and reputed to be lay-persons, to all purposes and intents; and those that shall after this proclamation marry, shall expose themselves to his grace's indignation, and suffer punishment and imprisonment at his grace's will and pleasure.

64

Also, he chargeth all archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, deacons, provosts, parsons, vicars, curates, and other ministers, and every of them in their own persons, within their cures diligently to preach, teach, open, and set forth to the people, the glory of God, and the truth of his word; and also considering the abuses and superstitions that have crept into the hearts and minds of many, by reason of their fond ceremonies, he chargeth them upon pain of imprisonment, at his grace's pleasure, not only to preach and teach the word of God accordingly; but also sincerely and purely declaring the difference between things commanded by God, and the rites and ceremonies in their church then used, lest the people thereby might grow into further suspicion.

"Also, forasmuch as it appears now clearly, that Thomas à Becket, formerly archbishop of Canterbury, stubbornly withstanding the wholesome laws established against the enormities of the clergy, by the king's noble progenitor King Henry II., for the well-being, rest, and tranquillity of this realm, did, of his froward mind, flee into France, and thence to the bishop of Rome, who was a maintainer of those enormities, to procure the abrogation of the said laws, whereby arose much trouble in this said realm. His death they untruly call a martyrdom; but that happened upon a rescue having been attempted, and on which occasion (as it is written) he gave opprobrious words to the gentlemen, who then counselled him to give up his stubbornness and to avoid the commotion of the people, who had risen up to attempt a rescue; and he not only called one of them by a bad name, but also took Tracey by the bosom, and violently shook him, and plucked him in such a manner, that he had almost thrown him down on the pavement of the church; so that in this affray, one of their company perceiving the same, struck him, and so in the throng Becket was slain: and further, that this canonization was made only by the bishop of Rome; because Becket had been a champion to maintain his usurped authority, and an encourager of the iniquity of the clergy.

"For these, and for other great and urgent causes, which it would be too tedious to recite, the king's majesty, by the advice of his council, had thought it expedient to declare to his loving subjects, that notwithstanding the said canonization, there appeareth nothing in his life and exterior conversation, whereby he should be called a saint, but rather esteemed to have been a rebel and traitor to his prince.

"Therefore his grace straightly chargeth and commandeth, that from henceforth the said Thomas à Becket shall not be esteemed, named, reputed, and called a saint, but Bishop Becket; and that his images and pictures through the whole realm shall be pulled down and thrown out of all churches, chapels, and other places; and that from henceforth the days which were used to be a festival in his name, shall not be observed; neither shall the service, office, antiphons, collects, and prayers, be read in his name, but razed and put out of all their books; and that all the festival days, already abrogated, shall be in nowise solemnized, but his grace's ordinances and injunctions thereupon observed; to the intent his grace's loving subjects shall be no longer blindly led and abused to commit idolatry, as they have done in times past; upon pain of his majesty's indignation, and imprisoment at his grace's pleasure.

Finally, his grace straightly charges and commands that his subjects keep and observe all and singular these injunctions made by his majesty, upon the pain therein

contained."

Here followeth how Religion began to go backward. To many who are yet alive, and who can testify to these things, it is not unknown, how variable the state of religion stood in these days; how hardly and with what difficulty it came forth, what chances and changes it suffered. Even as the king was ruled and gave ear sometime to one, sometime to another; so one while it went

forward, at another time as much backward again, and sometimes altered and changed for a season, according as those could prevail who were about the king. So long as Queen Anne lived, the gospel had success.

After, by sinister instigation of some about the king, she was made away with, the course of the gospel began again to decline; but the Lord then stirred up the lord Cromwell to help it, who no doubt would have done much for the increase of God's true religion, and had brought much more to perfection, if the pestilent adversaries had not craftily undermined him and supplanted his virtuous proceedings. By means of which adversaries it came to pass that lord Cromwell was accused of high treason by the duke of Norfolk, in the king's name, and arrested and sent to the Tower. He was hated by the popish party, for it was through him that many of the most important reforms were made. A bill of attainder was passed against him in June, and he was beheaded on Tower-hill, 28th July, 1540.

Among these adversaries, the chief was Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, who, with his confederates and adherents, dissatisfied with the state of the lord Cromwell, and at the late marriage of the lady Anne of Cleves, (who, in the beginning of the year 1540, was married to the king), as also grieved at the dissolution of the monasteries, and fearing the growing of the gospel, sought all occasions to interrupt these happy beginnings, and to train the king to their own purpose.

It happened that the lord Cromwell, for the better establishing of sincere religion, had devised a marriage for the king, to be concluded between him and the lady Anne of Cleves, whose other sister was already married to the duke of Saxony. By this marriage it was supposed that a perpetual league, amity, and alliance would be nourished between this realm and the princes of Ger. many; and so godly religion might be made more strong on both parts against the bishop of Rome, and his ty rannical religion. But the devil, ever envying the prosperity of the gospel, laid a stumbling-block in the way for the king to stumble upon. For when the parents of the noble lady were conferred with for the furtherance of the marriage, the duke of Saxony, her brother-in-law, disliked the marriage. The crafty bishop of Winchester, taking advantage of this, so alienated the king's mind from the duke, that he brought the king at length out of credit with that religion and doctrine which the duke had maintained for many years before.

This wily Winchester, with his crafty assistants, and also by other pestilent persuasions, ceased not to seek all means to overthrow religion. First, bringing the king, in hatred with the German princes, then putting him in fear of the emperor, of the French king, of the pope, of the king of Scotland, and other foreign powers; but especially of civil tumults and commotions within his own kingdom; which above all things he most dreaded, by reason of these innovations of religion, and the dissolving of abbeys, and the abolishing of rites, and other customs of the church, which had so fast a hold on the minds of the people, that it was to be feared that their hearts were or would be shortly stirred up against him, unless some speedy remedy were provided. The bishop exhorted the king for his own safeguard, and tranquillity of his realm, to see how and by what policy so manifold mischiefs might be prevented. He suggested that no other way or shift could be better devised, than to shew himself sharp and severe against the new sectaries, the anabaptists, and sacramentarians (as they called them); and that he should also set forth such articles, confirming the ancient catholic faith, as might recover his credit with christian princes, and that all the world might see and judge him to be a right and perfect catholic. By these and such suggestions the king was too much led away; and he then began to withdraw his defence from the reformation of true religion, supposing to procure to himself more safety in his own realm, and also to avoid such dangers as might happen by other princes. And therefore, althongh he had rejected the pope out of this realm, yet because he would declare himself nevertheless to be a good catholic son of the mother church, and a withstander of new innovations and heresies (as the blind

opinion of the world then did esteem them) he stretched out his hand to the condemning and burning of Lambert; then he gave out those injunctions above prefixed; and now to increase this opinion with all men, in the year following, which was 1540, he summoned a parliament at Westminster, on the twenty-eighth day of April, of all the states and burgesses of the realm; also a synod or convocation of all the archbishops, bishops, and other learned of the clergy of this realm, to be in like manner assembled.

The Act of the Six Articles.

In this parliament, synod, or convocation, certain articles, matters, and questions, touching religion, were decreed by certain prelates, to the number of six, com. monly called The Six Articles, to be received among the king's subjects for the purpose of unity. But what unity followed, the groaning hearts of a great number, and also the cruel death of many, both in the days of King Henry, and of Queen Mary, can so well declare, that as I pray God the like may never be felt hereafter.

The doctor of these wicked articles is worthy of no memory among christian men, but rather deserves to be buried in perpetual oblivion, yet the office of history compels us, for the light of posterity, faithfully and truly to comprise things done in the church, as well at one time as at another; this we shall do briefly, and recapitulate the sum of the six articles as they were given out.

The First Article.

The first article agreed upon in this present parliament was this, that in the most blessed sacrament of the altar by the strength and efficacy of Christ's mighty word (it being spoken by the priest) is present really, under the form of bread and wine, the natural body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ, as conceived of the Virgin Mary; and after the consecration there remains no substance of bread or wine, or any other substance, but the substance of Christ, God and man.

The Second Article.

Secondly, that the communion in both kinds is not necessary for salvation to all persons by the law of God; and that it is to be believed, and not doubted of, but that in the flesh, under form of bread, is the very blood, and with the blood, under form of wine, is the very flesh as well separate as they were both together.

The Third Article.

printing, cyphering, or any otherwise, should publish, preach, teach, say, affirm, declare, dispute, argue or hold any opinion, that in the blessed sacrament of the altar, under form of bread and wine (after the consecration thereof), there is not present really the natural body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ, as conceived of the Virgin Mary; or that after the said consecration there remaineth any substance of the bread or wine, or any other substance of Christ, God and man; or after the time abovesaid, publish, preach, teach, say, affirm, declare, dispute, argue, or hold opinion, That in the flesh, under the form of bread is not the very blood of Christ, or that with the blood of Christ, under the form of wine, is not the very flesh of Christ, as well apart, as though they were both together; or by any of the means abovesaid, or otherwise, preach, teach, declare, or affirm the said sacrament to be any other substance than is abovesaid, or by any means contemn, deprave, or despise the said blessed sacrament; that then every such person so offending, their aiders, comforters, counsellors, consenters, and abettors therein (being thereof convicted in form underwritten, by the authority abovesaid) should be deemed and adjudged heretics, and every such offence should be adjudged as manifest heresy; and that every such offender and offenders should therefore have and suffer judgment, execution, pain and pains of death by way of burning, without any abjuration, benefit of the clergy, or sanctuary, to be therefore permitted, had, allowed, or suffered; and also should forfeit and lose to the king's highness, his heirs and successors, all his or their honours, manors, castles, lands, tenements, rents, reversions, services, possessions, and all other his or their hereditaments, goods and chattels, farms and freeholds, whatever they were, through any such offence or offences committed or done, or at any time after, as in any case of high treason."

And as to the other five articles, the penalty devised for them was this: "That every such person or persons that preach, teach, obstinately affirm, uphold, maintain, or defend, after the twelfth of July of the said year, any thing contrary to the same; or if any being inorders, or after a vow advisedly made, did marry, or make marriage, or contract matrimony, in so doing they should be adjudged as felons, and lose both life, and forfeit goods, as in the case of felony, without any benefit of the clergy, or privilege of the church or of the sanctuary," &c.

Also, "That every such person or persons, who after the day aforesaid, by word, writing, printing, cyphering, or otherwise, do publish, declare or hold opinion contrary to the five articles above expressed, being for any such

The Fourth Article.

Fourthly, that the vows of chastity or widowhood, by man or woman made to God advisedly, ought to be observed by the law of God; and that it exempteth them from other liberties of christian people, which otherwise they might enjoy.

The Fifth Article.

Fifthly, that it is meet and necessary that private masses be continued and admitted in this English church and congregation; and in them good christian people, ordering themselves accordingly, do receive both godly and goodly consolations and benefits; and it is agreeable also to God's law.

The Sixth Article.

Sixthly, that auricular confession was expedient and necessary, and ought to be retained and continued in the church of God.

After these articles were concluded, the prelates perceiving that such a foul and violent act could not prevail, unless straight and bloody penalties were set upon them, caused to be ordained and enacted by the king and the lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons in the said parliament:

"That if any person or persons within this realm of England, or any other the king's dominions, after the twelfth day of July next coming, by word, writing, im

besides the forfeit of all his goods, and chattels, and possessions whatsoever, should suffer imprisonment of his body at the king's pleasure; and for the second time, being accused, presented, and thereof convicted, should suffer as in the case aforesaid of felony."

Also, "If any within the order of priesthood, before the time of the said parliament, had married or contracted matrimony, or vowed widowhood, the said matrimony should stand utterly void and be dissolved."

Also, "That the same danger that belonged to priests marrying wives, should also redound to women who are married to the priests."

Furthermore, for the more effectual execution of the premises, it was enacted by the said parliament, "That full authority of inquisition of all such heresies, felonies, and contempts, should be committed and directed down into every shire, to certain persons specially appointed; that such persons, three at the least (provided always the archbishop, or bishop, or his chancellor, or his commissary be one) should sit four times at least in the year, having full power to take information and accusation, by the depositions of any two lawful persons at the least, as well as by the oaths of twelve men, to examine and inquire of all and singular the heresies, fclonies, and contempts above remembered; having also as ample power to make process against every person or persons indicted, presented, or accused before them; also to hear and determine the aforesaid heresies, felonies, contempts, and other offences, as well as if the matter had been presented before the justices of peace in their

sessions. And also that the said justices in their sessions, and every steward or under-steward, or his deputy, in their law-days, should have power by the oaths of twelve lawful men to inquire likewise of all and singular the heresies, felonies, contempts, and other offences, and to hear and determine the same, to all effects of this present act," &c.

"Provided that no person or persons thereupon accused, indited or presented, should be admitted to challenge any that should be empanelled for the trial of any matter or cause, other than for malice or envy; which challenge should forthwith be tried in like manner, as in cases of felony, &c.

"Provided moreover, that every person that should be named commissioner in this inquisition, should first take oath, the tenor of which oath here ensueth.

The Oath of the Commissioners.

"You shall swear, that you to your cunning, wit and power, shall truly and indifferently execute the authority to you given by the king's commission, made for correction of heretics and other offenders mentioned in the same commission, without any favour, affection, corruption, dread, or malice, to be borne to any person or persons, as God you help and all saints."

And thus much is briefly collected out of the act and originals, which are to be seen in the Stat. Anno 31. Reg. Hen. 8. concerning the six articles, which other. wise for the bloody cruelty thereof, are called "The Whip with six strings," set forth after the death of queen Anne, and of good John Lambert, devised by the cruelty of the bishops, but especially of the bishop of Winchester, and at length also subscribed by king Henry.

These six articles above specified, although they contained manifest errors, heresies, and absurdities against all scripture and learning; yet such was the miserable and unhappy state of that time, and the power of darkness, that the simple cause of truth and of religion was utterly left desolate, and forsaken of all friends. For every man seeing that the king wished to have these articles passed, few in all that parliament would either appear to perceive what was to be defended, or durst defend what they understood to be true; save only Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, who then being married (as is supposed), like a constant patron of God's cause, took upon him the defence of that truth, which was so oppressed in the parliament, and for three days together continued disputing against these six wicked articles.

Cranmer behaved himself with such humble modesty, and with such obedience, towards his prince, and protesting that the cause was not his, but the cause of Almighty God, that his courage was not disliked of the king, and his reasons and allegations were so strong, that they could not well be refuted. The king, (who ever bare special favour to him) admired his zealous defence, and only desired him to depart out of the parliament house into the council chamber, for a time, (for safety of his conscience) till the act should pass; which Cranmer, notwithstanding, with humble protestation refused to do.

After the parliament was finished, and that matter concluded, the king considering the constant zeal of the archbishop, in defence of his cause, and partly also weighing the many authorities and reasons by which he had confirmed the same; sent the lord Cromwell, the dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk, and all the lords of the parliament, to dine with him at Lambeth: where they signified to him, that it was the king's pleasure, that they all should, in his highness' behalf, cherish, comfort, and animate him, as one that in that parliament had declared himself, both greatly learned, and also a man discreetly wise; and therefore they willed him not to be discouraged in any thing that was passed in that parliament contrary to his allegations.

he hoped in God, that hereafter his allegations and authorities would be employed for the glory of God, and the advantage of the kingdom. Which allegations and authorities of his, I wish were extant to be seen and read. No doubt but they would stand, in time to come, in great good stead for the overthrow of the wicked and pernicious articles aforesaid.

Allegations against the six Articles.

In the meantime, forasmuch as these heretical articles are not so lightly to be passed over, whereby the rude and ignorant multitude hereafter may be deceived in the false and erroneous doctrine of them any more, as they have been in times past, for lack of right instruction, and experience of the ancient state and course of times in our forefathers' days; I thought, therefore, (the Lord thereunto assisting) so much as antiquity of histories may help to the restoring again of the truth and doctrine which is now decayed, to annex some allegations out of ancient records, which may throw some light for understanding of these new-fangled articles and heresies. And first, as to the article of transubstantiation, wherein this parliament enacts, that the sacrament of the altar is the very natural body of Christ, the self same which was born of the Virgin Mary; and that there remains no substance of bread and wine, after the priest's consecration, but only the body and blood of Christ, under the outward forms of bread and wine: here it is to be noted, that this monstrous article of theirs was never obtruded, received, or held, either in the Greek church, or in the Latin church, for a catholic article of doctrine, until the time of the Lateran council at Rome, under Pope Innocent III., (A. D. 1215.)

And as it has been commonly understood by most people, that this article has ever been, since the time of Christ, a true catholic and general doctrine, commonly received and taught in the church, being approved by the scriptures and doctors, with the consent of all ages to this present time; therefore, that the contrary may appear, and that the people may see how far they have been beguiled, we will here make a little pause in our history, and examine this article.

This monstrous paradox of transubstantiation was never received publicly in the church before the time of the Lateran council, under Pope Innocent III., A. D. 1215, or at most before the time of Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, 1070.

In the time of this Lanfranc, I deny not but that this question of transubstantiation began to come into controversy, and was reasoned upon, among certain learned of the clergy. But that this article of transubstantiation was publicly determined or authorized in the church for a general law or catholic doctrine of all men, necessarily to be believed, before the time of Innocent III., may be proved to be false.

And though our adversaries allege out of the old doctors certain speeches and phrases, which they wrest and wring to their purposes, as if this doctrine of transubstantiation stood upon the consent of the whole uni versal church, of all ages and times, of nations and people, and that the judgment of the church was never other than this: yet if the old doctors' sayings be well weighed and examined, it will be found that this prodigious opinion of transubstantiation had no such ground of consent and antiquity as they imagine; nor yet that any heresy or treason was made of denying of transubstantiation before the time of Innocent III., or at the

farthest of Lanfranc.

But in our church of England it is most certain, that transubstantiation was unknown till a very late period, as is most evident from the epistles and homilies of Elfric. This Elfric was made archbishop of Canterbury about the year of our Lord 996, in the time of king Ethelred II., and of Wulfsine, bishop of Sherborne.

amongst the canons and constitutions of the church in that time, as hereby may appear; for where the bishops

and priests before the coming of William the Conqueror had collected a certain book of canons and ordinances to govern the clergy, gathered out of general and particular councils, out of the book of Gildas, out of the penitential books of Theodore, archbishop of Canterbury, out of the writings of Egbert, archbishop of York, out of the epistles of Alcuin, as also out of the writings of the old fathers of the primitive church, &c.-among the canons and constitutions are placed two epistles of Elfric.

Besides this he translated two books containing eighty sermons out of the Latin into the Saxon language, which used then generally to be read in churches on Sundays and other festival days of the year.

An Epistle of Elfric to Wulfstane, touching the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper.

"Christ himself blessed the eucharist before his suffering; he blessed the bread and brake it, thus speaking to his apostles, 'Take eat; this is my body.' And again, he blessed one chalice with wine, and also said unto them, Drink ye all of it, for this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.' The Lord who hallowed the eucharist before his suffering, and said, that the bread was his own body, and that the wine was truly his blood, hallows daily by the hands of the priests, bread to be his body, and wine to be his blood, in spiritual mystery, as we read in books. Yet notwithstanding that lively bread is not bodily so, nor the self-same body that Christ suffered in; nor so that holy wine the Saviour's blood which was shed for us in bodily things; but in spiritual understanding. Both are truly; that bread is his body; and that wine also is his blood; as was the heavenly bread which we call manna, that fed for forty years God's people in the wilderness. And the clear water which did then run from the Rock in the wilderness was truly his blood, as St. Paul wrote in one of his epistles: All our fathers did eat in the wilderness the same spiritual meat, and drink the same spiritual drink; they drank of that spiritual Rock, and that Rock was Christ. The apostle hath said, as you have heard, that they all did eat the same spiritual meat; that they all did drink the same spritual drink. He saith not bodily, but spiritually; as Christ was not yet born, nor his blood shed, when the people of Israel did eat that meat, and drink of that Rock. The Rock was not bodily Christ, though he said so. It was the same mystery in the old law, and they did spiritually signify that spiritual eucharist of our Saviour's body which we consecrate now."

Besides the epistles of Elfric, which fight directly against transubstantiation, mention was also made of certain sermons, to the number of eighty, translated by Elfric out of the Latin into the Saxon, that is, into our English tongue. Of which eighty sermons, twentyfour were chiefly selected to be read, as homilies or treatises to the people.

There was one appointed to be read upon Easter day; which sermon being translated by Elfric, we have here exhibited it in English, that the christian reader may judge how the fantastical doctrine of transubstantiation, in those days of Elfric, and before his time, was not yet received nor known in the church of England.

The following are the words of this sermon for Easter-day, so far as relates to transubstantiation:-" He blessed bread before his suffering, and divided it to his disciples, thus saying, 'Take eat; this is my body: this do in remembrance of me.' Also he blessed the wine in a cup, and said, 'Drink ye all of it: For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.' The apostles did as Christ commanded, that is, they blessed bread and wine for the eucharist, and gave it to be received in remembrance of him. Even so also their successors, and all priests by Christ's commandment, do bless bread and wine for the eucharist in his name with the apostolic blessing. Now men have often searched, and do yet often search, how bread that is gathered of corn, and through the heat of fire baked, may be turned to Christ's body; or how wine

that is pressed out of many grapes is turned through one blessing into the Lord's blood. Now say we to such men, some things are spoken of Christ by signification, and some are things certain. True this is, and certain, that Christ was born of a Virgin, and suffered of his own accord, and was buried, and on the third day arose from death. He is said to be bread by signification; and a lamb; and a lion, and a mountain. He is called bread, because he is our life, and angel's life. He is said to be a lamb for his innocency; and a lion for strength, wherewith he overcame the strong devil. But Christ is not so notwithstanding after true nature; neither bread, nor a lamb, nor a lion. Why is then the holy eucharist called Christ's body, or his blood, if it be not truly what it is called? Truly the bread and wine which in the supper by the priest is hallowed, show one thing without to human understanding, and another thing within to believing minds. Without, there is seen bread and wine both in figure and in taste; and they are truly after their hallowing Christ's body and blood, through spiritual mystery. An heathen child is christened, yet he altereth not his shape without, though he be changed within. He is brought to the font sinful through Adam's disobedience, howbeit he is washed from all sin within, though he hath not changed his shape without. Even so the holy font water, that is called the well-spring of life, is like in shape to other waters, and is subject to corruption; but the Holy Ghost's might cometh to the corruptible water through the priest's blessing, and it may after wash the body and soul from all sin, through spiritual might. Behold now we see two things in this one creature; after true nature, that water is corruptible moisture; and after spiritual mystery, hath wholesome virtue. So also if we behold the holy eucharist, after bodily understanding, then we see that it is a creature corruptible and mutable. If we acknowledge therein spiritual might, then understand we that life is therein, and that it giveth immortality to them that eat with belief. Much is betwixt the invisible might of the holy eucharist, and the visible shape of proper nature. It is naturally corruptible bread, and corruptible wine, and is by might of God's word truly Christ's body and blood; not so notwithstanding bodily, but spiritually. Much is betwixt the body of Christ which he suffered in, and the body which is hallowed for the eucharist. The body truly that Christ suffered in, was born of the flesh of Mary; with blood and with bone; with skin and with sinews; in human limbs; with a reasonable soul living; and his spiritual body, which we call the eucharist, is gathered of many corns, without blood and bone, without limb, without soul; and therefore nothing is to be understood therein bodily, but all is spiritually to be understood. Whatsoever is in that eucharist, which giveth substance of life, that is of the spiritual might, and invisible doing. Therefore is that holy eucharist called a mystery, because there is one thing in it seen, and another thing understood. That which is there seen, hath bodily shape; and that we do there understand hath spiritual might. Certainly Christ's body, which suffered death and rose from death, never dieth henceforth, but is eternal and incorruptible. That eucharist is temporal, not eternal, corruptible and divided into sundry parts, chewed between the teeth, and sent into the belly; howbeit, nevertheless after spiritual might it is all in every part. Many receive that holy body, and yet notwithstanding it is whole in every part after spiritual mystery. Though some chew the less, yet is there no more might notwithstanding in the most part, than in the less; because it is whole in all men after the invisible might. This mystery is a pledge and a figure: Christ's body is truth itself. This pledge we do keep mystically, until we come to the truth itself, and then is this pledge ended. Truly it is, as we before have said, Christ's body, and his blood; not bodily, but spiritually. But now hear the apostle's word about this mystery. St. Paul the apostle speaketh of the old Israelites, thus writing in his epistle to faithful men, Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual

6

meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink: (for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them; and that Rock was Christ.)' Neither was that stone, then, from which the water ran, bodily Christ, but it signified Christ, who called thus to all believing and faithful men: "If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink ;" and "out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." This he said of the Holy Ghost, which they received who believed on him. The apostle Paul saith, that the Israelites did eat the same spiritual meat, and drink the same spiritual drink, because that heavenly meat that fed them forty years, and that water which from the rock did flow, had signification of Christ's body, and his blood that is now offered daily in God's church. It was the same which we now offer, not bodily, but spiritually."

After the time of Elfric, transubstantiation began first to be talked of among a few superstitious monks; so that as blindness and superstition began to increase, this gross opinion more and more prevailed; and about the year 1060, the denying of transubstantiation began to be accounted heresy.

Berenger, a Frenchman and archdeacon of Anjou, of all christian men was the first called and accounted an heretic for denying of transubstantiation.

This Berenger lived about the year 1060. The substance of his history is this; that when Berenger had professed the truth of the sacrament, and had stood in the open confession of it, according to the ancient doctrine received before in the church, he was so handled by superstitious monks, that, by evil entreaty, and for fear of death, he began to shrink and recant the truth. Of these malicious enemies against him, the chief troubler was Lanfranc, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury; and Hildebrand, afterwards bishop of Rome.

By these and other monks, the error and heresy of transubstantiation began first to be defended. The first that began to set up that faction in writing seems to be Paschasius, who lived a little before Berenger, about the time of Bertramn; and Lanfranc was the first that brought it into England.

On the other hand, the first that was openly troubled for denying transubstantiation, was this Berenger; with whom Lanfranc was supposed at first to hold and take part, but afterwards, to clear himself, he stood openly against him in the council, and wrote against him.

It follows in the act of the council, when the synod of archbishops, bishops, abbots, and other prelates were assembled together, the greater number held that the bread and wine were turned substantially into the body and blood of Christ. Others there were who held the contrary with Berenger, but at last were driven to give over. Berenger, among the rest, after he had long stood in the constant defence of the truth, at last submitted to their wills, and desired pardon of the council. And this was (as seems to William of Malmesbury) his first giving over. Afterwards, returning to himself again after the death of Pope Leo, and pricked with the sting of conscience, he was driven again to recognize the truth, which he had denied.

The pope, perceiving this, would not leave him so; but sent his cardinal chaplain, Hildebrand, into France, who so handled Berenger that he recanted again.

knowledging the true, catholic, and apostolical faith, doth execrate aH heresy, namely, that wherewith he hath lately been defamed, as holding that the bread and wine upon the altar, after the consecration of the priest, remain only a sacrament, and are not the very body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ; neither can be handled o broken with the priest's hands, or chewed with the teeth of the faithful, otherwise than only by manner of a sacrament: consenting now to the holy and apostolical church of Rome, he professed with mouth and heart to hold the same faith touching the sacrament of the Lord's mass, which the lord Pope Nicholas, with his synod here present doth hold, and commandeth to be holden by his evangelical and apostolical authority; that is, that the bread and wine upon the altar, after consecration, are not only a sacrament, but also are the very true and self-same body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and are sensibly felt and broken with hands, and chewed with teeth swearing by the holy evangelists, that whosoever shall hold or say to the contrary, he shall hold them perpetually accursed, and if he himself shall hereafter presume to preach or teach against the same, he shall be content to abide the severity and rigour of the canons," &c.

This cowardly recantation of Berenger, as it offended a great number of the godly sort, so it gave to the other party no little triumph.

Some time after this, Pope Hildebrand summoned a new council at Rome in the church of Lateran, to revive again the affair of Berenger, about the year, as some hold, 1079.

Thus Berenger, being tossed by these monks and pharisees, was so confounded, and baited on every side; that partly for worldly fear, restraining him on the one side; partly for shame and grief of conscience that he had now twice denied the truth; he (as is reported) forsaking his goods, his studies, learning, and former state of life, became a labourer, and wrought with his hands for his living, all the residue of his life.

The opinion which Berenger maintained, touching the sacrament (as by his own words in Lanfranc's book may appear) was this:-" The sacrifice of the church consisteth of two things: the one visible, the other invisible, that is, of the sacrament, and of the thing or matter of the sacrament. Which thing (meaning the body of Christ) if it were here present before our eyes, it were a thing visible and to be seen: but being lifted up into heaven, and sitting on the right hand of his Father, until the time of restitution of all things (as St. Peter saith) it cannot be called down from thence. For the person of Christ consists of God and man; the sacrament of the Lord's table, consists of bread and wine; which, being consecrated, are not changed; but remain in their substances, having a certain resemblance or similitude of those things whereof they be sacraments," &c.

By these words of Berenger's doctrine, all indifferent readers may see and judge, that he affirmed nothing but what was agreeable to the holy scriptures, believing with St. Augustine, and all other ancient elders of the church; that in the holy supper all faithful believers are refreshed spiritually with the body and blood of the Lord, unto everlasting life.

The rude and mis-shapen doctrine of these monks concerning transubstantiation, as we have heard when and by whom it first began to be broached; so if we would now know by what learning and scripture they confirmed and established it, we must understand that their chief ground to persuade the people was at this time certain miracles forged by them and published both in their writings and preachings.

full of lies and fables. Among many, one is thus invented by Paschasius. There was a priest named Plegildus, who saw and handled with his hands visibly the shape of a child upon the altar, and after he had embraced and kissed him, it returned again to the likeness of bread