Lb. 4. cap. 1 2. * Cap. 1 4. * Cap. 17.

V.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 213
this medicine is of that effect and strength, that
it eateth away all rotten and dead flesh, and
perfectly healeth all wounds and sores that it is
laid unto^
This is the dignity and excellency of Christ's
flesh and blood joined to his divinity; of the
which dignity Christ's adversaries, the Papists,
deprive and rob him when they affirm, that such
men do eat his flesh and receive this plaster as
remain still sick and sore, and be not holpen
thereby. ** And now for corroboration of Cyril's saying, CHAP
I would thus reason with the Papists, and de
mand of them, when an unrepentant sinner re
ceiveth the sacrament, whether he have Christ's
body within him or no ?
If they say no, then have I my purpose, that
evil men, although they receive the sacrament
of Christ's body, yet receive' they not his very
body. If they say yea, then I would ask them
further, whether they have Christ's spirit within
them or no ?
If they say nay, then do they separate Christ's
body from his spirit, and his humanity from his
divinity, and be condemned by the 'Scripture as
very Antichrists that divide Christ.
< And if they say yea, that a wicked man hath
Christ's spirit in him, then- the Scripture also
condemneth them, saying, " That as he which
fc hath no spirit of Christ's, is none of his ; so he

214 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
that hath Christ in him, liveth, because he is
justified. And if his spirit that raised Jesus from
death dwell in you, he, that raised Christ from
death, shall give life to your mortal bodies for
his spirit's sake, which dwelleth in youd."
Thus on every side the Scripture condemneth
the adversaries of God's word.
And this wickedness of the Papists is to be
wondered at, that they affirm Christ's flesh,
blood, soul, holy spirit, and his deity to be a man
that is subject to sin, and a limb of the devil.
They be wonderful jugglers and conjurers, that
with certain words can make God and the devil
to dwell together in one man, and make him both
the temple of God and the temple of the devil.
It appeareth that they be so blind, that they can
not see the light from darkness, Belial from
Christ, nor the table of the Lord from the table
of devils.
Thus is confuted this third intolerable error
and heresy of the Papists, that they which be
the limbs of the devil do eat the very body of
Christ, and drink his blood, manifestly and di
rectly contrary to the words of Christ himself,
who saith, '' Whosoever eateth my flesh, and
drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life."
chap. But lest they should seem to have nothing to
say for themselves, they allege St. Paul, in the
4 Romans viii.

vi.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 215
*
eleventh tb the Corinthians, where he saith, J^Tp"
" He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eat-pists'
eth and drinketh his own damnation, not dis^
cerning the Lord's body e."
But St. Paul in that place speaketh ofthe eat
ing of the bread, and drinking of the wine, and
not of the corporal eating of Christ's flesh and
blood, as it is manifest to every man that will
read the text : for these be the words of St. Paul,
" Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the
bread, and drink of the cup ; for he that eateth
and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh
his own damnation, not discerning the Lord's
body." In these words St. Paul's mind is, that foras
much as the bread and wine in the Lord's Sup
per do represent unto us the very body and blood
of our Saviour Christ, by his own institution and
ordinance ; therefore, although he sit in heaven
at his Father's right hand, yet should we come
to this mystical bread and wine with faith, reve
rence, purity, and fear, as we would do if we
should come to see and receive Christ himself
sensibly present. For unto the faithful Christ is
at his own holy table present, with his mighty
spirit and grace, and is of them more fruitfully
received, than if corporally they should receive
him bodily present. And therefore they that
' 1 Cor, xi.

216 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING :
shall worthily come to this God's board, must,
after due trial of themselves, consider first who
ordained this table, also what meat and drink
they shall have that come thereto, and how they
ought to behave themselves thereat. He that
prepared the table, is Christ himself. The meat
and drink wherewith he feedeth them that come
thereto as they ought to do, is his own body,
flesh, and blood. They that come thereto must
occupy their minds in considering how his body
was broken for them, and his blood shed for
their redemption. And so ought they to ap
proach to this heavenly table with all humble
ness of heart, and godliness of mind, as to the
table wherein Christ himself is given. And they
that come otherwise to this holy table, they
come unworthily, and do not eat and drink
Christ's flesh and blood, but eat and drink their
own damnation ; because they do not duly con
sider Christ's very flesh and blood, which be
offered there spiritually to be eaten and drunken,
but despising Christ's most holy supper do
come thereto, as it were to other common meats
and drinks, without regard of the Lord's body,
which is the spiritual meat of that table.
chap. But here may not be passed over the answer
unto certain places of ancient authors, which at

VII.

JXpl" the first shew seem to make for the Papists
|hors.au purpose, that evil men do eat and drink the very
flesh and blood of Christ. But if those places

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 217
be truly and thoroughly weighed, it shall appear
that not one of them maketh for their error, that
evil men do eat Christs very body.
The first place is of St. Augustine Contra
Cresconium Grammaticum f, where he saith, "That
although Christ himself say, ' He that eateth
not my flesh, and drinketh not my blood, shall
not have life in him :' yet do not his apostles
teach that the same is pernicious to them which
use it not well ; for he saith, ' Whosoever eateth
the bread and drinketh the cup of the Lord un
worthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood
ofthe Lord.'"
In which words St. Augustine seemeth to
conclude, that as well the evil as the good do eat
the body and blood of Christ, although the evil
have no benefit but hurt thereby.
But consider the place of St. Augustine dili
gently, and then it shall evidently appear that
he meant not of the eating of Christ's body, but
ofthe sacrament thereof. For the intent of St.
Augustine there, is to prove that good things
avail not to such persons as do evil use them ;
and that many things which of themselves be
good, and be good to some, yet to other some
they be not good. As the light is good for whole
eyes, and hurteth sore eyes ; the meat which is
gbod for some, is ill for other some : one medi^
1 Augustinus contra Cresconium, lib. 1. cap. 25,

218 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
cine healeth some, and maketh other sick ; one
harness doth arm one, and cumbreth another ;
one coat is meet for one, and too straight for
another. And after other examples, at the last
St. Augustine sheweth the same to be true in
the sacraments both of baptism and of the Lord's
body, which he saith do profit only them that
receive the same worthily.
And the words of St. Paul, which St. Augus
tine citeth, do speak of the sacramental bread
and cup, and not of the body and blood. And
yet St. Augustine calleth the bread and the cup,
the flesh and blood ; not that they be so indeed,
but that they so signify; as he saith in another
place, Contra Maximinum g. " In sacraments,"
saith he, " is to be considered not what they
be, but what they shew ; for they be signs of
other things, being one thing, and signifying
another." Therefore, as in baptism, those that come
feignedly, and those that come unfeignedly, both
be washed with the sacramental water, but both
be not washed with the Holy Ghost, and clothed
with Christ : so, in the Lord's Supper, both eat
and drink the sacramental bread and wine, but
both eat not Christ himself, and be fed with his
flesh and blood, but those only which worthily
receive the sacrament.
* Contra Maximinum, lib. 3. cap. 22.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 219
And this answer will serve to another place h
of St. Augustine against the Donatists, where he
saith, " That Judas received the body and blood
ofthe Lord." For as St. Augustine in that place
speaketh ofthe sacrament of baptism, so doth he
speak of the sacrament of the body and blood,
which nevertheless he calleth the body and
blood, because they signify and represent unto
us the very body, flesh, and blood.
And (as before is at length declared) a figure chap.
hath the name of the thing that is signified there-

,, , Figures be
by. As a mans image is called a man, a lionscaiiedby
. 1-1 1 the names o**
image, a lion ; a bird s image, a bird ; and an the things
# which they
image of a tree and herb, is called a tree or herb. signify-
So were we wont to say, our lady of Walsing
ham, our lady of Ipswich, our lady of grace, our
lady of pity, St. Peter of Milan, St. John of
Amyas, and such like, not meaning the things
themselves, but calling their images by the name
of the things by them represented. And like
wise we were wont to say, great St. Christopher
of York or Lincoln ; our lady smileth, or rocketh
her child ; let us go in pilgrimage to St. Peter
at Rome, and St. James in Compostella: and a
thousand like speeches, which were not under
stood of the very things, but only of the images
of them.
So doth St. John Chrysostome say, that we
* De bap. contra Donat. lib. 5. cap. 8.

220 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
see Christ with our eyes, touch him, feel him,
and grope him with our hands, fix our teeth in
his flesh, taste it, break it, eat it, and digest it,
make red our tongues and dye them with his
blood, and swallow it, and drink it.
And in a Catechism by me translated, and set
forth, I used like manner of speech, saying, that
with our bodily mouths we receive the body and
blood of Christ. Which my saying divers igno-*
rant persons (not used to read old ancient au
thors, nor acquainted with their phrase and
manner of speech) did carp and reprehend, for
laek of good understanding.
For this speech, and other before rehearsed of
Chrysostome, and all other like, be not under
stood of the very flesh and blood of our Saviour
Christ, (which in very deed we neither feel nor
see,) but that which we do, to the bread and wine,
by a figurative speech is spoken to be done to
the flesh and blood, because they be the very
signs, figures, and tokens instituted of Christ, to
represent unto us his very flesh and blood.
And. yet as with our corporal eyes, corporal
hands and mouths, we do corporally see, feel,
taste, and eat the bread, and drink the wine,
(being the signs and sacraments of Christ's body,)
even so with our spiritual eyes, hands, and
mouths, we do spiritually see, feel, taste, and eat
his very flesh and drink his very blood.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 221
As Eusebius Emissenus saith *, " When thou
comest to the reverend altar to. be filled with
spiritual meats, with " thy. faith look upon the
body and blood of him that is thy God, honour
him, touch him with thy mind, take him with
the hand of thy heart, and drink him with the
draught of thine inward man." And these spi
ritual things require no corporal presence of
Christ himself, who sitteth continually, in hea
ven, at the right hand of his Father.
And as this is most true, so it is full and suffi
cient to answer all things that the Papists can
bring in this matter, that have any appearance
for their party.
Now it is requisite to speak something of the chaf.
manner and form of worshipping of Christ, by .

IX.

them that receive this sacrament, lest that in ™n of the"
the stead of Christ himself be worshipped the sac,araen '
sacrament. For as his humanity, joined to his
divinity, and exalted to the right hand of his
Father, is to be worshipped of all creatures in
heaven, earth, and under the earth : even so, if
in the stead thereof we worship the signs and
sacraments, we commit as great idolatry as ever
was, or shall be, to the world's end.
And yet have the very Antichrists (the sub- The simple
tlest enemies that Christ hath) by their fine in- deceived.
ventions,and crafty scholastical divinity, deluded
1 Eusebius Emissenus in serm, de Eucharistia.

222 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
many simple souls, and brought them to this
horrible idolatry, to worship things visible and
made with their own hands, persuading them
that creatures were their Creator, their God,
and their Maker.
-For else what made the people to run from
their seats to the altar, and from altar to altar,
and from sakering (as they called it) to sakering,
peeping, tooting, and gazing at that thing,
which the priest held up in his hands, if they
thought not to honour that thing which they
saw ? What moved the priests to lift up the sa
crament so high over their heads ? or the people
to cry to the priest, hold up, hold up, and one
man to say to another, stoop down before, or to
say, this day I have seen my Maker; and, I
cannot be quiet except I see my Maker once a
day ? What was the cause of all these, and that
as well the priests as the people so devoutly did
knock and kneel at every sight of the sacrament,
but that they worshipped that visible thing which
they saw with their eyes, and took it for very
God ? For if they worshipped in spirit only
Christ, sitting in heaven with his Father, what
needeth they to remove out of their seats to toot
and gaze, as the apostles did after Christ when
he was gone up into heaven ? If they worship
ped nothing that they saw, why did they rise
up to see ? Doubtless many of the simple peo-

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 223
pie worshipped that thing which they saw with
their eyes.
And although the subtle Papists do colour
and cloak the matter never so finely, saying, that
they worship not the sacraments which they see
with their eyes, but that thing which they be
lieve with their faith to be really and corporally
in the sacraments, yet why do they then run from
place to place to gaze at the things which they
see, if they worship them not, giving thereby
occasion to them that be ignorant to worship
that which they see ? Why do they not rather
quietly sit still in their seats, and move the peo
ple to do the like, worshipping God in heart and
in spirit, than to gad about from place to place,
to see that thing which they confess themselves
is not to be worshipped ?
And yet to eschew one inconvenience (that is
to say, the worshipping of the sacrament,) they
fall into another as evil, and worship nothing
there at all. For they worship that thing (as
they say) which is really and corporally and yet
invisibly present under the kinds of bread and
wine, which (as before is expressed and proved)
is utterly nothing. And so they give unto the
ignorant occasion to worship bread and wine,
and they themselves worship nothing there at
all. But the Papists (for their own commodity to
keep the people still in idolatry) do often allege

224 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
a certain place k of St. Augustine upon the
Psalms, where he saith, " That no man doth eat
the flesh of Christ, except he first worship it,
and that we do not offend in worshipping there
of, but we should offend if we should not wor
ship it."
That is true which St. Augustine saith in this
place. For who is he that professeth Christ, and
is spiritually fed and nourished with his flesh and
blood, but he will honour and worship him, sit
ting at the right hand of his Father, and render
unto him, from the bottom of his heart, all laud,
praise, and thanks, for his merciful redemp
tion !
And as this is most true which St. Augustine
saith, so is that most false which the Papists
would persuade upon St. Augustine's words, that
the sacramental bread and wine, or any visible
thing, is to be worshipped in the sacrament.
For St. Augustine's mind was so far from any
such thought, that he forbiddeth utterly to wor
ship Christ's own flesh and blood alone, but in
consideration and as they be annexed and joined
to his divinity. How much less then could he
think or allow that we should worship the sa
cramental bread and wine, or any outward or
visible sacrament, which be shadows, figures,
and representations of Christ's very flesh and
blood !
k August, in Psal* xcviii.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 225
- And St. Augustine was afraid, lest in worship
ping of Christ's very body we should offend;
and therefore he biddeth us, when we worship
Christ, that we should not tarry and fix our
ftinds upon his flesh, which of itself availeth no
thing, but that we should lift up our minds from
the flesh to the spirit, which giveth life : and yet
the Papist's be not afraid, by crafty means, to in
duce us to worship those things, which be signs
and sacraments of Christ's body.
But what will not the shameless Papists allege
for their purpose, when they be not ashamed to
maintain the adoration of the sacrament by these
words of St. Augustine, wherein he speaketh not
one word ofthe adoration of the sacrament, but
only of Christ himself?
And although he say, that Christ gave his
flesh to be eaten of us, yet he meant not that his.
flesh is here corporally present, and corporally
eaten, but only spiritually. As his words de
clare plainly, which follow in the same place,
where St. Augustine, as it were, ih the person of
Christ, speaketh these words : " It is the spirit
that giveth life, but the flesh profiteth nothing.
The words which I have spoken unto you, be
spirit- and life. That which I have spoken, un
derstand you spiritually. You shall not eat this
body which you see, and drink that blood which
they shall shed that shall crucify me. I have
commended unto you a sacrament, understand it
y

22G OF THE EATING AND DRINKING
spiritually, and it shall give you life. And al
though it must be visibly ministered, yet it must
be invisibly understood."
These words of St. Augustine, with the other
before recited, do express his mind plainly, tha*
Christ is not otherwise to be eaten than spiritu
ally, which spiritual eating requireth no corpo
ral presence ; and that he intended not to teach
here any adoration either of the visible sacra
ments, or of any thing that is corporally in them.
For indeed there is nothing really and corporally
in the bread to be worshipped, although the Pa
pists say, that Christ is in every consecrated
bread. But our Saviour Christ himself hath given us
warning before hand, that such false Christians
and false teachers should come, and hath bid us
to beware of them, saying, " If any man tell you
that Christ is here, or Christ is there, believe
him not ; for there shall arise false Christs and
false prophets, and shall shew many signs and
wonders, so that if it were possible, the very elect
should be brought into error. Take heed, I
have told you beforehand V
Thus our Saviour Christ, like a most loving
pastor and saviour of our souls, hath given us
warning beforehand of the perils and dangers
that were to come, and to be wise and ware that

Matt.

THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST. 227
we should not give credit unto such teachers as
would persuade us to worship a piece of bread,
to kneel to it, to knock to it, to creep to it, to
follow it in procession, to lift up our hands to it,
to offer to it, to light candles to it, to shut it up
in a chest or box, to do all other honour unto it,
more than we do unto God ; having alway this
pretence or excuse for our idolatry, Behold here
is Christ. But our Saviour Christ calleth them
false prophets, and saith, "Take heed, I tell you
before, believe them not ; if they say to you, Be
hold Christ is abroad or in the wilderness, go
not out ; and if they say that he is kept in close
places, believe them not m."
And if you will ask me the question:, who* be chaf.
those false prophets and seducers of the people,

X.

the answer is soon made; the Romish Antichrists papTstTthat
and their adherents, the authors of all error, ig- eTtiieTea-
Boranee, blindness, superstition, hypocrisy, andpe"
idolatry. For Innocentius the Third, one of the most inaocentins
• i 1 -i t« tertius.
wicked men that ever was in the see of Rome,
did ordain and decree that the host should be
diligently kept under lock and key.
And Honorius the Third not only confirmed Honorius
the same, but commanded also that the priests
should diligently teach the people from time to
time, that when they lifted up the bread called

Matt. xxiv.
ti 2

228 OF THE EATING AND DRINKING, &C.
the host, the people should then reverently bow
down, and that likewise they should do when
the priest carrieth the host unto sick folks.
These be the statutes and ordinances of Rome,
under pretence of holiness, to lead the people
unto all error and idolatry ; not bringing them
by bread unto Christ, but from Christ unto
bread.
chap. But all that love and believe Christ himself,
let them not think that Christ is corporally in

XI.

tioVto the"" the bread, but let them lift up their hearts unto
iigof Christ heaven, and worship him, sitting there at the
in the sacra- .,, t, , x . ..
ment. right hand of his Father. Let them worship
him in themselves, whose temples they be, in
whom he dwelleth and liveth spiritually : but in
no wise let them worship him as being corporally
in the bread ; for he is not in it, neither spiritu
ally, as he is in man, nor corporally, as he is in
heaven; but only sacramentally, as a thing may
be said to be in the figure, whereby it is signi
fied. Thus is sufficiently reproved the third princi
pal error of the Papists, concerning the Lord's
Supper, which is, that wicked members of the
devil do eat Christ's very body, and drink his
blood.

THUS ENDETH THE FOURTH BOOK.

THE FIFTH BOOK

THE OBLATION AND SACRIFICE

OF

OUR SAVIOUR CHRIST.

The greatest blasphemy and injury that can be chap.
against Christ, and yet universally used through '•

the Popish kingdom, is this, that the priests ^VfThe"
make their massa sacrifice propitiatory, to remit mass*
the sins as well of themselves, as of other both
quick and dead, to whom they list to apply the
same. Thus, under pretence of holiness, the
Papistical priests have taken upon them to be
Christ's successors, and to make such an obla
tion and sacrifice, as never creature made but
Christ alone, neither he made the same any more
times than once, and that was by his death upon
the cross.
For as St. Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews chap.
witnesseth, " Although the high priests of the "'

230 OF THE OBLATION AND
*""' old law offered many times, (at the least every
sacrificeof year once,) yet Christ offereth not himself many
ofthepriests times, for then he should many times have died.
"aw.60 But now he offereth himself but once, to take
away sin by that offering of himself. And as
men must die once, so was Christ offered once,
to take away the sins of many **."
And furthermore St. Paul saith, " That the
sacrifices of the old law, although they were
continually offered from year to year, yet could
they not take away sin, nor make men perfect.
For if they could once have quieted men's con
sciences by taking away sin, they should have
ceased, and no more have been offered. But
Christ, with once offering, hath made perfect for
ever them that be sanctified ; putting their sins
clean out of God's remembrance. And where
remission of sins is, there is no more offering for
sin\" And yet further he saith, concerning the Old
Testament, " That it was disannulled and taken
away, because of the feebleness and unprofita
bleness thereof; for it brought nothing to perfec
tion. And the priests of that law were many,
because they lived not long, and so the priest
hood went from one to another; but Christ liveth
ever, and hath an everlasting priesthood that
passeth not from him to any man else. Where^
* Heb. ix. " Heb. x.

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 231
fore he is able perfectly to save them that come
to God by him, forasmuch as he liveth ever to
make intercession for us. For it was meet for
us to have such an high priest that is holy, in
nocent, without spot, separated from sinners,
and exalted up above heaven ; who needeth not
daily to offer up sacrifice, as Aaron's priests did,
first for his own sins, and then for the people.
For that he did once, when he offered up him
self1." Here, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, St. Paul
hath plainly and fully described unto us the dif
ference between the priesthood and sacrifices of
the Old Testament, and the most high and wor
thy priesthood of Christ, his most perfect and
necessary sacrifice, and the benefit that cometh
to us thereby. For Christ offered not the blood
of calves, sheep, and goats, as the priests of the
old law used to do ; but he offered his own blood
upon the cross. And he went not into an holy
place made by man's hand, (as Aaron did,) but
he ascended up into heaven, where his Eternal
Father dwelleth ; and before Him he maketh con
tinual supplication for the sins of the whole
world, presenting his own body, which was torn
for us, and his precious blood, which of his most
gracious and liberal charity he shed for us upon
the cross.
And that sacrifice was of such force, that it
c Heb. vii.

232 OF THE OBLATION AND
was no need to renew it every year, as the bi
shops did of the Old Testament ; whose sacrifices
were many times offered, and yet were of no
great effect or profit, because they were sinners
themselves that offered them, and offered not
their own blood, but the blood of brute beasts ;
but Christ's sacrifice, once offered, was sufficient
for evermore.
And that all men may the better understand
chap, this sacrifice of Christ, which he made for the
great benefit of all men, it is necessary to know

in.

oflacn'fices. the distinction and diversity of sacrifices.
One kind of sacrifice there is, which is called
a propitiatory or merciful sacrifice, that is to say,
such a sacrifice aspacifieth God's wrath and in
dignation, and obtaineth mercy and forgiveness
for all our sins, and is the ransom for our redemp
tion from everlasting damnation.
And although in the Old Testament there were
The sacrifice certain sacrifices called by that name, yet in
of Christ ¦ J J
very deed there is but one such sacrifice where
by our sins be pardoned, and God's mercy and
favour obtained, which is the death of the Son of
God our Lord Jesu Christ ; nor never was any
other sacrifice propitiatory at any time, nor ever
shall be.
This is the honour and glory of this our High
Priest, wherein he admitteth neither partner nor
successor. For by his one oblation he satisfied
his Father for all men's sins, and reconciled

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 233
mankind unto his grace and favour. And who
soever deprive him of this honour, and go about
to take it to themselves, they be very Anti
christs and most arrogant blasphemers against
God, and against his Son Jesus Christ whom
He hath sent.
Another kind of sacrifice there is, which doth l^Z™^
not reconcile us to God, but is made of them churoh<
that be reconciled by Christ, to testify our duties
unto God, and to shew ourselves thankful unto
him ; and therefore they be called sacrifices of
laud, praise, and thanksgiving.
The first kind of sacrifice Christ offered to
God for us ; the second kind we ourselves offer
to God by Christ.
And by the first kind of sacrifice Christ offer
ed also us unto his Father ; and by the second
we offer ourselves, and all that we have, unto him
and his Father.
And this sacrifice generally is our whole obe
dience unto God, in keeping his laws and com
mandments. Of which manner of sacrifice
speaketh the prophet David, saying, " A sacri
fice to God, is a contrite heart d." And St. Pe
ter saith of all Christian people, " That they be
an holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices,
acceptable to God by Jesu Christ6." And St.
Paul saith, " That alway we offer unto God a
sacrifice of laud and praise by Jesus Christ f."
t psaj# i_ e 1 Pet. ii. ' Heb. xiii.

234 OF THE OBLATION AND

chap. But now to speak somewhat more largely of
the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ, he was

IV.

piab decia- such an high bishop, that he, once offering him-
"crifice of self, was sufficient, by one effusion of his blood,
to abolish sin unto the world's end. He was so
perfect a priest, that by one oblation he purged
an infinite heap of sins, leaving an easy and a
ready remedy for all sinners, that his one sacri
fice should suffice for many years unto all men
that would not shew themselves unworthy. And
he took unto himself not only their sins that
many years before were dead, and put their
trust in him, but also the sins of those that until
his coming again should truly believe in his Gos
pel. So that now we may look for none other
priest, nor sacrifice, to take away- our sins, but
only him and his sacrifice. And as he, dying
once, was offered for all, so, as much as pertained
to him, he took all men's sins unto himself. So
that now there remaineth no more sacrifices for
sin, but extreme judgment at the last day,
when he shall appear to us again, not as a man
to be punished again, and to be made a sacrifice
for our sins, as he was before ; but he shall come
in his glory, without sin, to the great joy and
comfort of them, which be purified and made
clean by his death, and continue in godly and
innocent living ; and to the great terror and dread
of them that be wicked and ungodly s."
* Heb. ix.

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 235
Thus the Scripture teacheth, that if Christ
had made any oblation for sin more than once,
he should have died more than once ; foras
much as there is none oblation and sacrifice for
sin, but only his death. And now there is no
more oblation for sin, seeing that by him our sins
be remitted, and our consciences quieted.
And although in the Old Testament there chap.
were certain sacrifices, called sacrifices for sin,  ^ 
yet they were no such sacrifices that could take £c\Vof0the
away our sins in the sight of God ; but they were old law"
ceremonies ordained to this intent, that they
should be, as it were, shadows and figures, to
signify beforehand the excellent sacrifice of
Christ that was to come, which should be the
very true and perfect sacrifice for the sins of the
whole world.
And for this signification they had the name
of a sacrifice propitiatory, and were called sacri
fices for sins, not because they indeed took away
our sins, but because they were images, sha
dows, and figures, whereby godly men were ad
monished of the true sacrifice of Christ then to
come, which should truly abolish sin and ever
lasting death.
And that those sacrifices, which were made by
the priests in the old law, could not be able to
purchase our pardon, and deserve the remission
of our sins, St. Paul doth clearly affirm in his
said Epistle to the Hebrews, where he saith,

236 OF THE OBLATION AND
" It is impossible that our sins should be taken
away by the blood of oxen and goats \"
Wherefore all godly men, although they did
use those sacrifices ordained of God, yet they
did not take them as things of that value and
estimation, that thereby they should be able to
obtain remission of their sins before God. But
they took them partly for figures and tokens
ordained of God, by the which he declared, that
he would send that seed, which he promised to
be the very true sacrifice for sin, and that he
would receive them that trusted in that promise,
and remit their sins for the sacrifice after to
come. And partly they used them as certain
ceremonies, whereby such persons as had offend
ed against the law of Moses, and were cast
out of the congregation, were received again
among the people, and declared to be absolved.
As for like purposes we use, in the church of
Christ, sacraments by him instituted. And this
outward casting out from the people of God,
and receiving in again, was according to the law
and knowledge of man ; but the true reconcilia
tion and forgiveness of sin before God, neither
the fathers of the old law had, nor we yet bave,
but only by the sacrifice of Christ, made in the
mount of Calvary. And the sacrifices of the old
law were prognostications and figures of the

Heb.

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 237
same then to come, as our sacraments be figures
and demonstrations ofthe same now passed.
Now by these foresaid things may every man chap.
easily perceive, that the offering of the priest in

The mass is
a sacri-

the mass, or the appointing of his ministration at not
his pleasure, to them that be quick or dead, can- ator^ropi '
not merit and deserve, neither to himself, nor to
them for whom he singeth or sayeth, the remis
sion of their sins : but that such Popish doctrine
is contrary to the doctrine of the Gospel, and in
jurious to the sacrifice of Christ. '
For if only the death of Christ be the oblation,
sacrifice, and price, wherefore our sins be par
doned, then the act or ministration of the priest
cannot have the same office. Wherefore it is an
abominable blasphemy to give the office or dig
nity to a priest, which pertaineth only to Christ;
or to affirm that the church hath need of any
such sacrifice ; as who should say, that Christ's
sacrifice were not sufficient for the remission of
our sins ; or else that his sacrifice should hang
upon the sacrifice of a priest.
But all such priests as pretend to be Christ's
successors, in making a sacrifice of him, they be
his most heinous and horrible adversaries. For
never no person made a sacrifice of Christ, but
he himself only. And therefore St. Paul saith,
" That Christ's priesthood cannot pass from him
to another. For what needeth any more sacri
fices, if Christ's sacrifice be perfect and suffi-

238 OF THE OBLATION AND
cient ¦ ?" And as St. Paul saith, " That if the
sacrifices and ministration of Aaron, and other
priests of that time, had lacked nothing, but had
been perfect and sufficient, then should not the
sacrifice of Christ have been required, (for it had
been but in vain to add any thing to that, which
of itself was perfect ;) so likewise if Christ's sa
crifice which he had made himself be sufficient,
what need we every day to have more and more
sacrifices k ?" Wherefore all Popish priests that
presume to make every day a sacrifice of Christ,
either must they needs make Christ's sacrifice
vain, imperfect, and unsufficient, or else is their
sacrifice in vain, which is added to the sacrifice
which is already of itself sufficient and perfect.
But it is a wonderous thing to see what shifts
and cautels the Popish Antichrists devise, to
colour and cloak their wicked errors. And as a
chain is so joined together, that one link draw-
eth another after it ; so be vices and errors knit
together, that every one draweth his fellow with
him. And so doth it here in this matter.
chap. For the Papists, to excuse themselves* do say,
that they make no new sacrifice, nor none other

VII.

«on°ofUthe" sacrifice than Christ made ; for they be not so
fffion.ca' blind, but they see that then they should add
another sacrifice to Christ's sacrifice, and so
make his sacrifice imperfect ; but they say, that

Heb. vii. k He]y viii.

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 239
they make the self-same sacrifice for sin that
Christ himself made.
And here they run headlong into the foulest '
and most heinous error that ever was imagined.
For if they make every day the same oblation
and sacrifice for sin that Christ himself made,
and the oblation that he made was his death,
and the effusion of his most precious blood upon
the cross, for our redemption and price of our
sins: then followeth it of necessity, that they
every day slay Christ and shed his blood ; and
so be they worse than the wicked Jews and
Pharisees, which slew him, and shed his blood
but once.
Almighty God, the Father of light and truth, chap.
banish all such darkness and error out of his  VI11,
church, with the authors and teachers thereof ; Jri!^8**!
or else convert their hearts unto him, and give pe^ieT
this light of faith to every man, that he may
trust to have remission of his sins, and be deli
vered from eternal death and hell, by the merit
only of the death and blood of Christ : and that
by his own faith every man may apply the same
unto himself, and not take it at the appointment
of Popish priests, by the merit of their sacrifices
and oblations.
If we be indeed, as we profess, Christian men,
we may ascribe this honour and glory to no man,
but* to Christ alone. Wherefore let us give the
whole laud 'and praise hereof unto him ; let us

240 OF THE OBLATION AND
fly only to him for succour ; let us hold him fast,
and hang upon him, and give ourselves wholly
to him. And forasmuch as he hath given him
self to death for us, to be an oblation and sacri
fice to his Father for our sins, let us give our
selves again unto him, making unto him an obla
tion, not of goats, sheep, kine, and other beasts
that have no reason, as was accustomed before
Christ's coming ; but of a creature that hath
reason, that is to say, of ourselves, not killing
our own bodies, but mortifying the beastly and
unreasonable affections that would gladly rule
and reign in us.
So long as the law did reign, God suffered
dumb beasts to be offered unta him; but now
that we be spiritual, we must offer spiritual ob
lations, in the place of calves, sheep, goats, and
doves. We must kill devilish pride, furious an
ger, insatiable covetousness, filthy lucre, stink
ing lechery, deadly hatred and malice, foxy
wiliness, wolvish ravening and devouring, and
all other unreasonable lusts and desires of the
flesh. " And as many as belong to Chjist, must
crucify and kill these for Christ's sake, as Christ
crucified himseltfor their sakes r."
These be the sacrifices of Christian men ; these
hosts and oblations be acceptable to Christ.
And as Christ offered himself for us, so is it^our
1 Galat. v. * '

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 241
duties after this sort to offer ourselves to him
again. And so shall we not have the name of
Christian men in vain; but as we pretend to be
long to Christ in word and profession, so shall
we indeed be his in life and inward affection.
So that within and without we shall be altoge
ther his, clean from all hypocrisy or dissimula
tion. And if we refuse to offer ourselves after
this wise unto him, by crucifying our own wills,
and committing us wholly to the will of God,
we 'be most unkind people, superstitious hypo
crites, or rather unreasonable beasts, worthy to
be excluded utterly from all the benefits of
Christ's oblation.
And if we put. the oblation of the priest in the chap.
stead ofthe oblation of Christ, refusing to receive rx-
the sacrament of his body and blood ourselves, TheI!0pish
as he ordained ; and trusting to have remission !a?ry?utter?y
of our sins by the sacrifice of the priest in the ^ro^i*
mass, and thereby also to obtain release of the con^-ega-
pains in purgatory, we do not only injury to 'e
Christ, but also commit most detestable idola
try. For JJiese be but false doctrines, without
shame devised, and feigned, by wicked Popish
priests? idolaters, monks, and friars, which for
lucre have altered and corrupted the most holy
Supper of the Lord, and turned it into manifest
idolatry. Wherefore all godly men ought with
all their heart to resist and abhor all such blas
phemy against the Son of God.
u.

242 OF THE OBLATION AND
And forasmuch as in such masses is manifest
wickedness and idolatry, wherein the priest
alone maketh oblation satisfactory, and applieth
the same for the quick and the dead at his will
and pleasure ; all such Popish masses are to be
clearly taken away out of Christian churches,
and the true use of the Lord's Supper is to be
restored again, wherein godly people assembled
together may receive the sacrament every man
for himself, to testify thatjbe is a member of
Christ's body, fed with his flesh, and drinking
his blood spiritually.
chap. Christ did not ordain his sacraments to this
use, that one should receive them for another,

X.

Every man
ought to re- and the priest for all the lay people ; but he or-
ceive the l
sacrament darned them for this intent, that every man
himself, and , *
not one for should receive them for himself, to ratify, con-
another. •*
firm, and establish his own faith and everlasting
salvation. Therefore as one man may not be
baptized for another, (and if he be, it availeth
nothing;) so ought not one to receive the holy
communion for another. For if a man be dry or
hungry, he is never a whit eased, if another man
drink or eat for him : or if a man be all befiled*
it helpeth him nothing, another man to be wash
ed for him : so availeth it nothing to a man, if
another man be baptized for him, or be refreshed
for him with the meat and drink at the Lord's
table. And therefore, said St. Peter, " Let<
every man be baptized in the name of Jesu

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 243
Christ"1." And our Saviour Christ^ said to the
multitude, " Take, and eat." And further he
said, " Drink you all of this." Whosoever there
fore will be spiritually regenerated in Christ, he
must be baptized himself. And he that will live
himself by Christ, must by himself eat Christ's
flesh and drink his blood.
And briefly to conclude : he that thinketh to
come to the kingdom of Christ himself, must
also come to his sacraments himself, and keep
his commandments himself, and do all things
that pertain to a Christian man and to his voca
tion himself; lest if he refer these things to ano-
ther man to do them for him, the other may with
as good right claim the kingdom of heaven for
him. Therefore Christ made no such difference be- chap.
tween the priest and the layman, that the priest xr'
shoitld make oblation and sacrifice of Christ for Sj,*'
the layman, and eat the Lord's Supper from him pS and
all alone, and distribute and apply it as him liketh . ie aymiJ'
Christ made no such difference ; but the difference
that is between the priest and the layman in this
matter, is only in the ministration; that the
priest, as a common minister of the church, doth
minister and distribute the Lord's Supper unto
other, and other receive it at his hands. But
the very supper itself was by Christ instituted
and given to the whole church, not to be offered
m Acts ii.
r2

244 OF THE OBLATION AND
and eaten of the priest for other men, but by
him to be delivered to all that would duly ask
it. As in a prince's house the officers and minis
ters prepare the table, and yet other, as well as
they, eat the meat and drink the drink : so do
the priests and ministers prepare the Lord's
Supper, read the Gospel, and rehearse Christ's
words ; but all the people say thereto, Amen.
All remember Christ's death, all give thanks to
God, all repent and offer themselves an oblation
to Christ, all take him for their Lord and Savi
our, and spiritually feed upon him; and in token
thereof, they eat the bread and drink the wine in
his mystical supper.
And this nothing diminisheth the estimation
and dignity of priesthood and other ministers of
the church, but advanceth and highly commend-
eth their ministration. For if they are much to
be loved, honoured, and esteemed that be the
king's chancellors, judges, officers, and ministers
in temporal matters ; how much then are they to
be esteemed that be ministers of Christ's words
and sacraments, and have to them committed the
keys of heaven, to let in and shut out, by the
ministration of his word and gospel !
chap. Now, forasmuch, as I trust that I have plainly
xn' enough set forth the propitiatory sacrifice of our
to iter™-* Saviour Jesu Christ, to the capacity and comfort
pists' of all men that have any understanding of Christ;

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 245
and have declared the heinous abomination and
idolatry of the Popish mass, wherein the priests
have taken upon them the office of Christ, to
make a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the
people, it is now necessary to make answer to
the subtle persuasions and sophistical cavilla-
tions of the Papists, whereby they have deceived
many a simple man, both learned and un
learned. The place of St. Paul unto the Hebrews'*,
(which they do cite for their purpose,) maketh
quite and clean against them. For where St.
Paul saith, " That every high priest is ordained
to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins," he spake
not that of the priests of the New Testament,
but ofthe Old: which (as he saith) offered calves
and goats. And yet they were not such priests,
that by their offerings and sacrifices they could
take away the people's sins, but they were sha
dows and figures of Christ, our everlasting priest,
which only by one oblation of himself taketh
away the sins of the world." Wherefore the
Popish priests that apply this text unto them
selves, do directly contrary to the meaning of
St. Paul, to the great injury and prejudice of
.Christ, by whom only, St. Paul saith, " That
the sacrifice and oblation for the sin of the whole
world was accomplished and fulfilled."
° Hebrews v,

246 OF THE OBLATION AND
And as little serveth for the Papists' purpose
the text of the prophet Malachi, " That every
where should be offered unto God a pure sacri
fice and oblation"." For the prophet in that
place spake no word of the mass, nor of any ob
lation propitiatory to be made by the priesfS;
but he spake of the oblation of all faithful people
(in what place soever they be) which offer unto
God, with pure hearts and minds, sacrifices of
laud and praise : prophesying of the vocation of
the Gentiles, that God would extend his mercy
unto them, and not be the God only ofthe Jews,
but of all nations from east to west, that with
pure faith call upon him, and glorify his name.
chap. But the adversaries of Christ gather together
a great heap of authors, which (as they say) call

XIII.

thors.

to the au- the mass, or holy communion, a sacrifice. But
all those authors be answered unto in this one
sentence, that they called it not a sacrifice fer
sin, because that it taketh away our sin, (which
was taken away only by the death of Christ,)
but because it was ordained of Christ to put us
in remembrance of the sacrifice made by him
upon the cross. And for that cause it beareth
the name of that sacrifice, as St. Augustine de
clareth plainly in his Epistle Ad Bonifacium*,
before rehearsed in this book ; and in his book
De fide ad Petrum Diaconum, before rehearsed
0 Malachi i, p Augustinus ad Bonifacium.

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 247
also. And in his book De civitate Dei q, he saith,
" That which men call a sacrifice, is a sign or
representation of the true sacrifice."
And the master of the sentences (of whom all
the school authors take their occasion to write)
judged truly in this point, saying, " That which
is offered and consecrated of the priest, is called
a sacrifice and oblation, because it is a memory
and representation of the true sacrifice and holy
oblation, made in the altar of the cross r."
And St. John Chrysostome % after he hath said
that Christ is our bishop which offered that sa
crifice that made us clean, and that we offer the
same how, lest any man might be deceived by
his manner of speaking, he openeth his meaning
more plainly, saying, "That which we do, is
done for a remembrance of that which was done
by Christ. For Christ saith, Do this in re
membrance of me." Also Chrysostome declar
ing at length, that the priests of the old law
offered ever new sacrifices, and changed them
from time to time, and that Christian peopl* do
not so, but offer ever one sacrifice of Christ ; yet
by and by, lest some men might be offended with
this speech, he maketh as it were a correction of
his words, saying, "But rather we make a re
membrance of Christ's sacrifice." As though
*> De civitat; lib. 10. cap. 5. ' Lombardus, lib. 4. dist. IS.
* Chrysost. ad Heb. Hom. 17.

248

OF THE OBLATION AND

he should say : Although in a certain kind of
speech we may say, that every%day we make a
sacrifice of Christ ; yet in very deed, to speak
properly, we make no sacrifice of him, but only
a commemoration and remembrance of that sa
crifice, which he alone made, and never none but
he. Nor Christ never gave this honour to any
creature, that he should make a sacrifice of him,
nor did not ordain the sacrament of his holy sup
per, to the intent that either the people should
sacrifice Christ again, or that the priests should
make a sacrifice of him for the people: but his
holy supper was ordained for this purpose, that
every man eating and drinking thereof should
remember that Christ died for him, and so should
exercise his faith, and comfort himself by the
remembrance of Christ's benefits ; and so give
unto Christ most hearty thanks, and give him
self also clearly unto him.
Wherefore the ordinance of Christ ought to
be followed ; the priest to minister the sacrament
to the people, and they to use it to their conso
lation. And in this eating, drinking, and using
of the Lord's Supper, we make not of Christ a
new sacrifice propitiatory for remission of sin.
chap. But the humble confession of all penitent
 '— hearts, their acknowledging of Christ's benefits,
sons nfaL a their thanksgiving for the same, their faith and
wen as the consolation in Christ, their humble submission
priest.
and obedience to God's will and commandments,

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 249
is a sacrifice of laud and praise, accepted and
allowed of God no less than the sacrifice of the
priest. For Almighty God, without respect of
person, accepteth the oblation and sacrifice of
priest and lay person, of king and subject, of
master and servant, of man and woman, of young
and old, yea of English, French, Scot, Greek,
Latin, Jew, and Gentile ; of every man according
to his faithful and obedient heart unto Him ; and
that through the sacrifice propitiatory of Jesu
Christ. And as for the saying or singing of mass by CHAP-
the priest, as it was in time passed used, it is

XV.

neither a sacrifice propitiatory, nor yet a sacri- tioai mass *¦
„ neither a sa-
fice of laud and praise, nor in any wise allowed crifice Pro-
pitiatory,
before God, but abominable and detestable, and"°**?f .
thanksgiv-
thereof may well be verified the saying of Christ, •****¦•
" That thing which seemeth an high thing be
fore men, is abomination before God '."
They therefore which gather of the doctors,
that the mass is a sacrifice for remission of sin,
and that it is applied by the priest to them for
whom he saith or singeth ; they which so gather
of the doctors, do to them most grievous injury
and wrong, most falsely belying them.
For these monstrous things were never seen chap.
nor known of the old and primitive church, nor .

XVI.

There were
there were not then in one church many masses no Papisu,

1 Luke xvi.

250 OF THE OBLATION AND
hubTprimi- every day, but upon certain days there was a
tive cUch. common table of the Lord's Supper, where a
number of people did together receive the body
and blood of the Lord : but there were then no
daily private masses, where every priest received
alone, like as until this day there is none in the
Greek churches but one common mass in a day.
Nor the holy fathers of the old church would not
have suffered such ungodly and wicked abuses
of the Lord's Supper.
But these private masses sprang up of late
years partly through the ignorance and supersti
tion of unlearned monks and friars, which knew
not what a sacrifice was, but made of the mass a
sacrifice propitiatory, to remit both sin and the
pain due for the same ; but chiefly they sprang
of lucre and gain, when priests found the means
to sell masses to the people, which caused masses
so much to increase, that every day was said an
infinite number, and that no priest would receive
the communion at another priest's hand, but
every one would receive it alone ; neither re
garding the godly decree of the most famous and
holy council of Nice11, which appointeth in what
order priests should be placed above deacons at
the communion ; nor yet the canons of the apos
tles *, which command that when any comma-

" Concilium Nicenum, cap. 14.
* Canones Apostolorum, cap. 8.

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST.
nion is mmistered, all the priests together should
receive the same, or else be excommunicated.
So much the old fathers misliked, that any priest
should receive the sacrament alone.
Therefore when the old fathers called the mass,
or supper of the Lord, a sacrifice, they meant
that it was a sacrifice of lauds and thanksgiving,
(and so as well the people as the priest do sacri
fice,) or else that it was a remembrance of the
very true sacrifice propitiatory of Christ: but
they meant in no wise that it is a very true sacri
fice for sin, and applicable by the priest to the
quick and dead.
For the priest may well minister Christ's
words and sacraments to all men both good and
bad, but he can apply the benefit of Christ's
passion to no man of age and discretion, but
only to such as by their own faith do apply the
same unto themselves. So that every man of
age and discretion taketh to himself the benefits
of Christ, or refuseth them himself, by his own
faith, quick or dead ; that is to say, by his true
and lively faith, that worketh by charity, he re
ceiveth them, or else by his ungodliness or
feigned faith rejecteth them.
And this doctrine ofthe Scripture clearly con-
demneth the wicked inventions ofthe Papists in
these latter days, which have devised a purga
tory to torment souls after this life, and oblations
of masses said by the priests to deliver them

251

CHAP. XVII.

252 OF THE OBLATION AND
from the said torments ; and a great number of
other commodities do they promise to the sim
ple ignorant people by their masses.
Now the nature of man being ever prone to
idolatry from the beginning of the world, and
The causes . .
and means the Papists being ready by all means and policy
ticai masses to defend and extol the mass for their estima-
entered into
thecharch. tion an(j profit; and the people being superstiti-
ously enamoured and doted upon the mass, be
cause they take it for a present remedy against
all manner of evils ; and part of the princes being
blinded by Papistical doctrine, part loving quiet
ness, and loth to offend their clergy and sub
jects, and all being captive and subject to the
Antichrist of Rome ; the state of the world re
maining in this case, it is no wonder that abuses
grew and increased in the church, that super
stition with idolatry were taken for godliness
and true religion, and that many things were
brought in without the authority of Christ:
Tfhtj;eapnap?5- As purgatory, the oblation and sacrificing of
ticalma*,ses* Christ by the priest alone, the application and
appointing of the same to such persons as the
priest would sing or say mass for, and to such
abuses as they could devise, to deliver some from
purgatory, and some from hell, if they were not
there finally by God determined to abide, as
they termed the matter; to make rain or fair
weather, to put away the plague and other sick
nesses both from man and beast, to hallow and

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 253
Ml
preserve them that went to Jerusalem, to Rome,
to St. James in Compostella, and to other places
in pilgrimage ; for a preservative against tempest
and thunder, against perils and dangers of the sea ;
for a remedy against murrain of cattle, against
pensiveness of the heart, and against all manner
of affliction and tribulation.
And, finally, they extol their masses far above
Christ's passion ; promising many things there
by, which were never promised us by Christ's
passion : As that if a man hear mass, he shall
lack no bodily sustenance that day, nor nothing
necessary for him, nor shall be letted in his jour
ney ; he shall not lose his sight that day, nor die
no sudden death; he shall not wax old in the
time that he heareth mass, nor no wicked spirits
shall have power of him, be he never so wicked
a man, so long as he looketh upon the sacrament.
All these foolish and devilish superstitions the
Papists of their own idle brain have devised of
late years, which devices were never known in
the old church.
And yet they cry out against them that pro- chap.
fess the Gospel, and say that they dissent from .

XVIII.

the church, and would have them to follow the church is to
example of their church. And so would they be folIowed-
gladly do, if the Papists would follow the first
church of the apostles, which was most pure and
incorrupt; but the Papists have clearly varied
from the usage and example of that church, and

254 OF THE OBLATION AND
have invented new devices of their own brains,
and will in no wise content to follow the primi
tive church ; and yet they would have other to
follow their church, utterly varying and dissent
ing from the first most godly church.
But thanks be to the Eternal God, the manner
of the holy communion, which is now set forth
within this realm, is agreeable with the institu
tion of Christ, with St. Paul and the old pri
mitive and apostolick church, with the right
faith of the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross for
our redemption, and with the true doctrine of
our salvation, justification, and remission of all
our sins by that only sacrifice.
a short in- Now resteth nothing but that all faithful sub
struction to
the hoiy jects will gladly receive and embrace the same,
communion. «* O «/
being sorry for their former ignorance; and every
man repenting himself of his offences against
God, and amending the same, may yield himself
wholly to God, to serve and obey Him all the
days of his life, and often to come to the holy
supper, which our Lord and Saviour Christ hath
prepared ; and as he there corporally eateth the
very bread, and drinketh the very wine ; so spi
ritually he may feed of the very flesh and blood
of Jesu Christ his Saviour and Redeemer, re
membering his death, thanking him for his bene
fits, and looking for none other sacrifice at no
priest's hands for remission of his sins, but only
trusting to his sacrifice, which being both the

communion.

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 255
high priest, and also the Lamb of God, prepared
from the beginning to take away the sins of the
world, offered up himself once for ever in a sa
crifice of sweet smell unto his Father, and by
the same paid the ransom for the sins of the
whole world ; who is before us entered into
heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of his Fa
ther, as patron, mediator, and intercessor for us ;
and there hath prepared places for all them
that be lively members of his body, to reign
with him for ever, in the glory of his Father ; to
Whom with Him, and the Holy Ghost, be glory,
honour, and praise, for ever and ever. Amen.

APPENDIX.

No. I.
From bishop Ridley's Replies in the Disputation with
W the Papists, held at Cambridge, June 20, 1549. First
printed in Fox's Acts and Monuments; reprinted in
1688 by Dr. Gilbert Ironside, as some assert; by the
learned and reverend Henry Wharton, according to
others. m
I grant that the old ancient fathers do record, and wit
ness, a certain honour and adoration to be due unto
Christ's body ; but.they speak not of it in the sacrament,
but of it in heaven, at the right hand of the Father ; as
holy Chrysostome saith, Honour thou it, and then eat it.
But that honour may not be given to the outward sign,
but to the body of Christ itself in heaven. For that body
is * there only in a sign virtually, by grace, in the exhi
bition of it in spirit, effect, and faith, to the worthy
receiver of it. For we receive, virtually only, Christ's
body in the sacrament.
, AJso I grant, that there is a mutation of the common
bread and wine spiritually into the Lord's bread and wine,
by the sanctifying of them in the Lord's word. But I
deny that there is any mutation of the substances ; for
there is no change either of the substances, or of
the accidents; but in very deed there do come unto the
, In the Sacrament. S

258 APPENDIX.
bread other accidents, insomuch that whereas the bread
and wine were not sanctified before, nor holy, yet after
wards they are sanctified, and so do receive then another
sort or kind of virtue which they had not before.
Christ dwelleth in us by faith, and by faith we receive
Christ both God and man, both in spirit and flesh ; that
is, this sacramental eating is the mean, and way, whereby
we attain to the spiritual eating; and indeed for the
strengthening of us to the eating of this spiritual food
was this sacrament ordained- And these words, This is
my body, are meant thus : by grace it is my true body, J
but not my fleshly body, as some of you suppose. — b The
circumstances of the Scripture, the analogy and propor
tion of the sacraments, and the testimony of the faith
ful Fathers, ought to rule us in taking the meaning of
the Holy Scripture touching the sacrament [of the Load's
Supper.] But the words ofthe Lord's Supper, the
circumstances of the Scripture, the analogy of the sa
craments, and the sayings of the Fathers, do most effec
tually and plainly prove a figurative speech in the words
of the Lord's Supper. Therefore, a figurative sense
and meaning is specially to be received in these words,
This is my body.
The circumstances of the Scripture : Do this in re
membrance of me. As oft as ye shall eat of this bread,
and drink of this cup, ye shall shew forth the Lord's
death. Let a man prove Mmself, and so eat of this
bread and drink of this cup. They came together to
break bread; and they continued in breaking of bread.
The bread which we break, %c. For we, being many,
are all one bread and one body, $c.
b From the bishop's Answers to the ProposiUons of the Papists, in
the Disputation at Oxford, in April, 1554. First printed in Fox's Acts
and Monuments ; reprinted in 168S.

APPENDIX. 259
- The analogy of the sacraments is necessary ; for if the
sacraments had not some similitude or likeness of the
things whereof they, be sacraments, they could in no wise
be sacraments. . And this simihtdde, in the sacrament of
the Lord's Supper, is taken three maimer of ways. The
first consisteth in nourishing ; as you shall read in Rdba-
nus, Cyprian, Austin, Irenaeus, strtd most plainly in Isi
dore out of Bertram. The second, in the uniting and
joining of many into one, as Cyprian teacheth. The
third is a similitude of unlike things ; where, like as the
bread is turned into one body, so we by the fight use of
this sacrament are turned, through faith, into the body
of Christ.
The sayings of thfe Fathers declare it to be a figurative
speech ; as it appeareth in Origen, Tertullian, Chrysos
tome in op'efe impeffecto, Augustine, Basil, Gregory
Ndssianzeti, Hilary, and most plainly of all, ih Bertram.
Moreover the sayings and places of all the fathers, whose
names I have .* before recited against the assertion ofthe
first proposition, do quite overthrow Transubstantiation.
But of all, most evidently and plainly, Irerweus, Origen,
Cyprian, Chrysostome to Cassarius the monk, Augustine
against Adamantius, Gelasius, Cyril, Epiphanius, Chry
sostome again on the 20th of Matthew, Rabanus, Da
mascene, and Bertram. — Finally, with Bertram, I con
fess that Christ's body is in the sacrament in this respect ;
namely, as he writeth: because there is in it the spirit of
Christ ; that is, the power of the Word of God, which
c Namely, against the assertion, that in the sacrament ofthe altar,
by the virtue of God's Word spoken of the priest, the natural hody of
Christ, born of the Virgin Mary, and hit natural blood, is really pre
sent under the forms of bread and mine. Against this assertion, the
fathers, whom Ridley adduces, besides those named in the preceding
and subsequent sentences above, are, Justin, Irenaut, Eusebius Emis
senus, Athanasius, Jerome, Vigilius, and Fulgentius.
%2

260 APPENDIX.
not only feedeth the soul, but also cleanseth it. — I sup
pose it may [now] appear unto all men how far we are
from that opinion, whereof some go about falsely to
slander us to the world, saying, we teach that the godly
and faithful should receive nothing else at the Lord's
Table but a figure of the body of Christ.
11 1 answer also to this proposition, [that in the mass
IS THE LIVELY SACRIFICE OF THE CHURCH, PROPITIABLE
AND AVAILABLE FOR THE SINS AS WELL OF THE QUICK AS
of the dead,] that being taken in such sense as the
words seem to import, it is not only erroneous, but withal i
so much to the derogation and defacing of the death and
passion of Christ, that I judge it may and ought most
worthily to be counted wicked and blasphemous against
the most precious blood of our Saviour Christ.
ARGUMENTS CONFIRMING THIS ANSWER.
No sacrifice ought to be done, but where the priest is
meet to offer the same.
All other priests are unmeet to offer sacrifice propi
tiatory for sin, save only Christ.
Therefore, no other priests ought to sacrifice for sin,
but Christ alone.
The second part of my argument is thus proved.
No honour in God's Church ought to be taken, where
unto a man is not called as Aaron.
It is a great honour in God's Church to sacrifice for
sin. Therefore, no man ought to sacrifice for sin, but only
they which are called.
But only Christ is called to that honour.
Therefore, no other priest but Christ ought to sacri
fice for sin. " From the bishop's Answers, &c. as before.

APPENDIX. 261
That no man is called to this degree of honour but
Christ alone, it is evident; for there are but two only
orders of priesthood allowed in the Word of God;
namely, the order of Aaron and the order of Melchise-
dech . But now the order of Aaron is come to an end,
by reason that it was unprofitable and weak ; and of the
order of Melchisedech there is but one priest alone, even
Christ the Lord, who hath a priesthood that cannot pass
to any other. ANOTHER ARGUMENT.
That thing is vain, and to no effect, where no necessity
is wherefore it is done.
To offer up any more sacrifice propiatory for the quick
and the dead there is no necessity ; for Christ our Sa
viour did that fully and perfectly, once for all.
Therefore, to do the same in the mass, it is in vain.
ANOTHER ARGUMENT.
After that eternal redemption is found and obtained,
there needeth no more daily offering for the same.
But Christ, coming an high bishop, &c. found and ob
tained for us eternal redemption.
Therefore, there needeth now no more daily oblation
for the sins of the quick and the dead.
ANOTHER ARGUMENT.
All remission of sins cometh only by shedding of
blood. In the mass there is no shedding of blood.
Therefore, in the mass there is no remission of sins ;
and so it followeth also that there is no propitiatory sacri
fice. ANOTHER ARGUMENT.
In the mass the paSsion of Christ is not in verity, but
in a mystery, representing the same; yea even there,
where the Lord's Supper is duly ministered.

262 APPENDIX.
But where Christ suffereth not, there is he not offered
in verity: for the Apostle saith, Not that he might offer
up himself oftentimes ; for then must he have suffered
oftentimes since the beginning of the world. Now where
Christ is not offered, there is no propitiatory sacrifice.
Therefore, in the mass there is no propitiatory sacri*
fice. For Christ appeared once in the latter end of the
world, to put sin to flight by the offering up of himself.
And as it is appointed to all men that they shall once die',
and then cometh the judgment; even so Christ was once
offered to take away the sins of many. And unto them
that look for him sliall he appear again without sin unto
salvation. ANOTHER ARGUMENT.
Where there is any sacrifice that can make the comers
thereunto perfect, there ought men to cease from offer
ing any more expiatory and propitiatory sacrifices.
But in the New Testament there is one only sacrifice
now already long since offered, which is able to make the
comers thereunto perfect for ever.
Therefore, in the New Testament they ought to cease
from offering any more propitiatory sacrifice.
SENTENCES OF THE SCRIPTURE TENDING TO THE SAME
END AND PURPOSE, OUT OF WHICH ALSO MAY BE GA
THERED OTHER MANIFEST ARGUMENTS FOR MORE CON
FIRMATION THEREOF.
By the which will, saith the Apostle, we are sanctified
by the offering up of the body qf Jesus Christ, once for
all. And in the same place, But this man, after that he
had offered one sacrifice for sin, sitteth for ever at the
right hand of God, Sfc, For with one offering hath he
made perfect for ever them that are sanctified, and by
Mmself hath he purged our sins. I beseech you to mark

APPENDIX. 263
these words, by himself; the which, well weighed, will',
without doubt, cease all controversy. The Apostle
plainly- denieth any other sacrifice to remain for him that
trea'deth under his feet the blood of the Testament by
the which be was made holy. Christ will not be crucified
again ; he will not his death to be had in derision. He
hath reconciled us in the body of his flesh. Mark, I be
seech you, he saith not in the mystery qf his body, but
rathe body of his flesh. If any man sin, we have an ad
vocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and
he is the propitiation for our sins ; not for ours only, but
for ihe sins ofthe whole world.
I know that all these places of the Scripture are
avoided by two manner of subtil shifts. The one is by
the distinction of the bloody and unbloody sacrifice ; as
though our unbloody sacrifice of the Church were any
other than the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, than
a commemoration, a showing forth, and a sacramental
representation of that one only bloody sacrifice offered
up once for all. The other is by depraving and wresting
the sayings of the ancient Fathers unto a strange kind of
sense, as the Fathers themselves, indeed, never meant.
For what the meaning of the Fathers was, is evident by
that which St. Augustin writeth in his Epistle to Boni
face, and in the 83d chapter of his ninth book against
Faustus, the Manichee ; besides many other places :
likewise by Eusebius Emissene, Cyprian, Chrysostome,
Fulgentius, Bertram, and others ; which do wholly con
cord and agree together in this unity in the Lord ; that
the redemption, once made in verity for the salvation of
man, continueth in full effect for ever, and worketh with
out ceasing unto the end of the world ; that the sacrifice,
once offered, cannnot be consumed; that the Lord's
death and passion is as effectual, the virtue of that blood

264 APPENDIX.
once shed, as fresh at this day for the washing away of
sins, as it was even the same day that it flowed out of the
side of our blessed Saviour ; and finally, that the whole '
substance of our sacrifice, which is frequented of the
Church in the Lord's Supper, consisteth in prayers,
praise, and giving of thanks, and in remembering and
showing forth of that sacrifice once offered upon the
altar of the cross ; that the same might continually be had
in reverence by mystery, which once only, and no more,
was offered for the price of our redemption.

APPENDIX. 265

No. II.
m--
From bishop Hooper's Brief and Clear Confession qf
the Christian Faith, first printed in 1550, again ih
158f, and in 1584.
i I believe that the holy sacrament of the Supper is a
holy and outward ceremony, instituted by Jesus Christ in
the Gospel, a day before his death, in the nature and
substance of bread and wine, in remembrance and for a
memorial of his death and passion, having and contain
ing in it a promise of the remission of sins. By this
sacrament we are indeed made partakers of the body
and blood of Jesus Christ, and are therewith nourished
and fed in the house of the Lord, which is his Church,
and after that into the same we are entered through
Baptism. The same ought to be given and ministered
unto all under both the kinds, according to the ordinance
and commandment of Christ; for the altering whereof
none ought to be so hardy as to attempt any thing.
I believe that in the holy sacrament these signs and
badges are not changed in any point, but the same do
remain'wholly in their nature ; that is to say, the bread
is not changed and transubstantiated (as the fond Papists
and false doctors do teach, deceiving the poor,) into the
body of Jesus Christ, neither the wine transubstantiated
into his blood ; but the bread remaineth still bread, and
the wine remaineth still wine, every one in its proper and
first nature. For the words that Christ spake to his dis
ciples in giving them the bread, saying, This is my body,
I understand and believe to be spoken by a figurative

266 APPENDIX.
manner of speech, called metonymia, which is a manner
of speaking very common in the Scriptures ; as the same
was understood and also declared by the writing of the
holy fathers and doctors of the Church, Irenaeus, Cy
prian, Tertullian, Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostome,
and other like, who lived before the CouncU of Lateran ;
when it was concluded that the bread was transubstan
tiated into the body of Christ, and the wine into his
blood; and then was it given forth as an article of faith,
to the great dishonour of God, and to the great slander
of all the Church.
I believe that all this sacrament consisteth in the use
Jiheyeof ; so that without the right use the bread and
wine in nothing differ from other common bread and wine
that are comtnonly used ; and therefore do nof beheve
that the; body: of Christ can be contained, -bid, or en
closed, in the bread, Under the.' bread, or with the
bread ; neither the bipod in the wine, under the wise, or
with the wine. But I believe and confess the very body
pf Christ to be in heavgn, on the right hand of the Fa
ther ; and that always and as often as we u§e this bread
and wine, according to the ordinance and institution of
Chrisfy we do verily and indeed, receive his body and
blood. ~ r> fcr " -_. '¦:--" : '.
I believe that this Teoejvklg is mt done carnally- oj
bodily, but spiritually, through a true *md lively faith;
this is tq say, the body and blefod qf- Christ are not gwert
tq the mouth and belly for the nourishing of thg body,
but unto flur fa^hfor the nourishing of the spirit,- and
hjward man, unto eternal hfe. And for that~e»us.e we
haye no need that Ghrist should come fi-om heaven to uSi
but that we should ascend unto him, lifting up our hearts
through a lively faith on high unto the right hand, of th*i
Father, tyhere'Chrjst sitteth, from Vhienee we wait fof

APPENDIX. 267
our redemption ; and we must not seek for Christ in these
bodily elements.
I believe that Jesus Christ, by the sacrifice of his body
which he offered upon the tree of the cross, hath de
faced and destroyed sin, death, and the devil, with all his
kingdom ; and hath wholly performed the work of our
salvation ; and hath abolished and made an end of all
other sacrifices. So that from thenceforth there is none
other propitiatory sacrifice, either for the living or the
dead, to be looked for, or sought for, than the same.
For by this one only oblation hath he consecrated for ever
all those that are sanctified.
I beheve that the Holy Supper of the Lord is not a
Sacrifice, but only a remembrance and commemoration of
this holy sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Therefore, it ought
not to be worshipped as God, neither as Christ therein
contained, who must be worshipped in faith only, without
all corruptible elements.
Likewise, I believe and confess that the Popish mass
is the invention and ordinance of man, a sacrifice of anti
christ, and a forsaking of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ,
that is to say, of his death and passion ; and that it is a
foul and infected sepulchre, which hideth and covereth
the merit of the blood of Christ ; and therefore ought
the mass to be abolished, and the Holy Supper of the
Lord to be restored and set in its perfection again.

268 APPENDIX.

No. III.

'*™

From bishop Jeremy Taylor's Dissuasive from Popery,
chap. 2. sect. 12.
If their [the Papists'] doctrines, as they are expli
cated by their practice and the commentaries of their
greatest doctors, do make their disciples guilty of
idolatry ; there is not any thing greater to deter men
from them, than that danger to their souls, which is
imminent over them, upon that account.
Their worshipping of images we have already re
proved upon the account of its novelty, and innovation,
in Christian religion. But that it is against good life ; a
direct breach of the second commandment; an act of
idolatry, as much as the heathens themselves were
guilty of, in relation to the second commandment ; is but
too evident by the doctrines of their own leaders.
The same also is the case in their worshipping the
consecrated bread and wine. Of which how far they
will be excused before God by their ignorant pretensions
and suppositions, we know not ; but they hope to save
themselves harmless by saying, that they believe the
bread*- to be their Saviour, and that if they did not
believe so, they would not do so. We believe^that they
say true ; but we are afraid that this will no more excuse
them, than it will excuse those who worship the sun,
and moon, and the queen of heaven, whom they would

APPENDIX. 269
not worship, if they did not believe to have divinity in
them. And it may be observed, that they are very fond
of that persuasion, by which they are led into this wor
ship. The error might be some excuse, if it were pro
bable, or if there were much temptation to it ; but when
they choose this persuasion, and have nothing for it but
a tropical expression of Scripture, which rather than not
believe in the natural, useless, and impossible sense, they
will defy all their own reason, and four of the five ope
rations of their soul, seeing, smelling, tasting, and feel
ing; and contradict the plain doctrine of the ancient
Church, before they can consent to believe this error,
THAT.BREAD IS CHANGED INTO GoD, AND THE PRIEST CAN
make his Maker; — we have too much cause to fear,
that the error is too gross to admit an excuse. And it
is hard to suppose it invincible and involuntary, because
it is so hard, and so untempting, and so unnatural, to
admit the error. We do desire that God may find an
excuse for it, and that they would not. But this we are
most sure of, that they might, if they pleased, find many
excuses, or rather just causes, for not giving divine ho
nour to the consecrated elements ; because there are so
many contingencies in the whole conduct of this affair,
and we are so uncertain of the priest's intention, and we
can never be made certain, that there is not in the whole
order of causes any invalidity in the consecration ; and it
is so impossible that any man should be sure that here,
and now, and this bread is transubstantiated, and is really
the natural body of Christ ; that it were fit to omit the
giving God's due to that which they do not know to be
any thing but a piece of bread ; and it cannot consist
with holiness, and our duty to God, certainly to give

270 APPENDIX.
divine worship to that thing, which, though their doc
trine were true, they cannot know certainly to have a
divine being* , 
e We hope it may be sufficient to say, that what.thb
Church of Rome teaches of Transubstantiatj$>n,.is
absolutely impossible, -and implies contradictions
very-many, to the belief of which no faith can
oblige us, and no reason can endure. . For. Christ's
body being in heaven, glorious, spiritual, and impassible*
cannot be broken. And since, by the Roman doctrme j
•frothing is broken but that which cannot be broken, that
is, the colour, the taste, and other accidents of the el&»
ments ; yet if they could be broken, since the accidents
of bread and wine are not the substance of- Christ's
body and blood, it is certain that on the altar Christ's
body naturally, and properly, cannot be broken. And
since they say that every consecrated wafer is Christ's
whole body, and yet this wafer is not that wafer ; there
fore either this, or that, is not Christ's body; or else
Christ hath two bodies, for there are two wafers. But
when Christ instituted the. sacrament, and said, This is
iny body which is broken ; because at that time Christ's
body was not broken naturally and properly, the very
words of institution do force us to understand the sacra
ment in a sense not naturali but spiritual, that is, truly
sacramental. And all this is besides the plain demon
strations of sense, which tells us it is bread and it is
wine naturally as much after as before consecration. And
after all, the natural sense is such as our Blessed Saviour
reproved in the men of Capernaum, arid called them to a
spiritual understanding; the natural sense being not
¦ From the Dissuasive, chap. i. sect. 5.

APPENDIX. 271
only unreasonable and impossible, but also to no purpose
of the spirit, or any ways perfective of the soul ; as
hath been clearly demonstrated by many learned men
against the fond hypothesis of the Church of Rome in
this article.

the END.

LONDON!
PRINTED BY R. GILD&KT,
»T. john's-square.