was broken and crucified for them; and is to them spiritually and effectually given, and of them spiritually and fruitfully taken and eaten, to their spiritual and heavenly comfort, sustentation and nourishment of their souls, as the bread is of their bodies? And what would you require more? Can there be any greater comfort to a christian man than this? Is here nothing else but bare tokens? But yet importune adversaries, and such as be wilful and obstinate, will never be satisfied, but quarrel farther, saying, What of all this? Here be a great many of gay words framed together, but to what purpose? For all be but signs and tokens as concerning the bread. But how can he be taken for a good christian man, that thinketh that Christ did ordain his sacramental signs and tokens in vain, without effectual grace and operation? For so might we as well say, that the water in baptism is a bare token, and hath no warrant signed by scripture for any apparel at all: for the scripture speaketh not of any promise made to the receiving of a token or figure only. And so may be concluded, after your manner of reasoning, that in baptism is no spiritual operation in deed, because that washing in water in itself is but a token. But to express the true effect of the sacraments: As the washing outwardly in water is not a vain token, but teacheth such a washing as God worketh inwardly, in them that duly receive the same; so likewise is not the bread a vain token, but sheweth and preacheth to the godly receiver, what God worketh in him by his almighty power secretly and invisibly. And therefore as the bread is outwardly eaten indeed in the Lord's supper, so is the very body of Christ inwardly by faith eaten indeed of all them that come thereto in such sort as they ought to do, which eating nourisheth them into everlasting life. And this eating hath a warrant signed by Christ himself in the sixth of John, A warrant. where Christ saith: "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath life John vi. everlasting." But they that to the outward eating of the bread, join not thereto an inward eating of Christ by faith, they have no warrant by scripture at all, but the bread and wine to them be vain, nude, and bare tokens. 11. And where you say that scripture expresseth no matter of signification [of] special effect in the sacraments of bread and wine, if your eyes were not blinded with popish errors, frowardness, and self-love, ye might see in the twenty-second of Luke, where Christ himself expresseth a matter of signification, saying: Hoc facite in mei commemo- Luke xxii. rationem: "Do this in remembrance of me." And St Paul likewise, 1 Cor. xi., 1 Cor. xi. bath the very same thing; which is a plain and direct answer to that same your last question, whereupon you triumph at your pleasure, as though the victory were all yours. For ye say, when this question is demanded of me, What to signify? "Here must be a sort of good words framed without scripture." But here St Paul answereth your question in express words, that it is the Lord's death that shall be signified, 1 Cor. xi. represented, and preached in these holy mysteries, until his coming again. And this remembrance, representation and preaching of Christ's death, cannot be without special effect, except you will say that Christ worketh not effectually with his word and sacraments. And St Paul expresseth the effect, when he saith: "The bread which we 1 Cor. x. break is the communion of Christ's body." But by this place and such like in your book, ye disclose yourself to all men of judgment, either how wilful in your opinion, or how slender in knowledge of the scriptures you be. WINCHESTER. teaching of And therefore like as the teaching is new, to say it is an only figure, or only signi- * A new fieth; so the matter of signification must be newly devised, and new wine have new bottles, only figure. and be thoroughly new, after fifteen hundred and fifty years, in the very year of jubilee (as faith be they were wont to call it) to be newly erected and builded in Englishmen's hearts. CANTERBURY. How can a called catho- now. It seemeth that you be very desirous to abuse the people's ears with this term, "new," and with the " year of jubilee," as though the true doctrine of the sacrament by me taught should be but a new doctrine, and yours old (as the Jews slandered Mark i. [CRANMER.] 2 the doctrine of Christ by the name of newness); or else that in this year of jubilee, you would put the people in remembrance of the full remission of sin, which they were wont to have at Rome this year, that they might long to return to Rome for pardons again, as the children of Israel longed to return to Egypt for the flesh that they were wont to have there. But all men of learning and judgment know well enough that this your doctrine is no older than the bishop of Rome's usurped supremacy, which though it be of good age by number of years, yet is it new to Christ and his word. If there were such darkness in the world now, as hath been in that world which you note for old, the people might drink new wine of the whore of Babylon's cup, until they were as drunk with hypocrisy and superstition, as they might well stand upon their legs, and no man once say, black is their eye. But now, (thanks be to God!) the light of his word so shineth in the world, that your drunkenness in this year of jubilee is espied, so that you cannot erect and build your popish kingdom any longer in Englishmen's hearts, without your own scorn, shame and confusion. The old popish bottles must needs burst, when the new wine of God's holy word is poured into them. 12. to discern truth from falsehood. A lesson of Sclomon's judgment. WINCHESTER. Which new teaching, whether it proceedeth from the spirit of truth or no, shall more plainly appear by such matter as this author uttereth wherewith to impugn the true faith taught hitherto. For among many other proofs, whereby truth after much travail in con* Tokens how tention at the last prevaileth and hath victory, there is none more notable, than when the very adversaries of truth (who pretend, nevertheless, to be truth's friends) do by some evident untruth bewray themselves. According whereunto, when the two women contended before king • 1 Kings iii. Solomon for the child yet alive, Solomon discerned the true natural mother from the other, by their speeches and sayings; which in the very1 mother were ever conformable unto nature, and in the other, at the last evidently against nature. The very true mother spake always like herself, and never disagreed from the truth of nature, but rather than the child should be killed (as Solomon threatened when he called for a sword) required2 it to be given whole alive to the other woman. The other woman that was not the true mother cared more for victory than for the child, and therefore spake that was in nature an evidence that she lied calling herself mother, and saying, "Let it be divided," which no3 natural mother could say of her own child. Whereupon proceedeth Solomon's most wise judgment, which hath this lesson in it,- -ever where contention is, on that part to be the truth, where all sayings and doings appear uniformly consonant to the truth pretended; and on what side a notable lie appeareth, the rest Truth need- may be judged to be after the same sort. For truth needeth no aid of lies, craft, or sleight, wherewith to be supported or1 maintained. So as in the entreating of the truth of this high and ineffable mystery of the sacrament, on what part thou, reader, seest craft, sleight, shift, obliquity, or in any one point an open manifest lie, there thou mayest consider, whatsoever pretence be loveth simpli- made of truth, yet the victory of truth not to be there intended, which loveth simplicity, plainness, direct speech, without admixtion of shift or colour. eth no aid of lies. • Truth city and plainness. The church of Rome is CANTERBURY. If either division or confusion may try the true mother, the wicked church of not the true Rome (not in speech only, but in all other practices) hath long gone about to oppress, eator of the confound and divide the true and lively faith of Christ, shewing herself not to be the catholic faith. * Absurda et falsa. true mother, but a most cruel stepmother, dividing, confounding and counterfeiting all things at her pleasure, not contrary to nature only, but chiefly against the plain words of scripture. For here in this one matter of controversy between you, Smith, and me, you divide against nature the accidents of bread and wine from their substances, and the substance of Christ from his accidents; and contrary to the scripture you divide our eternal life, attributing unto the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross only the beginning thereof, and the continuance thereof you ascribe unto the sacrifice of popish priests. In the very true mother, 1551.] [2 Required rather, 1551.] [3 No true natural mother, 1551.] And in the sacraments you separate Christ's body from his spirit, affirming that in And against scriptogether the natural And can your church be 'taken for the true natural mother of the true doctrine The speaking of Christ, that thus unnaturally speaketh, divideth, and confoundeth Christ's body? If Solomon were alive, he would surely give judgment that Christ should be taken from that woman, that speaketh so unnaturally, and so unlike his mother, and be given to the true church of the faithful, that never digressed from the truth of God's word, nor from the true speech of Christ's natural body, but speak according to the same, that Christ's body, although it be inseparable, annexed unto his Godhead, yet it hath all the natural conditions and properties of a very man's body, occupying one place, and being of a certain height and measure, having all members distinct and set in good order and proportion. And yet the same body joined unto his divinity, is not only the beginning, but also the continuance and consummation of our eternal and celestial life. By him we be regenerated, by him we be fed and nourished from time to time, as he hath taught us most certainly to believe by his holy word and sacraments, which remain in their former substance and nature, as Christ doth in his, without mixtion or confusion. This is the true and natural speaking in this matter, like a true natural mother, and like a true and right believing christian man. of the true mother. 13. mother of faith. Marry, of that doctrine which you teach, I cannot deny but the church of Rome Rome is the is the mother thereof, which in scripture is called Babylon, because of commixtion the papistical or confusion: which in all her doings and teachings so doth mix and confound error with truth, superstition with religion, godliness with hypocrisy, scripture with traditions, that she sheweth herself alway uniform and consonant, to confound all the doctrine of Christ, yea, Christ himself, shewing herself to be Christ's stepmother, and the true natural mother of antichrist. And for the conclusion of your matter here, I doubt not but the indifferent reader shall easily perceive what spirit moved you to write your book. For seeing that your book is so full of crafts, sleights, shifts, obliquities, and manifest untruths, it may be easily judged, that whatsover pretence be made of truth, yet nothing is less intended, than that truth should either have victory, or appear and be seen at all. WINCHESTER. The name of the author great, wherewith to put And that thou, reader, mightest by these marks judge of that is here entreated by the author against the most blessed sacrament, I shall note certain evident and manifest untruths, which this author is not afraid to utter, (a matter wonderful, considering his dignity, if he that is named be men to the author indeed,) which should be a great stay of contradiction, if anything were to be regarded against the truth. silence. dent untruth. First, I will note unto the reader, how this author termeth the faith of the real and substantial An impu presence of Christ's body and blood in the sacrament to be the faith of the papists: which saying, what foundation it hath, thou mayest consider of that followeth. Luther, that professed openly to abhor all that might be noted popish, defended stoutly the presence of Christ's body in the sacrament, and to be present really and substantially, even with the same words and terms. Bucer, that is here in England, in a solemn work that he writeth upon the Gospels, professeth the same faith of the real and substantial presence of Christ's body in the sacrament, which he affirmeth to have been believed of all the church of Christ from the beginning hitherto. The faith of the sacra catechism im Justus Jonas hath translated a catechism out of Dutch into Latin, taught in the city of ment in the Nuremberg in Germany, where Hosiander is chief preacher, in which catechism they be accounted proveth this for no true christian men, that deny the presence of Christ's body in the sacrament. The words trine now. author's doc 14. * Erasmus commendeth to the world the sacra ment. 66 really” and “substantially" be not expressed as they be in Bucer, but the word "truly” is there, and, as Bucer saith, that is, substantially. Which catechism was translated into English in this author's name about two years past. Philip Melancthon, no papist nor priest, writeth a very wise epistle in this matter to Ecolampadius, and signifying soberly his belief of the presence of Christ's very body in the sacrament; and to prove the same to have been the faith of the old church from the beginning, allegeth the sayings of Irene, Cyprian, Chrysostom, Hilary, Cyril, Ambrose, Theophylact, which authors he esteemeth both worthy credit, and to affirm the presence of Christ's body in the sacrament plainly without ambiguity. He answereth to certain places of St Augustine, and saith all Ecolampadius' enterprise to depend upon conjectures, and arguments applausible to idle wits, with much more wise matter, as that epistle doth purport, which is set out in a book of a good volume among the other epistles of Ecolampadius, so as no man may suspect anything counterfeit in the matter. 66 One Hippinus, or Epinus, of Hamburgh, greatly esteemed among the Lutherans, hath written a book to the king's majesty that now is, published abroad in print, wherein much inveighing against the church of Rome, doth in the matter of the sacrament write as followeth : 'Eucharistia is called by itself a sacrifice, because it is a remembrance of the true sacrifice offered upon the cross, and that in it is dispensed the true body and true blood of Christ, which is plainly the same in essence, that is to say substance, and the same blood in essence signifying, though the manner of presence be spiritual, yet the substance of that is present, is the same with that in heaven." Erasmus, noted a man that durst and did speak of all abuses in the church liberally, taken for no papist, and among us so much esteemed, as his paraphrases of the gospel is ordered to be had in every church of this realm, declareth in divers of his works most manifestly his the work of faith of the presence of Christ's body in the sacrament, and by his epistles recommendeth to Algerus upon the world the work of Algerus in that matter of the sacrament, whom he noteth well exercised in the scriptures, and the old doctors, Cyprian, Hilary, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Basil, Christ hidden Chrysostom. And for Erasmus' own judgment, he saith we have an inviolable foundation of Christ's own words, “This is my body,” rehearsed again by St Paul: he saith further, the body of Christ is hidden under those signs; and sheweth also upon what occasions men have repent, that erred in reading the old fathers, and wisheth that they which have followed Berengarius in garius' error. error would also follow him in repentance. I will not, reader, encumber thee with more words of Erasmus. * The body of under the signs. * Erasmus would all to follow Beren Peter Martyr doth with the faith of the sacrament. An issue. Peter Martyr, of Oxford, taken for no papist, in a treatise he made of late of the sacrament, lies impugn which is now translated into English, sheweth how as touching the real presence of Christ's body, it is not only the sentence of the papists, but of other also; whom the said Peter nevertheless doth with as many shifts and lies as he may impugn for that point, as well as he doth the papists for transubstantiation, but yet he doth not, as this author doth, impute that faith of the real presence of Christ's body and blood to the only papists. Whereupon, reader, here I join with the author an issue, that the faith of the real and substantial presence of Christ's body and blood in the sacrament is not the device of papists, or their faith only, as this author doth considerately slander it to be, and desire therefore that according to Solomon's judgment this may serve for a *This author note and mark, to give sentence1 for the true mother of the child. For what should this mean, so without shame openly and untruly to call this faith popish, but only with the envious word of pists oppress papist to overmatch the truth? would with the envious words of pa the truth. 15. CANTERBURY. This explication of the true catholic faith noteth to the reader certain evident and manifest untruths uttered by me (as he saith), which I also pray thee, good reader, to note for this intent, that thou mayest take the rest of my sayings for true, which he noteth not for false, and doubtless they should not have escaped noting as well as the other, if they had been untrue, as he saith the other be. And if I can prove 2 these things also true, which he noteth for manifest and evident untruths, then me fest untruths. utter, as he saith. The first is, that the faith of the real presence is the faith of Four mani. the papists. Another is, that these words, My flesh is verily meat," I do translate thus3: “My flesh is very meat." Another is, that I handle not sincerely the words of St Augustine, speaking of the eating of Christ's body. The fourth is, that by these words, This is my body," Christ intendeth not to make the bread his body,. but to signify that such as receive that worthily be members of Christ's body. These be the heinous and manifest errors which I have uttered. truth, that the real pre faith of the Mine issue. As touching the first, that the faith of the real and substantial presence of Christ's The first unbody and blood in the sacrament is the faith of the papists, this is no untruth, but a the faith of most certain truth. For you confess yourself, and defend in this book, that it is your sence is the faith: and so do likewise all the papists. And here I will make an issue with you, papists. that the papists believe the real, corporal, and natural presence of Christ's body and blood in the sacrament. Answer me directly without colour, whether it be so or not. If they believe not so, then they believe as I do, for I believe not so: and then let them openly confess that my belief is true. And if they believe so, then say I true when I say that it is the papists' faith. And then is my saying no manifest untruth, but a mere truth; and so the verdict in the issue passeth upon my side by your own confession. 6 Bucer. And here the reader may note well, that once again you be fain to fly for succour unto M. Luther, Bucer, Jonas, Melancthon, and Epinus, whose names' were wont Luther. to be so hateful unto you, that you could never with patience abide the hearing of Jonas. them and yet their sayings help you nothing at all. For although these men in Epinus. this and many other things have in times past, and yet peradventure some do (the veil of old darkness not clearly in every point removed from their eyes), agree with the papists in part of this matter, yet they agree not in the whole: and therefore it is true nevertheless, that this faith which you teach is the papists' faith. For if you would conclude, that this is not the papists' faith, because Luther, Bucer, and other, believe in many things as the papists do, then by the same reason you may conclude that the papists believe not that Christ was born, crucified, died, rose again, and ascended into heaven, which things Luther, Bucer and the other, constantly both taught and believed: and yet the faith of the real presence may be called rather the faith of the papists than of the other, not only because the papists do so believe, but specially for that the papists were the first authors and inventors of that faith, and have been the chief spreaders abroad of it, and were the cause that other were blinded with the same error. 8 4 But here may the reader note one thing by the way, that it is a foul clout that you would refuse to wipe your nose withal, when you take such men to prove your matter, whom you have hitherto accounted most vile and filthy heretics. And yet now you be glad to fly to them for succour, whom you take for God's enemies, and to whom you have ever had a singular hatred. You pretend that you stay yourself upon ancient writers: and why run you now to such men for aid, as be not only new, but also as you think, be evil and corrupt in judgment; and to such as think you, by your writings and doings, as rank a papist as is any at Rome? And yet not one of these new men (whom you allege) do thoroughly agree with your doctrine, either in transubstantiation, or in carnal eating and drinking of Christ's flesh and blood, or in the sacrifice of Christ in the mass, nor yet thoroughly in the real presence. For they affirm not such a gross presence of Christ's body, as expelleth the substance of bread, and is made by conversion thereof into the substance of Christ's body, and is eaten with the mouth. And yet if they did, the ancient authors that were next unto Christ's time (whom I have alleged) may not give place unto these new men in this matter, although they were men of excellent learning and judgment, howsoever it liketh you to accept them. But I may conclude that your faith in the sacrament is popish, until such time as you can prove that your doctrine of transubstantiation and of the real presence was [3 I translate thus, 1551.] [* Flee, 1551.] [ Martin Luther, 1551.] [ Whose names before were wout, 1551.] [7 Because that Luther, 1551.] [8 But for that specially, that the papists, 1551.] Melancthon. 16. |