« PoprzedniaDalej »
So as in the ordinance of this Supper, after this understanding, BOOK Christ showed not his omnipotency, but only benevolence, that he loved us, and would be remembered of us. For Christ did not promise say, Whosoever eateth this token eateth my body, or eateth my token in the supper flesh, or shall have any profit of it in special, but, Do this in remembrance of me.
made to a
or in the sixth
of John. [1580.]
I make no such vain inductions as you imagine me to do, but such as be established by Scripture and the consent of all the old writers. And yet both you and Smyth use such fond inductions for your proof of transubstantiation, when you say, God can do this thing, and he can make that thing: whereof you would conclude, that he doth clearly take away the substance of bread and wine, and putteth his flesh and blood in their places: and that Christ maketh his body to be corporally in many places at one time; of which doctrines you have not one jot in all the whole Scripture.
And as concerning your argument made upon the history Injury to of the institution of Christ's Supper, like fond reasoning baptism. might ungodly men make of the sacrament of baptism, and so scoff out both these high mysteries of Christ. For when Christ said these words after his resurrection, Go into the Matt. ult. whole world, and preach unto all people, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: here might wicked blasphemers say, What point of faith is in these words, but to believe the story, that Christ did institute such a sacrament, wherein he commanded to give water for a token? which is now, after this understanding, no secret mystery at all, or any ordinance above reason: so as in the ordinance of this sacrament after this understanding, Christ showed not his omnipotency; for he said not then, Whosoever receiveth this token of water shall receive remission of sin, or the Holy Ghost, or shall have any profit of in it especial, but, Do this.
And albeit this author would not have them bare tokens, yet Tokens be and they be only tokens, they have no warrant signed by Scrip
but tokens, howsoever
without Scripture. Untrue
BOOK ture for any apparel at all. For the sixth of John speaketh not of any promise made to the eating of a token of Christ's flesh, they be gar- but to the eating of Christ's very flesh, whereof the bread, as this gay words author would have it, is but a figure in Christ's words, when he said, This is my body. And if it be but a figure in Christ's words, it is but a figure in St. Paul's words, when he said: The bread which we break, is it not the communication of Christ's body? that is to say, a figure of the communication of Christ's body, if this author's doctrine be true, and not the communication in deed. Every spe- Wherefore if the very body of Christ be not in the Supper de- 2 cial sacra- livered in deed, the eating there hath no special promise, but only commandment to do it in remembrance. After which doctrine
ment hath promise
and hath why should it be noted absolutely for a sacrament and special a secret hid- mystery, that hath nothing hidden in it, but a plain open ordinance
of a token for a remembrance: to the eating of which token is an-
If I granted for your pleasure that the bare bread, having no further respect, were but only a bare figure of Christ's body, or a bare token, (because that term liketh you better, as it may be thought for this consideration, that men should think that I take the bread in the holy mystery to be but as it were a token of 'I recommend me unto you,') but if I grant, I say, that the bare bread is but a bare token of Christ's body, what have you gained thereby? Is therefore the whole use of the bread in the whole action and ministration of the Lord's holy Supper but a naked or nude and bare token? Is not one loaf being broken and distributed among faithful people in the Lord's Supper, taken and eaten of them, a token that the body of Christ was broken and crucified for them? and is to them spiritually and effectually given, and of them spiritually and fruitfully taken and eaten, to their spiritual and heavenly comfort, sustentation, and nourishment of their souls, as the bread is of their bodies?
Bread is not a vain and bare token.
And what would you require more? Can there be any BOOK greater comfort to a Christian man than this? Is there nothing else but bare tokens?
But yet importune adversaries, and such as be wilful and obstinate, will never be satisfied, but quarrel further, saying, What of all this? Here be a great many of gay words framed together, but to what purpose? For all be but signs and tokens as concerning the bread. But how can he be taken for a good Christian man, that thinketh that Christ did ordain his sacramental signs and tokens in vain, without effectual grace and operation? For so might we as well say, that the water in baptism is a bare token, and hath no warrant signed by Scripture for any apparel at all: for the Scripture speaketh not of any promise made to the receiving of a token or figure only. And so may be concluded after your manner of reasoning, that in baptism is no spiritual operation in deed, because that washing in water, in itself, is but a token.
But to express the true effect of the sacraments: as the washing outwardly in water is not a vain token, but teacheth such a washing as God worketh inwardly in them that duly receive the same: so likewise is not the bread a vain token, but showeth and preacheth to the godly receiver, what God worketh in him by his almighty power secretly and invisibly. And therefore as the bread is outwardly eaten in deed in the Lord's Supper, so is the very body of Christ inwardly by faith eaten in deed of all them that come thereto in such sort as they ought to do, which eating nourisheth them unto everlasting life.
And this eating hath a warrant signed by Christ himself A warrant. in the sixth of John, where Christ saith, He that eateth my John vi. flesh and drinketh my blood, hath life everlasting. But they that to the outward eating of the bread, join not thereto an inward eating of Christ by faith, they have no warrant by Scripture at all, but the bread and wine to them be vain, nude, and bare tokens.
3 And where you say that Scripture expresseth no matter of signification of special effect in the sacraments of bread
BOOK and wine, if your eyes were not blinded with popish errors, frowardness and self love, ye might see, in the 22nd of Luke, Luke xxii. where Christ himself expresseth a matter of signification, saying: Hoc facite in mei commemorationem. Do this in 1 Cor. xi. remembrance of me. And St. Paul likewise, 1 Cor. xi. hath the very same thing, which is a plain and direct answer to that same your last question, whereupon you triumph at your pleasure, as though the victory were all yours. For ye say, when this question is demanded of me, What to signify, here must be a sort of good words framed without Scripture. But here St. Paul answereth your question in 1 Cor. xi. express words, that it is the Lord's death, that shall be signified, represented, and preached in these holy mysteries until his coming again. And this remembrance, representation, and preaching of Christ's death, cannot be without special effect, except you will say, that Christ worketh not effectually with his word and sacraments. And St. Paul expresseth the effect, when he saith: The bread which we break, is the communion of Christ's body. But by this place and such like in your book, ye disclose yourself to all men of judgment, either how wilful in your opinion, or how slender in knowledge of the Scriptures you be.
1 Cor. x.
AND therefore like as the teaching is new, to say it is an only teaching of figure, or only signifieth: so the matter of signification must be only figure. How can a newly devised, and new wine have new bottles, and be throughly new, after fifteen hundred and fifty years, in the very year of jutholic, that bilee, as they were wont to call it, to be newly erected and builded
faith be called ca
beginneth in Englishmen's hearts.
It seemeth that you be very desirous to abuse the people's ears with this term, "new," and with the year of jubilee, as though the true doctrine of the sacrament, by me taught, should be but a new doctrine, and yours old, as the Jews slandered the doctrine of Christ by the name of newness, or else that in this year of jubilee you would put the people in remembrance of the full remission of sin, which they were
wont to have at Rome this year, that they might long to re- BOOK turn to Rome for pardons again, as the children of Israel longed to return to Egypt for the flesh that they were wont to have there.
But all men of learning and judgment know well enough, that this your doctrine is no elder than the Bishop of Rome's usurped supremacy, which though it be of good age by number of years, yet is it new to Christ and his word. If there were such darkness in the world now, as hath been in that world which you note for old, the people might drink new wine of the whore of Babylon's cup, until they were as drunk with hypocrisy and superstition, as they might well stand upon their legs, and no man once say, black is their eye. But now, thanks be to God, the light of his word so shineth in the world, that your drunkenness in this year of jubilee is espied, so that you cannot erect and build your popish kingdom any longer in Englishmen's hearts, without your own scorn, shame, and confusion. The old popish bottles must needs brast, when the new wine of God's holy word is poured into them.
WHICH new teaching, whether it proceedeth from the spirit of Tokens truth or no, shall more plainly appear by such matter as this how to disauthor uttereth, wherewith to impugn the true faith taught from falsehitherto. For among many other proofs, whereby truth after much travail in contention, at the last prevaileth, and bath victory, there is none more notable, than when the very adversaries of truth, who pretend nevertheless to be truth's friends, do by some evident untruth bewray themselves. According whereunto, when the two women contended before king Salomon for the child yet alive, Salomon discerned the true natural mother from the other, by their speeches and sayings. Which in the very true mother, were ever conformable unto nature, and in the other, at the last evidently against nature. The very true mother spake always like herself, and never disagreed from the truth of nature, 1 but rather than the child should be killed, as Salomon threatened when he called for a sword, required rather it to be given whole alive to the other woman. The other woman, that was not the