“The” Acts and Monuments of the Church

themselves very obedient, especially in restoring the popish religion. For this purpose great provision was made, both by the queen's officers, as well as by the townsmen and inhabitants of Oxford, and the country about.

But the queen's mind soon changed, and the parliament was held at Westminster in the April following. Then the queen proposed her marriage with king Philip ; and the restoring the pope's supremacy. Her marriage was agreed upon; but the other request could not then be obtained.

When this parliament was summoned, she also summoned a convocation of the bishops, and of the clergy, writing to Bonner (whom she had made vicegerent instead of Cranmer, who was then in the Tower) after the tenor and form of a new stile, differing from the old stile of king Henry and king Edward, in the omission of the title of "Supreme Head" of the church of England and Ireland.

In this convocation, Bonner, bishop of London, being vicegerent and president, made an oration to the clergy, in which he seems to shew a piece of profound and deep learning, in setting forth the most incomparable and super-angelical order of priesthood, as may appear by this parcel or fragment of his oration.

"Wherefore it is to be known," said Bonner, "that priests and elders are worthy to be worshipped by all men, for the dignity which they have from God; as in Matthew xvi. Whatsoever ye shall loose upon earth,' &c.; and 'whatsoever ye shall bind,' &c. For a priest by some means is like the Virgin Mary, and this is shewed by three points. As the blessed Virgin by five words did conceive Christ, as it is said, fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum; that is, 'Be it unto me according to thy word,' (Luke i.) so the priest by five words doth make the very body of Christ. Even as immediately after the consent of Mary, Christ was all whole in her womb; so immediately after the speaking of the words of consecration, the bread is transubstantiated into the very body of Christ. Secondly, as the Virgin carried Christ in her arms, and laid him in an ox-stall after his birth; even so the priest after the consecration lifts up the body of Christ, and places it, and carries it, and handles it with his hands. Thirdly, as the blessed Virgin was sanctified before she had conceived; so the priest, being ordained and anointed before he doth consecrate, because without orders he could consecrate nothing: therefore the layman cannot do that thing, although he be ever so holy, and do speak the self-same words of consecration. Therefore here may be seen, that the dignity of priests by some means passes the dignity of angels, because there is no power given to any of the angels to make the body of Christ. Whereby the least priest on earth may do, that which the greatest and highest angel in heaven cannot do, as St. Bernard saith, 'O worshipful dignity of priests, in whose hands the Son of God is, as in the womb of the Virgin he was incarnate.' St. Augustine saith, that angels in the consecration of the sacred host do serve him, and the Lord of heaven descendeth to him. Whereupon St. Ambrose upon Luke saith, Doubt thou not the angels to be where Christ is present upon the altar.' Wherefore priests are to be honoured before all kings of the earth, princes, and nobles. For a priest is higher than a king, happier than an angel, maker of his Creator," &c.

On the 10th of March a letter was sent to the lieutenant of the Tower to deliver the bodies of Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, and bishops Ridley and Latimer, to Sir John Williams, to be conveyed by him to Oxford. On the 26th of March, there was a letter directed to Sir Henry Doell, and one Foster, to attach the bodies of Taylor, parson of Hadley, and of Henry Askew, and to send them up to the council.

About the 10th of April, Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury; Ridley, bishop of London; and Hugh Latimer, sometime bishop of Worcester, were conveyed as prisoners from the Tower to Windsor; and thence to the University of Oxford, to dispute with the divines and learned men of both the Universities of Oxford and

Cambridge, about the presence, substance, and sacrifice of the sacrament. The names of the doctors and graduates appointed to dispute against them, were these: of Oxford, Weston, prolocutor, Tresham, Cole, Oglethorpe, Pye, Harpsfield, and Fecknam; of Cambridge, Young, vice-chancellor, Glin, Seaton, Watson, Sedgewick, Atkinson, &c. The articles or questions upon

which they should dispute were these:

1. Whether the natural body of Christ was really in the sacrament, after the words spoken by the priest, or not?

2. Whether in the sacrament, after the words of consecration, any other substance did remain than the substance of the body and blood of Christ?

3. Whether in the mass there was a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead?

After those from Cambridge were incorporated into the University of Oxford, on the 12th, and after a convocation on the 14th, and a solemn mass, they signed the articles.

The mass being done, they went in procession: First, the choir in their surplices followed the cross; then the first-year regents and proctors; then the doctors of law, and their beadles before them; then the doctors of divinity of both universities intermingled, the divinity and arts-beadles going before them; the vice-chancellor and prolocutor going together. After them the bachelors of divinity, regentes et non regentes, in their array; and last of all, the bachelors of law and art. After whom followed a great company of scholars and students who had not graduated. And thus they proceeded through the street to Christ's church, and there the choir sung a psalm, and after that a collect was read. This done, the commissioners, doctors, and many others, departed to Lincoln college, where they dined with the mayor of the town, one alderman, four beadles, Master Say and the Cambridge notary. After dinner they went all again to St. Mary's church; and there, after a short consultation in a chapel, all the commissioners came into the choir, and sat all on seats before the altar, to the number of thirty-three persons: and they sent to the mayor, that he should bring in Cranmer, who was brought to them by a number of bill-men.

Thus the reverend archbishop, when he was brought before the commissioners, reverenced them with much humility, and stood with his staff in his hand, a stool was offered him, but he refused to sit. Then the prolocutor, sitting in the midst in a scarlet gown, began with a short oration in praise of unity, and especially in the church of Christ; he spoke of the bringing up of Cranmer and of his taking degrees in Cambridge, and also how he was promoted by king Henry VIII., and had been his counsellor and a catholic man, one of the same unity, and a member thereof in times past, but of late years had separated and cut himself off from it, by teaching and setting forth of erroneous doctrines, making every year a new faith and therefore it pleased the queen's grace, to send them of the convocation and other learned men, to bring him to this unity again, if it might be. Then the prolocutor informed him how they of the convocation-house had agreed upon certain articles to which they wished him to subscribe.

The archbishop answered to the preface very ably, modestly, and learnedly, shewing that he was very glad of an unity, forasmuch as it was "the preserver of all commonwealths, as well of the heathen as of the christians;" and so he dilated the matter with one or two stories of the Roman commonwealth. Which when he had done, he said, that he was very glad to come to an unity, provided it were in Christ, and agreeable to his holy word.

When he had thus spoken, the prolocutor caused the articles to be read to him, and asked him, if he would subscribe to them. Then the archbishop of Canterbury after having read them over three or four times, and touching the first article, he asked what they meant by the term, "natural body," "Do you not mean," saith he, "a sensible body?" Some answered, "The same that was born of the Virgin," but very confusedly; some saying one thing, some another. Then the archhishop denied

it utterly, and when he had looked upon the other two, he said they were false, and against God's holy word : and therefore he could not agree in a unity with them. The prolocutor assigned him to answer the articles on Monday next (April 16th), and so committed him to the mayor again, permitting him to name what books he wished for, and he should have them brought to him. The archbishop was greatly commended by every body for his modesty: so that some masters of art of the university were seen to weep for him, though in judgment they were contrary to him.

Then Dr. Ridley was brought in, who, hearing the articles read, answered without any delay, saying, “They | were all false; and that they sprang out of a bitter and sour root." His answers were sharp, witty, and very earnest. Then they laid to his charge a sermon that he made when he was bishop of Rochester, in which, they said, he spoke in favour of transubstantiation. He de. nied it utterly, and asked whether they could bring any that heard him, who would say and affirm it; but they could bring no proof of it all.

Then he was asked, whether he would dispute or not. He answered, that as long as God gave him life, he should not only have his heart, but also his mouth and pen to defend his truth; but he required time and books. They said he should dispute on Tuesday, and till that time he should have books. He said it was not reasonable that he should not have his own books, and time also to look for his disputations. Then they gave him the articles, and bade him write his mind about them that night.

Last of all came in Latimer, with a handkerchief, and two or three caps on his head, his spectacles hanging by a string at his breast, and a staff in his hand; he was set in a chair. And, after his denial of the articles, Wednesday was appointed for his disputation, but he alleged age, sickness, disease, and lack of books, saying, That he was almost as fit to be a captain of Calais as to dispute, but he would, he said, declare his mind either by writing or by word of mouth, and would stand to all they could lay upon his back; complaining, that he was permitted to have neither pen nor ink, nor books, except the New Testament there in his hand, which he said he had read over seven times deliberately; and yet could not find the mass in it; neither the marrow-bones nor sinews of the same. At which words the commissioners were not a little offended; and Dr. Weston said, that he would make him grant that the mass had both marrow-bones and sinews in the New Testament. Master Latimer said, “That you will never do, Master Doctor," and so forthwith they put him to silence; so that when he was desirous to tell what he meant by those terms, he could not be suffered.

On Monday, the 16th of April, 1554, Doctor Weston, with the visitors, censors, and opponents, repairing to the divinity school, enstalled themselves in their places. Doctor Cranmer was brought there, and set in the answerer's place, with the mayor and aldermen sitting by him. Doctor Weston, prolocutor, after the custom of the university, began the disputation with an oration. His words, as he spake them, were these: "Ye are assembled here, brethren, this day, to confound the detestable heresy of the truth of the body of Christ in the sacraments," &c. At which words thus pronounced by the prolocutor unawares, many of the learned men there present burst out into laughter, as, even in the entrance of the disputations, he had betrayed himself, and his religion, in calling the opinion of the truth of Christ's body in the sacrament a detestable heresy. The rest of his oration tended all to this effect, that it was not lawful by God's word to call these questions into controversy. Doctor Cranmer answered in this wise: "We are assembled to discuss these doubtful controversies, and to lay them open before the eyes of the world, of what ye think it unlawful to dispute. It is, indeed, not reasonable, that we should dispute about that which is determined before the truth be tried. And if these questions are not called into controversy, surely my answer is looked for in vain."

Then Chedsey, the first opponent, began in this wise to dispute.

"Reverend Master doctor, these three conclusions are put forth to us at present to dispute upon :

"1. In the sacrament of the altar is the natural body of Christ, conceived of the Virgin Mary, and also his blood present really under the forms of bread and wine, by virtue of God's word pronounced by the priest.

"2. There remaineth no substance of bread and wine after the consecration, nor any other substance, but the substance of God and man.

"3. The lively sacrifice of the church is in the mass propitiatory, as well for the living as the dead.

These are the conclusions propounded, upon which our controversy rests. Now that we might not doubt how you take them, you have already given to us your opinion. I term it your opinion, because it disagrees from the catholic opinion. I argue that as your opi nion differs from the scripture, therefore you are deceived."

Cranmer. "I deny that my opinion differs from seripture."

Chedsey." Christ, when he instituted his last supper, spake to his disciples, saying, “Take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you.' This is his true body."

Cranmer." His true body is truly present to them that truly receive him; but spiritually. And so it is taken after a spiritual sort. For when he said, 'This is my body, it is all one as if he had said, 'This is the breaking of my body; this is the shedding of my blood. As often as you shall do this, it shall put you in remembrance of the breaking of my body, and the shedding of my blood; that as truly as you receive this sacrament, so truly shall you receive the benefit promised by receiving the same worthily.'

Chedsey." Your opinion differs from the church, which saith, that the true body is in the sacrament, and therefore your opinion is false."

Cranmer." I say and agree with the church, that the body of Christ is in the sacrament effectually, because the passion of Christ is effectual."

Chedsey." Christ, when he spake these words, 'This is my body,' spake of the substance, but not of the effect."

Cranmer."I grant he spake of the substance, and not of the effect after a sort: and yet it is most true that the body of Christ is effectually in the sacrament. But I deny that he is there truly present in bread, or that his organical body is under the bread. It is still that bread which is taken out of the fruit of the ground, and by man's hand brought to that visible shape, being round in form and without sense or life, nourishing the body, and strengthening the heart of man; of this bread, and not of any uncertain and wandering substance, as you say, the old fathers say that Christ spake these words, ، Eat, this is my body.' And likewise also of the wine, which is the fruit of the vine pressed out of grapes, and makes man's heart merry, of the very same wine, I say, Christ spake, Drink, this is my blood.' And so the old doctors call this speaking of Christ tropical, figurative, anagogical, allegorical, which they interpret thus that although the substance of bread and wine remain, and are received by the faithful, yet notwithstanding Christ changed the name of it, and called the bread by the name of his flesh, and the wine by the name of his blood. Not that it is so in very deed, but signified in a mystery.' So that we should consider, not what they are in their own nature, but what they import to us and signify, and we should understand the sacrament not carnally, but spiritually, and should attend not to the visible nature of the sacraments, neither have respect only to the outward bread and cup. But that, lifting up our minds, we should look up to the blood of Christ with our faith, should touch him with our mind, and receive him with our inward man, and that being like eagles in this life, we should fly up inte heaven in our hearts, where that Lamb is resident at the right hand of his Father, which taketh away the sin of the world,' by whose stripes we are healed,'

by whose passion we are filled at his table, and whose blood we receiving out of his holy side, do live for ever, being made the guests of Christ, having him dwelling in us through the grace of his true nature, and through the virtue and efficacy of his whole passion, being no less assured and certified, that we are fed spiritually unto eternal life by Christ's flesh crucified, and by his blood shed, the true food of our minds, than that our bodies are fed with meat and drink in this life: and of this the mystical bread on the table of Christ, and the mystical wine, being administered and received after the institution of Christ, are to us a memorial, a pledge, a token, a sacrament, and a seal.

"And as for your third article, which declares the mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice or oblation, I do not hold it to be an oblation of Christ. He offered himself to God the Father once to death upon the altar of the cross for our redemption, which was of such efficacy, that there is no more need of any sacrifice for the redemption of the whole world, for all the sacrifices of the old law he took away, performing in himself that in very deed, which they signified and promised. Whoever, therefore, shall fix the hope of his salvation in any other sacrifice, he falls from the grace of Christ, and is contumelious against the blood of Christ. For He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.' Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.' 'For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world; but now once, in the end of the world, hath he appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment; so Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time, without sin, unto salvation.' 'Who, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever sat down on the right hand of God. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Now, where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.' But this only sacrifice of Christ, whoever shall seek any other propitiatory sacrifice for sin, makes the sacrifice of Christ of no validity, force, or efficacy. For if it be sufficient to remit sins, what need is there of any other? For the necessity of another argues and declares this to be insufficient. Almighty God grant that we may truly trust in one sacrifice of Christ, and that we to him again may repay our sacrifices of thanksgiving, of praise, of confessing his name, of true amendment, of repentance, of mercifulness towards our neighbours, and of all other good works of charity! For by such sacrifices we shall declare ourselves neither ungrateful to God, nor altogether unworthy of this holy sacrifice of Christ. And thus you have the true and sincere use of the Lord's holy supper, and the fruit of the true sacrifice of Christ. Which, however, through captious or wrested interpretations, or by men's traditions, shall go about, otherwise than Christ ordained them, to alter or transubstantiate, he shall answer to Christ in the latter day, when he shall understand (but then too late) that he has no participation with the body and blood of Christ, but that out of the supper of eternal life he has eaten and drank eternal condemnation to himself."

Chedsey.-"The Scriptures in many places affirm, that Christ gave his natural body, Matthew xxvi., Mark xiv., Luke xxii."

Cranmer." If you understand by the natural body, one that has such proportion and members as he had when living here, then I answer in the negative." Chedsey." The scripture makes against you, for the circumstance teaches us not only that there is the body, but also teaches us what manner of body it is, and saith,

'The body shall be given which was not bread, but that which was crucified."

Cranmer I grant he said it was his body, which should be given. 'The body,' saith he, that shall be given for you.' As if he said, 'This bread is the breaking of my body, and this cup is the shedding of my blood.' What will ye say then? is the bread the breaking of his body, and the cup the shedding of his blood really?"

After some further disputation Chedsey withdrew, and Oglethorpe began in his stead to question Cranmer. Oglethorpe. "Your judgment differs from all

churches."

Cranmer.-" Bread."

Weston.- -"What gave he?"
Cranmer.- "Bread."
Weston.-"What brake he?"
Cranmer.- "Bread."

Weston,- "What did he eat?"
Cranmer.- "Bread."

Weston.- "He gave bread, therefore he gave not his body."

Cranmer." I deny the argument."

Cole." This argument holds good: It is bread, therefore it is not the body."

Cranmer." The like argument may be made. He is a Rock, therefore he is not Christ."

There was much further disputation on this question, chiefly confined to the ascertaining the opinions of the primitive church, which would be too long to insert here.

This disorderly disputation, sometimes in Latin, sometimes in English, continued almost till two o'clock. When it was finished, and the arguments written and delivered to Master Say, the prisoner was taken away by the mayor, and the doctors dined together at the university college.

Disputation at Oxford between Doctor Smith, with his other Colleagues and Doctors, and Bishop Ridley. The following day (April 17) Doctor Ridley was brought forth to dispute, with Doctor Smith for his principal opponent.

Besides this Smith, there was Weston, Tresham, Oglethorpe, Glin, Seaton, Cole, Ward, Harpsfield, Watson, Pye, Harding, Curton, and Fecknam: to all these opponents Ridley answered very learnedly. He made a preface to the questions, but they would not let him go on with it, saying it was blasphemy; and they would not suffer him to speak his mind. Smith could get nothing at his hands; so that others took his arguments and prosecuted them. He shewed himself to be learned, and a great divine. They could bring nothing, but what he knew as well as they.

Weston, prolocutor." Good christian people and brethren, we have begun this day our school, by God's good speed I trust, and are entering into a controversy, whereof no question ought to be moved concerning the truth of the body of our Lord Jesus Christ in the eucharist. Christ is true, who said the words. The words are true which he spake; yea, truth itself that cannot fail. Let us therefore pray unto God to send down unto us his Holy Spirit, which is the true interpreter of his word; which may purge away errors, and give light, that truth may appear."

Smith." This day three questions are propounded, whereof no controversy among christians ought to be moved, to wit:

"1.Whether the natural body of Christ our Saviour, which was conceived of the Virgin, and offered for man's redemption upon the cross, is verily and really in the sacrament by virtue of God's word spoken by the priests, &c.

"In matters appertaining to God we may not speak according to the sense of man, nor of the world. This first proposition is framed after another manner of phrase or kind of speech than the scripture uses; and it is very obscure and dark, by means of words of doubtful signification.

"First, there is a double sense in these words: by virtue of God's word;' for it is doubtful what word of God this is.

"Again, there is a doubtfulness in these words: 'of the priest;' whether any man may be called a priest but he who has authority to make a propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead."

Weston." Let this be sufficient."

Ridley." If we lack time at present, there is time enough hereafter."

Weston.-"These are but evasions; you consume the time in vain."

Ridley." I cannot start far from you, I am captive and bound."

Weston.-"Fall to it, my masters."

Smith." That which you have spoken may suffice at present."

Ridley..-"Let me alone, I pray you, for I have not much to say."

Weston." Go forward."

Ridley." Moreover, there is ambiguity in this word 'really, which may be variously interpreted, so that the whole proposition is formed of phrases that are not scriptural, but are of doubtful signification.

Now the error and falseness of the proposition, in the sense in which the Romish church takes it, may appear, in that they affirm the bread to be transubstantiated and changed into the flesh assumed by the word of God, and that too by virtue of a phrase which they have themselves devised, and which cannot be found in any of the scriptures. Which position is the foundation of transubstantiation, a foundation monstrous, and against reasou, and destroying the analogy of the sacraments: and therefore this proposition also, which is built upon this rotten foundation, is false, erroneous, and a detestable heresy."

Weston.-"We lose time."

Ridley." You shall have time enough." Weston.-"Fall to reasoning. You shall have some other day for this matter."

Ridley." I have no more to say concerning my explication. If you will give me leave and let me alone, I will only speak a word or two in confirmation of this." Weston." Go to; say on."

Ridley." No doctrine ought to be established in the church of God, which dissents from the word of God, from the rule of faith, and draws with it many absurdities that cannot be avoided.

"Yet the doctrine of transubstantiation maintains a real, corporeal, and carnal presence of Christ's flesh, assumed and taken by the word, to be in the sacrament of the Lord's supper, and that not by virtue and grace only, but also by the whole essence and substance of the body and flesh of Christ. Now such a presence disagrees with God's word, from the rule of faith, and cannot but draw with it many absurdities."

Weston." You consume time, which might be better oestowed on other matters. Master opponent, I pray you, to your argument."

Smith." I will here reason with you upon transubstantiation, which you say is contrary to the rule and analogy of faith. I prove the contrary by the scrip

tures and the doctors. But before I enter into argument with you, I demand first, whether in the sixth chapter of St. John there is any mention made of the sacrament, or of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament?"

Ridley." It is against reason that I should be prevented prosecuting that which I have to speak in this assembly, being not so long but that it may be com prebended in a few words."

Weston.-"Let him go on."

Ridley.-"This carnal presence is contrary to the word of God, as, appears in John xvi. 7, 'I tell you the truth. It is expedient for you that I go away, for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you.' Acts iii. 21. 'Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets.' Mat. ix. 15. Can the children of the bridegroom mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast.' John xvi. 22. But I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice.' Mat. xiv. 23. 28. If any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe them not. For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.'

"It differs from the articles of faith: He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father, from whence he shall come to judge both the quick and the dead.'

“It destroys the institution of the Lord's supper, which was commanded only to be used and continued until the Lord himself should come. If therefore he be really present in the body of his flesh, then must the supper cease for a remembrance is not of a thing present, but of a thing absent. And there is a difference between remembrance and presence, and (as one of the fathers saith) a figure is in vain where the thing figured is present.

"It makes precious things common to profane and ungodly persons, and constrains men to confess many absurdities. For it affirms, that wicked and ungodly persons, yea, (and as some of them hold, the wicked and faithless mice, rats, and dogs, also may receive the very real and corporeal body of the Lord, wherein the fulness of the Spirit of light and grace dwells; contrary to the manifest words of Christ in six places and sentences of the sixth chapter of St. John.

"It confirms also and maintaius that beastly kind of cruelty of the Anthropophagi, that is, the devourers of man's flesh. For it is a more cruel thing to devour a living man, than to slay him."

Pye." He requires time to speak blasphemies! Leave your blasphemies!"

Ridley." I had little thought to have had such reproachful words at your hands."

Weston." All is quiet. Go to your arguments." Ridley." I have not many more words to say." Weston.-"You utter blasphemies with a most impudent face leave off, and get you to the argument."

Ridley." It forces men to maintain many monstrous miracles, without any necessity and authority of God's word. For at the coming of this presence of the body and flesh of Christ, they thrust away the substance of bread, and affirm that the accidents remain without any subject, and instead of it, they place Christ's body without his qualities and the true manner of a body. And if the sacrament be reserved so long until it mould, and worms breed in it, some say that the substance of bread miraculously returns again, and some deny it. Others affirm that the real body of Christ goes down into the stomach of the receivers, and there abides so long only as they shall continue to be good; but others hold, that the body of Christ is carried into heaven, so soon as the forms of bread are bruised with the teeth! O workers of miracles! Truly, and most truly I see that fulfilled in these men, whereof St. Paul prophesied: 2 Thes. ii. 10-12. Because they received not the truth, that they might be saved,' God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie, that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.' This gross presence has brought

forth that foolish fantasy of concomitance, by which is broken at this day and abrogated the commandment of the Lord for distributing of the Lord's cup to the laity. "It gives occasion to heretics to maintain and defend their errors; as to Marcion, who said that Christ had but a fantastical body; and to Eutyches, who wickedly confounded the two natures in Christ.

Finally, It falsifies the sayings of the godly fathers and the catholic faith of the church, which Vigilius, a martyr, and grave writer saith, was taught of the apostles, confirmed with the blood of martyrs, and was continually maintained by the faithful until his time. By the saying of the fathers, I mean of Justin, Irenæus, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, Emisene, Athanasius, Cyril, Epiphanius, Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustine, Vigilius, Fulgentius, Bertram, and other most ancient fathers. All those places, as I am sure, I have read making for my purpose, so I am well assured that I could shew the same, if I might have the use of my own books, which I will undertake to do, even upon the peril of my life, and loss of all that I may lose in this world.

festly false, directly against the word of God, the nature of the sacrament, and the most evident testimonies of the godly fathers; and it is the rotten foundation of the other two conclusions propounded by you, both of the first, and also of the third. I will not therefore now tarry upon any further explanation, being contented with that which is already given to the answer of the first proposition.

"The circumstances of the scripture, the analogy and proportion of the sacraments, and the testimony of the faithful fathers ought to rule us in taking the meaning of the holy scriptures touching the sacrament. Now the words of the Lord's supper, the circumstances of the scripture, the analogy of the sacraments, and the sayings of the fathers, do most effectually and plainly prove a figurative speech in the words of the Lord's supper.

"The circumstances of the scriptures,' Do this in remembrance of me.' 'As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.' 'Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that 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 one bread and one body,' &c. 1 Cor. x. 14—17. "The analogy of the sacraments is necessary: for the sacraments must have some similitude or likeness of the things whereof they be sacraments.

"But now, my brethren, think not, because I disallow that presence which the first proposition maintains, as a presence which I take to be forged, fantastical, and contrary to God's word, perniciously brought into the church by the Romanists, that I therefore go about to take away the true presence of Christ's body in his supper rightly and duly administered, which is grounded upon the word of God, and made more plaintive speech, as it appears in Origen, Tertullian, Chry

by the commentaries of the faithful fathers. They who think thus of me, the Lord knoweth how far they are deceived. And to make the same evident, I will in a few words declare what true presence of Christ's body in the sacrament of the Lord's supper I hold and affirm.

"I say and confess with the evangelist Luke, and with the apostle Paul, that the bread on which thanks are given, is the body of Christ in remembrance of him and his death, to be set forth perpetually by the faithful until his coming again.

"I say and confess that the bread which we break is the communion and partaking of Christ's body.

"I say and believe that there is not only a signification of Christ's body set forth in the sacrament, but also that there is given to the godly and faithful the grace of Christ's body, that is, the food of life and immortality.

"I say also, with St. Augustine, that we eat life and we drink life with Emisene, that we feel the Lord to be present in grace;-with Athanasius, that we receive celestial food, which comes from above;-the propriety of natural communion, with Hilary ;-the nature of flesh and benediction which gives life in bread and wine, with Cyril;-and with the same Cyril, the virtue of the very flesh of Christ, life and grace of his body, the property of the only begotten, that is to say, life, as he himself in plain words expounds it.

"I confess also with Basil, that we receive the mystical advent and coming of Christ, grace and virtue of his very nature-the sacrament of his very flesh, with Ambrose the body by grace, with Epiphanius-spiritual flesh, but not that which was crucified, with Jerome grace flowing into a sacrifice, and the grace of the spirit, with Chrysostom-grace and invisible verity, grace and communion of the members of Christ's body, with Augustine.

"Finally, with Bertram, who was the last of all these, I confess that Christ's body is in the sacrament in this respect; namely, as he writes, because there is in it the spirit of Christ, that is, the power of the word of God, which not only feeds the soul, but also cleanses it. But of these I suppose it may clearly appear to all men, how far we are from that opinion, of which some go about falsely to slander us, saying, we teach that the godly and faithful receive nothing else at the Lord's table, but a figure of the body of Christ.

"As to the second proposition, which asserts that *After the consecration there remaineth no substance of bread and wine, neither any other substance, than the substance of God and man,' I answer, that it is mani

"The sayings of the fathers declare it to be a figura

sostom, Augustine, Ambrose, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Hilary, and most plainly of all in Bertram. The sayings and places of all the fathers, whose names I have before recited against the assertion of the first proposition, quite overthrow transubstantiation. But of all most evidently and plainly, Irenæus, Origen, Cyprian, Chrysostom to Cesarius the monk, Augustine against Adamantus, Gelasius, Cyril, Epiphanius, Chrysostom; again on Matthew xx., Rabanus, Damascene and Bertram.

"I have for the proof of what I have spoken whatever was written by Bertram, a learned man, of sound and upright judgment, and ever counted a catholic for these seven hundred years until this our age. Whosoever shall read and weigh his treatise, considering the time of the writer, his learning, godliness of life, the allegations of the ancient fathers, and his manifold and well-grounded arguments, I cannot but marvel, if he have any fear of God at all, how he can with good conscience speak against him in this matter of the sacrament. This Bertram was the first person that arrested my attention, and that first brought me from the common error of the Romish church, and caused me to search more diligently and exactly both the scriptures and the writings of the old ecclesiastical fathers in this matter. And this I protest before the face of God, who knows I lie not in the things I now speak.

"As to the third proposition, which is, that In the mass is the lively sacrifice of the church, propitiatory and available for the sins as well of the quick as of the dead.' "I answer this third proposition as I did the first. And moreover I say, that being taken in such sense as the words seem to import, it is not only erroneous, but so much to the derogation and nullifying 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. Concerning the Romish mass which is used at this day, or the lively sacrifice, propitiatory and available for the sins of the living and the dead, the holy scripture hath not so much as one syllable.

"As to these words, The lively sacrifice of the church,' there is a doubt whether they are to be understood figuratively and sacramentally.

"Moreover, in these words 'as well as,' it may be doubted whether they be spoken in mockery, as men are wont to say in sport, of a foolish or ignorant person, that he is apt as well in conditions as in knowledge; being apt indeed in neither of them.

"There is also a doubt in the word 'propitiatory,' whether it signifies here that which takes away sin, or

« Poprzednia Dalej »

Książki

“The” Acts and Monuments of the Church: Containing the History and ...