III.

BOOK serve for him also. And yet Smith here shall serve me in good stead against you, who hath imputed unto me so many impudent lies made against the papists in the comparisons before rehearsed: and Smith saith that this is the first lie, which is in the eighth comparison. And so shall Smithe, being mine adversary and your friend, be such a witness. for me as you cannot except against, to prove that those things which before you said were impudent lies, be no lies at all. For this is the first lie, saith Smith, and then my sayings before must be all true, and not impudent lies. Now to the ninth comparison.

Christ's

derstanded

manhood

and God

"They say, that the body of Christ that is in the sacra“ment hath his own proper form and quantity. We say, "that Christ is there sacramentally and spiritually without "form or quantity."

Winchester.

And

In this comparison is both sleight and craft. In the first part of it, which is that they say, there is mention of the body of Christ which is proper of the humanity of Christ. In the second part, which is of we say,' there is no mention of Christ's body, but of Christ, who in his divine nature is understanded present without body is un- a body. Now the sacrament is institute of Christ's body and of his hu- blood, and because the divine nature in Christ continueth the 2 manity. unity with the body of Christ, we must needs confess, where the [1580.] The unity body of Christ is, there is whole Christ God and man. of Christ's when we speak of Christ's body, we must understand a true body, which hath both form and quantity, and therefore such as confess the true catholic faith, they affirm of Christ's body all truth of a natural body, which although it hath all those truths of form and quantity, yet they say, Christ's body is not present after the manner of quantity, nor in a visible form, as it was conversant in this 3 present life, but that there is truly in the sacrament the very true 4 body of Christ, which good men believe upon the credit of Christ that said so, and knowledge therewith the manner of that presence to be an high mystery, and the manner so spiritual, as the carnal man cannot by discourse of reason reach it, but in his discourse shall, as this author doth, think it a vanity and foolishness. Which foolishness nevertheless overcometh the wisdom of the

head.
[1580.]

world. And thus I have opened what they say on the catholic BOOK part.

III.

the institu

This is my

body.

Now for the other part whereof this author is, and with his A marvellous saying faith, we say,' the words seem to imply, that Christ's human of this aubody is not in the sacrament, in that it is said, Christ to be there thor without Scripsacramentally and spiritually without form or quantity, which say- ture. ing hath no Scripture for it. For the Scripture speaketh of [1580.] Christ's body which was betrayed for us to be given us to be eaten. Where also Christ's Divinity is present as accompanying Christ in his humanity, which humanity is specially spoken of, the presence tion of the of which humanity when it is denied, then is there no text to sacrament, spake of his prove the presence of Christ's Divinity specially, that is to say, humanity, otherwise than it is by his omnipotency present everywhere. And saying, to conclude this piece of comparison, this manner of speech was never I think read, that Christ is present in the sacrament with- [1580.] 1 out form or quantity. And St. Paul speaketh of a form in the Godhead, Qui quum in forma Dei esset. Who when he was in the Phil. ii. form of God. So as if Christ be present in the sacrament without all form, then is he there, neither as God nor man, which is a stranger teaching than yet hath been heard or read of; but into such absurdities in deed do they fall, who entreat irreverently and untruly this high mystery. This is here worthy a special note, how by the manner of the speech in the latter part of this difference, the teaching seemeth to be, that Christ is spiritually present in the sacrament, because of the word "there," which thou, reader, There. mayest compare how it agreeth with the rest of this author's doc- [1580.] trine. Let us go to the next.

Canterbury.

Such is the nature of many, that they can find many knots in a plain rush, and doubts where no doubts ought to be found. So find you sleight and craft where I meant all things simply and plainly. And to avoid such sleight and craft as you gather of my words, I shall express them plainly

thus.

Note this contrariety in the author. [1580.]

The papists say, that the body of Christ that is in the sa- The comcrament hath his own proper form and quantity. We say, [1580.] parison. that the body of Christ hath not his proper form and quantity, neither in the sacrament nor in them that receive the

III.

BOOK sacrament, but is in the sacrament sacramentally, and in the worthy receivers spiritually, without the proper form and quantity of his body. This was my meaning at the first, and no man that had looked of this place indifferently would have taken the second part of this comparison to be understanded of Christ's divine nature: for the bread and wine be sacraments of his body and blood, and not of his Divinity, as Theodoretus saith, and therefore his divine na- 2 ture is not sacramentally in the sacrament, but his human nature only. And what manner of speech had this been, to say of Christ's divine nature, that it is in the sacrament without quantity, which hath in it no manner of quantity, wheresoever it be? And where I set forth these comparisons to show wherein we vary from the papists, what variance had been in this comparison, if I had understanded the first part of Christ's humanity, and the second of his Divinity?

Smyth.

Whether in the sacra

ment Christ's body hath

his proper

form and quantity.

The reader by this one place among many other may easily discern how captious you be to reprehend whatsoever I say, and to pervert every thing into a wrong sense: so that in respect of you, Smyth is a very indifferent taker of my words, although in deed he far passeth the bounds of honesty.

But now to come directly to the matter, if it be true that you say, that in the sacrament Christ's body hath all the forms and quantities of a natural body, why say you then, that his body is not there present after the manner of quantity? Declare what difference is between form and quantity, and the manner of quantity. And if Christ's body in the sacrament have the same quantity, that is to say, the same length, breadth, and thickness, and the same form, that is to say, the same due order and proportion of the members and parts of his body that he had when he was crucified, and hath now in heaven, (as he hath by your saying here in this place,) then I pray you declare further, how the length, breadth, and thickness of a man should be contained in quantity within the compass of a piece of bread, no longer r Theodoret. Dialog. 1.

III.

nor broader than one or two inches, nor much thicker than BOOK one leaf of paper: how an inch may be as long as an ell, and an ell as short as an inch: how length and roundness shall agree in one proportion; and a thick and thin thing be both of one thickness: which you must warrant to be brought to pass, if the form and quantity of Christ's body be contained under the form and quantity of such bread and wine as we now use.

But as Smyth in the last comparison did me good service Smyth. against you, so shall you in this comparison do me good service against him. For among the five lies wherewith he chargeth me in these comparisons, he accounteth this for one, that I report of the papists, that Christ's body in the sacrament hath his proper form and quantity, which you say is a truth. And therefore if I make a lie herein, as Smith saith I do, yet I lie not alone, but have you to bear me company. And yet once again more may the reader here note, how the papists vary among themselves.

4 And it is untrue that you say, that good men believe upon the credit of Christ, that there is truly in the sacrament the very true body of Christ. For Christ called bread his body and wine his blood, which, as the old authors say, must needs be understanded figuratively, but he never said that his true body is truly in the sacrament, as you here report of him.

And the manner of his presence you call so high a mystery, that the carnal man cannot reach it. And in deed as you feign the matter, it is so high a mystery, that never man could reach it but yourself alone. For you make the manner of Christ's being in the sacrament so spiritual, that you say his flesh, blood, and bones be there really and carnally, and yet you confess in your book, that you never read any old author that so said. And this manner of handling of so pure a mystery, is neither godly foolishness nor worldly, but rather a mere frensy and madness.

And although the Scripture speak of Christ's body to be eaten of us, yet that is understanded of spiritual and not of corporal eating, and of spiritual, not of corporal presence.

III.

John xvi.

BOOK The Scripture saith, that Christ hath forsaken the world, and is ascended into heaven. Upon which words St. Mark xvi. Augustine, Vigilius, and other ancient authors do prove, Luke xxiv. that as concerning the nature of his manhood, Christ is gone hence, and is not here, as I have declared in my third book, the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth chapters.

Acts i.

"All."

"There."

And where you think that this manner of speech was never read, that Christ is present in the sacrament without I form or quantity, I am sure that it was never read in any approved author, that Christ hath his proper form and quantity in the sacrament. And Duns saith 3, that his quan- 3 tity is in heaven, and not in the sacrament.

And when I say that Christ is in the sacrament sacramentally, and without form and quantity, who would think any man so captious, so ignorant, or so full of sophistry, to draw my words to the form of Christ's Divinity, which I speak most plainly of the form and quantity of his body and humanity, as I have before declared? And although some other might be so far overseen, yet specially you ought not so to take my words. Forasmuch as you said not past sixteen lines before, that my words seem to imply, that I meant of Christ's human body.

And because it may appear how truly and faithfully you report my words, you add this word "all," which is more than I spake, and marreth all the whole matter. And you gather thereof such absurdities as I never spake, but as you sophistically do gather, to make a great matter of nothing. And where of this word "there," you would conclude repugnance in my doctrine, that where in other places I have written, that Christ is spiritually present in them that receive the sacrament, and not in the sacraments of bread and wine, and now it should seem that I teach contrary, that Christ is spiritually present in the very bread and wine, if you pleased to understand my words rightly, there is no repugnance in my words at all. For by this word "there," I mean not in the sacraments of bread and wine, but in the ministration of the sacrament, as the old authors for the Scotus, iv. sent. dist. 10. q. 1.