Obrazy na stronie

The especial design of Cranmer in these passages, as indeed throughout his whole Answer, may perhaps be best described in his own words at the commencement of his argument, where he says:—

"This therefore shall be mine issue: that as no scripture, so no ancient author known and approved, hath in plain terms your transubtantiation; nor that the body and blood of Christ be really, corporally, naturally, and carnally under the forms of bread and wine; nor that evil men do eat the very body and drink the very blood of Christ; nor that Christ is offered every day by the priest a sacrifice propitiatory for sin. Wherefore by your own description and rule of a catholic faith, your doctrine and teaching in these your articles cannot be good and catholic, except you can find it in plain terms in the scripture and old catholic doctors; which when you do, I will hold up my hand at the bar, and say, 'guilty,' and if you cannot, then it is reason that you do the like, per legem talionis."Ans. to Gardiner. Book i. p. 13.

And again, at p. 152, his language is :

And as for pleading of those words, 'really,' 'corporally,' 'sensibly,' and 'naturally,' they be your own terms, and the terms wherein resteth the whole contention between you and me; and should you be offended because I speak of those terms? It appeareth now that you be loth to hear of those words, and would very gladly have them put in silence, and so should the variance between you and me be clearly ended. For it you will confess, that the body of Christ is not in the Sacrament really, corporally,

after at his table without mysteries. For he said, 'of the fruit of the vine;" which surely bringeth forth no water, but wine.'

These words of Chrysostom 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 consecration, as the papists feign. And yet more plainly St. Chrysostom declareth this matter in another place, saying: 'the bread before it be sanctified is called bread, but when it is sanctified by the means of the priest, it is delivered from the name of bread, and is exalted to the name of the Lord's body, although the nature of bread doth still remain.

"The nature of bread,' said 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 subtance.""

And p. 286 where, having quoted two passages from St. Chrysostom ad Cæsarium Monachum. "When thou speakest of God," &c. and "Wherefore Christ is both God and man" &c., he remarks "These words of Chrysostom 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 signify unto the godly eaters of that bread, that they spiritually eat the supernatural bread of the body of Christ, WHO SPIRITUALLY IS THERE PRESENT, and dwelleth in them, and they in him, although COPORALLY he sitteth in heaven at the right hand of his Father."


sensibly, and naturally, then you and I shall shake hands, and be both earnest friends of the truth.

"And yet one thing you do here confess, (which is worthy to be noted and had in memory,) that you read not in any old author, that the body of Christ is really and sensibly in the Sacrament. And hereunto I add, that none of them say, that he is in the bread and wine corporally nor naturally. No, never no papist said, that Christ's body is in the Sacrament naturally nor carnally, but you alone, (who be the first author of this gross error, which Smith himself condemneth, and denieth that ever Christian man so taught,) although some say that it is there 'really,' some 'substantially,' and some sensibly.'"


Having now produced these statements of Cranmer (perhaps at needless length except for the desire of giving the context fairly) I proceed to add a few passages from some of his contemporaries which may serve to illustrate further that (as I argued in the Letter) the physical Presence held to be bound up with Transubstantiation, together with its popular result, was the great point of opposition by the English reforming party. Thus Ridley, in his "Godly talk with Latimer in the Tower," A.D., 1555, mentions among the "things" which he says "do offend me in the Mass" that "the sign is servilely worshipped for the thing signified," (Foxe, Act and Mon. vii. 411) thus admitting here as elsewhere (see pp. 58 and 60) that adoration is due to "the thing signified."

So, too, in his Examination at Oxford, Sep. 30, 1555, in part quoted at p. 61, he thus writes touching the Sacramental change due to Consecration.


Always my protestation reserved, I answer thus; that in the Sacrament is a certain change, in that, that bread, which was before common bread, is now made a lively presentation of Christ's body, and not only a figure, but effectuously representeth his body, that even as the mortal body was nourished by that visible bread, so is the internal soul fed with the heavenly food of Christ's body, which the eyes of faith see, as the bodily eyes see only bread. Such a sacramental mutation I grant to be in the bread and wine, which truly is no small change, but such a change as no mortal man can make, but only the omnipotency of Christ's word."-Foxe, vii. 528.

The next example is from a very different class of persons,

[ocr errors]

viz., two "husbandmen called "John Simson and John Ardely, of the parish of Wigborough the Great in Essex," who where articled by Bishop Bonner, May 22, 1555; two of his accusations were these :

"IV. Item, that albeit it be true, that in the Sacrament of the Altar there is in substance the very body and blood of Christ under the forms of bread and wine, and albeit that it be so believed, taught, and preached undoubtedly in the said Church of Rome, and all the other Churches aforesaid, yet thou hast not so believed, nor dost so believe; but, contrariwise, thou hast and dost believe firmly and stedfastly that there is not in the said Sacrament of the altar, under the said form of bread and wine, the very substance of Christ's body and blood, but that there is only the substance of material and common bread and wine, with the form thereof; and that the said material and common bread and wine are only the signs and tokens of Christ's body and blood, and by faith to be received, only for a remembrance of Christ's passion and death, without any such substance of Christ's body and blood at all.

"V. Item, that thou hast believed and taught, and thou hast openly spoken, and to thy power maintained and defended, and so dost believe, think, maintain and defend, that the very true receiving and eating of Christ's body and blood, is only to take material and common bread, and to break it, and to distribute it amongst the people; remembering thereby the passion and death of Christ only."

To these charges they replied thus:

"To the fourth they answer, that in the Sacrament, commonly called the Sacrament of the altar, there is very bread and very wine, not altered or changed in substance in any wise; and that he that receiveth the said bread and wine, doth spiritually and by faith only receive the body and blood of Christ; but not the very natural body and blood of Christ in substance under the forms of bread and wine.

"To the fifth they say, they have answered, answering to the said fourth article, and yet nevertheless they say, that they have believed, and do believe, that in the Sacrament of the altar there is not the very substance of Christ's body and blood, but only the substance of the natural bread and wine."-Foxe, vii. 87 and 88.

The last illustration is from "Another Letter written to the Christian Congregation by Robert Samuel" who was "Minister at Barholt [i.e. Bargholt] in Suffolk;" he was burned Aug. 31st, 1555; in this Letter "he declareth the confession of his faith" thus:

"The other Sacrament, which is the Supper and Holy Maunday of our Saviour Christ, whereby the Church of Christ is known, I believe to be a remembrance of Christ's death and passion, a seal and confirmation of his most precious body given unto death, even to the vile death of the cross, wherewith we are redeemed and delivered from sin, death, hell, and damnation. It is a visible word, because it worketh the same thing in the eyes, which the word worketh in the ears. For like as the word is a mean to the ears, whereby the Holy Ghost moveth the heart to believe; so this Sacrament is a mean to the eyes, whereby the Holy Ghost moveth the heart to believe; it preacheth peace between God and man; it exhorteth to mutual love and all godly life, and teacheth to contemn the world for the life to come, when Christ shall appear, which now is in heaven, and nowhere else as concerning his human body.

"Yet do I believe assuredly, that his very body is present in his most holy Supper at the contemplation of our spiritual eyes, and so verily eaten with the mouth of our faith. For as soon as I hear these most comfortable and heavenly words spoken and pronounced by the mouth of the minister, "This is my body which is given for you" when I hear (I say) this heavenly harmony of God's infallible promises and truth, I look not upon, neither do I behold bread and wine; for I take and believe the words simply and plainly, even as Christ spake them. For hearing these words, my senses be rapt and utterly excluded; for faith wholly taketh place, and not flesh, nor the carnal imaginations of our gross, fleshy, and unreverent eating after the manner of our bodily food, which profiteth nothing at all, as Christ witnesseth; but with a sorrowful and wounded conscience, a hungry and thirsty soul, a pure and faithful mind, do fully embrace, behold, and feed, and look upon, that most glorious body of Christ in heaven, at the right hand of God the Father, very God and very man, which was crucified and slain, and his blood shed for our sins, there now making intercession, offering and giving his holy body for me, for my body, for my ransom, for my full price and satisfaction, who is my Christ, and all that he ever hath; and by this spiritual and faithful eating of this lively and heavenly bread, I feel the most sweet sap and taste of the fruits, benefits, and unspeakable joys of Christ's death and passion, fully digested into the bowels of my soul. For my mind is quieted from all worldly adversities, turmoilings, and troubles; my conscience is pacified from sin, death, hell, and damnation; my soul is full, and hath even enough, and will no more; for all things are but loss, vile dung, and dross, vain vanity, for the excellent knowledge-sake of Christ Jesus my Lord and Saviour.

"Thus now is Christ's flesh my very meat indeed, and his blood my very drink indeed, and I am become flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bones. Now I live yet not I, but Christ liveth in me yea, I dwell in him, and he in me; for, through faith in Christ and for Christ's sake we are one, that is, of one consent, mind, and fellowship with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Thus am I

assured and fully persuaded, and on this rock have I builded, by God's grace, my dwelling and resting place for body and soul, life and death. And thus I commit my cause unto Christ the righteous and just Judge, who will another day judge these debates and controversies; whom I humbly beseech to cast his tender and merciful eyes upon the afflicted and ruinous Churches, and shortly to reduce them into a godly and perpetual concord. Amen.

"Thus do I believe, and this is my faith and my understanding in Christ my Saviour, and his true and holy religion. And this whosoever is ashamed to do, among this adulterous and sinful generation, of him shall the son of Man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.


I pass on now to consider somewhat more fully, than in the Letter, such occurrences in the reign of Elizabeth as touch the subject on which the Letter proposed to treat.

It was noticed at p. 63 that the Declaration on Kneeling did not appear in Elizabeth's Prayer Book, and the reason assigned by Burnet for the omission is there quoted: the same Prelate, in writing of the review of the 42 articles in 1559, gives the following account of the way in which the question of the Real Presence was then dealt with, and so furnishes a further illustration of the grounds on which he alleges the suppression of the Declaration itself:

"In the Article about the Lord's Supper, there is a great deal left out, for instead of that large refutation of the Corporal Presence, from the impossibility of a body's being in more places at once; from whence it follows, that since Christ's body is in Heaven, the faithful ought not to believe or profess a Real or Corporal Presence of it in the Sacrament. In the new Articles, it is said, That the body of Christ is given and received after a spiritual manner ; and the means by which it is received, is faith. But in the Original Copy of these Articles (M. S. S. Cor. Christ, Camb.), which I have seen subscribed by the hands of all that sat in either House of Convocation, there is a further addition made. The Articles were subscribed with that precaution, which was requisite in a matter of such consequence; for before the Subscriptions, there is set down the number of the pages, and of the lines in every page of the Book, to which they set their hands.

In that Article of the Eucharist, these words are added, Christus in Calum ascendens, corpori suo immortalitatem dedit, naturam non abstulit: Humanæ enim naturæ veritatem, juxta scripturas perpetuo retinet, quam in uno & definito loca esse, & non in multa vel omnia simul loca diffundi, oportet: Quum igitur Christus in Coelum

« PoprzedniaDalej »