THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY. Sub stance way. Here, good christian reader, I beseech thee to consider thus much by the and na In the university of Oxford, and in the late solemn disputation holden ture not there against that godly father and martyr of blessed memory, Doctor Cranmer, changed. the archbishop of Canterbury, the authority of this father Theodoretus was utterly Anno 1554. refused in open audience, for that he was a Grecian, and therefore not thought to judge catholicly of the sacraments, according to the late determination of the church of Rome. Which thing notwithstanding, it appeareth M. Harding hath now reconciled him, and made him catholic. Howbeit, this thing seemeth very strange, that one man, in the uttering of one sentence, without any manner altering or change of word, should be both an heretic and a catholic, both together. Concerning the greatest substance hereof, this place of Theodoretus is answered before, in the eighth article, and in the twenty-eighth division 13. Here he saith that "the bread and the wine are seen and touched, as they were before." Hereof M. Harding concludeth thus: Ergo, there is neither bread nor wine remaining, but only accidents and shews without substance. This argument Dial. 1. Im of itself is strange and wonderful, and the more for that it concludeth plain contrary, not only to the meaning, but also to the express and evident words of Theodoretus. For thus his words lie: Qui seipsum appellavit vitem, ille symbola Theodor. et signa, quæ videntur, appellatione corporis et sanguinis honoravit; non naturam mutabilis. mutans, &c.1a: “He, that calleth himself the vine, honoured the signs and tokens (whereby he meaneth the sacraments), that be seen, with the name of his body and blood; not changing the nature thereof, &c." And again: Signa mystica Theodor. in post sanctificationem non recedunt a natura sua. Manent enim in priori substantia 15: "The mystical signs after the consecration depart not from their own nature. For they remain in their former substance." Now let us compare this text with M. Harding's gloss. Theodoretus saith, "The bread and wine depart not from their own nature: " M. Harding saith, They depart utterly from their own nature. Theodoretus saith, "The bread and wine remain in their former substance:" M. Harding saith, There remain only the shews and accidents of bread and wine, without any their former substance. It is a bold gloss, that thus dareth to overthrow the manifest meaning of the text. I trow such dealing should be rectified by a writ of error. Of these plain words of Theodoretus we may well conclude thus against M. Harding: The substance of the bread and wine remaineth still as it was before; therefore the accidents and shews of bread and wine be not there without their substance. For the rest, how these mystical signs be understanded and believed to be the body and blood of Christ, it is answered before, in the eighth article, and twenty-sixth 16 division. Dial. 2. In Lib. Sent. Prosperi, De Consec. autem. "We do not in like sort," saith St Augustine, "take these two forms Dist. 2. cap. Nos of bread and wine after consecration, as we took them before: sith that we grant faithfully, that before consecration it is bread and wine that nature hath shaped; but after consecration that it is the flesh and blood of Christ that the blessing hath consecrated17" In another place he saith The hundred De Verbis Domini that this is not the bread which goeth into the body (179) (meaning ninth unSermo 28. for bodily sustenance), but that bread of life qui animæ nostræ sub- truth stantiam fulcit 18, "which sustaineth the substance of our soul.” secundum Lucam, [13 Here is an error: it should be the twenty. sixth division. See before, pages 547, &c.] [14 Theodor. Op. Immut. Dial. 1. Tom. IV. p. 18.] [17 August. in Lib. Sentent. Prosp. in Corp. Jur. Canon. Lugd. 1624. Decret. Gratian. Decr. and seventy For Rabanus saith: "Sacramentum.. in alimentum corporis redi Tert. Pars, De Consecr. Dist. ii. can. 41. col. 1932. gitur 19," [18 August. Op. Par. 1679-1700. Serm. lxxxiv. 3. [19 Rab. Maur. Op. Col. Agrip. 1626-7. De Instit. Cleric. Lib. 1. cap. xxxi. Tom. VI. p. 11.] THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY. The former of these two places may be easily discharged by that is answered before to the words of St Ambrose, in the third division hereof. St Augustine speaketh of the changing and advancing1 of the natures of bread and wine unto a spiritual and divine use, and not of the abolishing of the same. As for accidents and shews standing without subject and substance, he saith nothing. True it is, the bread, before the consecration, was nothing else but bare and common bread; now it is advanced2, and made a sacrament of Christ's body and blood; not by nature, but by consecration, above nature. Chrysostom saith: Chrysost. in Oculis intellectus ista perspiciamus. Nihil enim sensibile tradidit nobis Christus, &c. Sic et in baptismo3: "Let us behold these things with the eyes of our mind; for Christ hath delivered to us nothing that is sensible, &c. So likewise in baptism." I think M. Harding will not deny but the water in baptism is a thing sensible; likewise, that the bread and wine in the holy mysteries, or, at the least, the accidents and shews thereof, are things sensible. But St Chrysostom withdraweth us from the bread, the wine, the water, and all other like things, that be sensible, to the consideration of the body and blood of Christ, that are not sensible: in comparison whereof, all the rest are consumed, and seem nothing. Matt. Hom. 83. Sacram. Lib. v. cap. iv. Touching the second place, the words be written both in St Augustine, and Ambros. de also in a book that is commonly known by the name of St Ambrose de Sacramentis, the meaning whereof nothing toucheth, neither the bread, nor the wine, but only the body and blood of Christ, which thereby are represented. And therefore this place, so unadvisedly chosen, can little further M. Harding's fantasy of empty accidents, hanging, I know not how, without substance. Rab. Maur. xxxi. Dom. August. in Johan. August. in The words be plain of themselves without further exposition. Non iste panis,...qui vadit in corpus, sed ille panis vitæ æternæ, qui animæ nostræ substantiam fulcit: "Not this bread that passeth into the body, but that bread of everlasting life, that strengtheneth the substance of our soul.” M. Harding knoweth that the sacrament is received into our bodies. Rabanus saith: Sacramentum... ore percipitur,... [et] in alimentum corporis redigitur: "The sacrament is received with the mouth, and is turned to the nourishment of the body." But Cypr. de Coen. the body of Christ, as St Cyprian saith, est cibus mentis, non ventris", "is meat for the mind, not for the belly." So St Augustine saith: Panis...iste interioris Tractat. 26. hominis quærit esuriem3: "This bread seeketh the hunger of the inner man.” Intus bibendo felix sum: "Drinking in my heart within, I am made happy." Tertullian saith: Ruminandus intellectu, et fide digerendus [est] 10: "That meat Resur. Carn. ought to be chewed with understanding, and to be digested with faith." Likewise Chrysost. ex Chrysostom: Magnus iste panis, qui replet mentem... non ventrem11: "This great bread, that filleth the mind, and not the belly." Of this bread St Ambrose speaketh, and not of the sacrament, that is received into the body. Wherefore it appeareth, M. Harding was not well advised how little this place would make for his purpose. The old father Origen saith: Accidit, ut simpliciores quidam, Cant. Cantic. nescientes distinguere,... quæ sint, quæ in scripturis divinis interiori homini, quæ vero exteriori deputanda sint, vocabulorum similitudine falsi, ad ineptas quasdam fabulas et figmenta inania se contulerint 12: "It happeneth that simple folk, being not able to discern what things they be in the holy scriptures that are to be applied to the inner man, and what to the utter, being deceived by the likeness of words, turn themselves into 13 vain imaginations and foolish fables." Tertull. de variis locis in Matt. Hom. 9. Orig. in [ August. Op. Par. 1679-1700. In Johan. Evang. cap. vi. Tractat. xxvi. 1. Tom. III. Pars II. col. 494.] [ Id. ibid. Tractat. xxv. 17. col. 493.] [10 Tertull. Op. Lut. 1641. De Resur. Carn. 37. p. 406.] [" Chrysost. Op. Lat. Basil. 1547. Ex Matt. cap. v. De Orat. Domin. Hom. Tom. V. col. 716.] [12 Orig. Op. Par. 1733-59. In Cantic. Canticor. Prolog. Tom. III. p. 28; where similitudinibus.] [18 To, 1565, 1609.] M. HARDING. THE SIXTH DIVISION. bread; ergo, No man can speak more plainly hereof than Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus, an old author who wrote in Greek, and is extant, but as yet remaining in written hand, and common1 to the sight of few learned men: his words be not much unlike the words of the school doctors. Præbetur corpus év Túπ...äрrov, in specie, sive figura panis. Item, præbetur sanguis év rún olvov 15: "Christ's body," saith he, “is given us in form or figure of bread. Again, his blood is given us in form of wine.” A little after these words he saith thus: μὴ πρόσεχε οὖν, ὡς ψιλοῖς τῷ ἄρτῳ καὶ It is not bare To ovo, &c.: Ne mentem adhibeas quasi pani et vino nudis: sunt enim hæc its bread corpus et sanguis, ut Dominus pronunciavit. Nam tametsi illud tibi sensus suggerit, esse [scilicet panem et vinum nudum], tamen firmet te fides, et ne gustatu rem dijudices, quin potius pro certo ac comperto habe, omni dubitatione relicta, esse tibi impartitum corpus et sanguinem Christi16: "Consider not," saith this father, "these as bare bread and wine. For these are his body and blood, as our Lord said. For, although thy sense report to thee so much, that it is bare bread and wine, yet let thy faith stay thee, and judge not thereof by thy taste, but rather be right well assured, all doubt put apart, that the body and blood of Christ is given to thee." Again he saith thus in the same place: Hæc cum scias, et pro certo et explorato habeas, (180) qui videtur esse panis, non esse, sed The hundred corpus Christi; item, quod videtur vinum, non esse, quanquam id velit sensus, sed untruth, sanguinem Christi, ac de eo prophetam dixisse, Panis cor hominis confirmat; wilful corfirma ipse cor, sumpto hoc pane, utpote spirituali17: "Whereas thou knowest this ruption of for a very certainty, that that which seemeth to be wine is not wine, albeit the words and sense maketh that account of it, but the blood of Christ, and that the prophet thereof said, 'Bread strengtheneth the heart of man;' strengthen then 19 thyself 20 thy heart, by taking this bread as that which is spiritual." And in the 21 III. Catechesi this father saith: Panis eucharistiæ post invocationem sancti Spiritus non amplius est panis nudus et simplex, sed corpus, &c. 22: "The bread of the sacrament, after prayer made to the Holy Ghost, is not bare and simple bread, but the body of Christ." and eightieth standing in the author's meaning, as shall ap pear 18. Now, sith that by this doctor's plain declaration of the catholic faith in this point we ought to believe, and to be verily assured, that the bread is no more bread after consecration, but the very body of Christ, and the wine no more wine, but his precious blood, though they seem to the eye otherwise, though taste and feeling judge otherwise, and, to be short, though all senses report the contrary; and all this upon warrant of our Lord's word, who said these to be his body and blood, and that (as he teacheth) not in the bread and wine; and further, sith we are taught by Eusebius Emissenus, in homilies 23 of Easter, to believe Newly set terrena commutari et transire 24, "the earthly things to be changed, and to pass;" justly sus[Transubstantia- again, creaturas converti in substantiam corporis Christi 25, "the tion. H. A. 1564.] creatures of bread and wine to be turned into the substance of our Lord's body and blood,” which is the very transubstantiation; and sith Chrysostomb saith, panem absumi, "that the bread is consumed away" by the substance of Christ's body; and Damascene, bread and wine transmutari [In Liturgia. H. A. 1564.] [14 Commen, 1565, and H. A. 1564.] [15 Cyril. Hierosol. Op. Par. 1720. Catech. xxii. Myst. iv. 3. p. 320.] [16 Id. ibid. 6. p. 321.] [17 Ταῦτα μαθῶν, καὶ πληροφορηθεὶς ὡς ὁ φαι· νόμενος ἄμτος οὐκ ἄρτος ἐστὶν, εἰ καὶ τῇ γεύσει αἰσθητός, ἀλλὰ σῶμα Χριστοῦ· καὶ ὁ φαινόμενος οἶνος οὐκ οἶνός ἐστιν, εἰ καὶ ἡ γεῦσις τοῦτο βού λεται, ἀλλὰ αἷμα Χριστοῦ· καὶ ὅτι περὶ τούτου ἔλεγε πάλαι ὁ Δαβὶδ ψάλλων, Καὶ ἄρτος καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου στηρίζει, τοῦ ἱλαρῦναι πρόσωπον ἐν ἐλαίῳ· στηρίζου τὴν καρδίαν, μεταλαμβάνων αὐτ τοῦ ὡς πνευματικοῦ· καὶ ἱλάρυνον τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς σου πρόσωπον.-Id. ibid. 9. p. 322.] [18 See below, page 579.] [19 Thou, H. A. 1564.] [20 Theeself, 1565.] [21 H.A. 1564, omits the.] [22 Id. Catech. xxi. Myst. iii. 3. pp. 316, 7.] [24 Nec dubitet quisquam...creaturas...in domi- [25...tibi novum... non debeat videri, quod in Christi substantiam terrena et mortalia committantur, &c.-Id. ibid. fol. 45.] abroad and pected. In compaChrist's body, sented, the rison of that is reprebread is nothing. < Such a supernatural change there is in the water of baptism, and in all sacraments. d Even so Theophylact transelementamur in Christum 4." Samona, Methonensis, Cabasilas, Ephesius, are late writers, void of credit, yet all enemies to transubstantiation. doxa Fide, cap. ziv. these Greek wri forth of late by one Sainctes. H.A. supernaturaliter1, "to be changed above the course of nature;" and Lib. iv. De OrthoTheophylact, the bread transelementari in carnem Domini2, "to be In Marc. xiv. saith: "Nos quite turned by changing of the elements," that is, the matter of3 substance it consisteth of, "into the flesh of our Lord;" and that in another place, ineffabili In Matt. xxvi. operatione transformari, etiamsi panis nobis videatur, "that the bread is transformed and changed into another substantial form (he meaneth that of our Lord's body) by unspeakable working, though it seem to be bread; finally, sith that the Greek doctors of late age affirm the same doctrine, among whom [The treatises of •These four, Samona useth for persuasion of it the similitude which Gregory ters have been set Nyssene and Damascene for declaration of the same used before, Claudius de and Marcus which is, that in consecration such manner transubstantiation is made, 1564] as is the conversion of the bread in nourishing, in which it is turned into the substance of the nourished'; Methonensis, like St Ambrose, would not men in this matter to look for the order of nature, seeing that Christ was born of a virgin beside all order of nature, and saith that our Lord's body in this sacrament is received under the form or shape of another thing, lest blood should cause it to be horrible; Nicolaus Cabasila saith, that this bread is no more a figure of our Lord's body, neither a gift bearing an image of the true gift, nor Cap. xxvii. bearing any description of the passions of our Saviour himself, as it were in a table, but the true gift itself, the most holy body of our Lord itself, which hath truly received reproaches, contumelies, stripes, which was crucified, which was killed'; This Marcus Marcus Ephesius, though otherwise to be rejected, as he that obstinately resisted wilfully de- the determination of the council of Florence concerning the proceeding of the Holy praveth St Basil's words. Ghost out of the Son, yet a sufficient witness of the Greek church's faith in this point, affirming the things offered to be called of St Basil antitypa, that is, the Two sorts of samplers and figures of our Lord's body, because they be not yet perfitly conseConsecration crated, but as yet bearing the figure and image, referreth the change or transubfit, the other stantiation of them to the Holy Ghost, donec Spiritus sanctus adveniat, qui ea mutet 10: These gifts offered (saith he) be of St Basil called figures, "until the Holy Ghost come upon them, to change them." Whereby he sheweth the faith of the Greek church, that, through the Holy Ghost in consecration, the bread and wine are so changed, as they may no more be called figures, but the very body and blood of our Lord itself, as into the same changed by the coming of the Holy Ghost. Which change is a change in substance, and therefore it may rightly be termed transubstantiation, which is nothing else but a turning or [Transubstantiachanging of one substance into another substance. Ephesius unperfit. THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY. tion. H. A. 1564.] This Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus is an old author newly set forth. I will not call his credit into question; notwithstanding many of his considerations be very [' Damascen. Op. Par. 1712. De Fid. Orthod. Lib. IV. cap. xiii. Tom. I. p. 270.] [ Theophyl. Op. Venet. 1754-63. In Marc. Comm. cap. xiv. Tom. I. p. 249.] [ Or, H. A. 1564.] [* See below, page 577, note 12.] [5 H. A. 1564, omits that.] [ Id. in Matt. Comm. cap. xxvi. Tom. I. p. 146.] [7 Spiritus sanctus descendit, et...panem et vinum in corpus et sanguinem Christi μeraßáλλet, id est, commutat, non minus quam hepar convertit alimentum in corpus alicujus hominis.-Samon. Discept. sup. Verit. Corp. et Sang. Christ. in Sacr. Euch. in Mag. Biblioth. Vet. Patr. Col. Agrip. 1618-22. Tom. XI. p. 477. See also ad calc. Lit. Sanct. Patr. Par. 1560. fol. 26. 2.] [8 Quid requiris causam et ordinem naturæ panis transmutationis in Christi corpus, et aquæ vinique in sanguinem; cum supra naturam, rationem, mentem, et cogitationem, ex virgine sit natus? scias oportet...Deum...hoc fecisse...ne aversarentur multi arrhabonem æternæ vitæ, et ægre ferrent, carnem et ... sanguinem intuentes.-Nic. Episc. Methon. De Corp. et Sang. Christ. in Mag. Biblioth. Vet. Patr. Tom. XII. Pars I. p. 1192. See also ad calc. Lit. Sanct. Patr. foll. 25, 6.] [9...panis enim non amplius figura dominici corporis, neque donum ferens imaginem veri doni, neque ferens aliquam descriptionem ipsius Servatoris passionum tanquam in tabula: sed ipsum verum donum, ipsum sanctissimum corpus Domini, quod omnia illa vere suscepit, probra, contumelias, vibices; quod crucifixum, quod interfectum. - Nic. Cabas. Liturg. Expos. cap. xxvii. in Mag. Biblioth. Vet. Patr. Tom. XIV. p. 149.] [10 Idcirco et Magnus Basilius...antitypa vocat proposita dona, nimirum quasi nondum perfecta per ea verba, verum adhuc typum quendam et imaginem ferentia. Itaque deinceps statim Spiritus sanctus adveniat precatur, faciatque panem quidem ipsum preciosum corpus; calicem autem, ipsum preciosum sanguinem.-Marc. Ephes. ad calc. Lit. Sanct. Patr. fol. 28.] Bare bread. Myst. 4. much like to M. Harding's judgment in this article, that is to say, like accidens sine subjecto, a shew of words without substance." He seemeth both in words and sense fully to agree with Chrysostom, Ecumenius, and other Greek fathers, Bare oil. that never understood this M. Harding's new religion. He shutteth up the hearers' bodily eyes, wherewith they see the bread and wine; and borroweth only the inner eyes of their minds, wherewith they may see the very body and blood of Christ, which is that bread that came from heaven. And herein, notwithstanding his words be quick and violent, the more to stir and inflame the hearts of them unto whom he speaketh, yet he himself in plainest wise openeth and cleareth his own meaning. For thus he writeth: Ne consideres, tanquam panem Catech. nudum: Panis eucharistia non est amplius panis simplex et nudus11: "Consider it not as if it were bare bread: The bread of the sacrament is no longer bare and simple bread." Which words are naturally resolved thus: It is bread; howbeit not only bare bread, but bread, and some other thing else beside. So, where they of M. Harding's side are wont to say, Papa non est purus homo 12, "The pope is not a bare man ;" I trow their meaning is not that the pope is no man, but only that he is a man, and yet, besides that, hath another capacity above the condition and state of common men. Of these words of Cyrillus we may well reason thus by the way: The sacrament is not only or bare bread; therefore it is bread, albeit not only bare bread. And thus the same Cyrillus, that is brought to testify that there remaineth no bread in the sacrament, testifieth most plainly to the contrary, that there is bread remaining in the sacrament. Catech. Myst. And, although this answer of itself might seem sufficient, yet, good christian reader, for thy better satisfaction, I pray thee further to understand that, as this Cyrillus speaketh here of the sacrament of our Lord's body and blood, even so, and in like phrase and form of words, he speaketh of the oil that they call holy, of the water of baptism, and of other ceremonies. Of the oil he writeth thus, and further by the same expoundeth his meaning touching the sacrament: Vide, Cyril. in ne illud putes esse unguentum tantum. Quemadmodum enim panis eucharistiæ, post Tert. sancti Spiritus invocationem, non amplius est panis communis, sed corpus Christi; sic et sanctum hoc unguentum non amplius est unguentum nudum, neque . commune,... sed est charisma Christi13: "Beware thou think not this to be oil only. For as the bread of the sacrament, after the invocation of the Holy Ghost, is no longer common bread, but the body of Christ; so this holy oil is no longer bare or common oil, but it is the grace of Christ." By these words there appeareth like change in the one as in the other. As the oil is the grace of Christ, so is the bread the body of Christ; and as the nature and substance of the oil remaineth still, although it be not bare or common oil, so the nature or substance of the bread remaineth still, although it be not common or bare bread. ... In like sort he writeth of the water of baptism: Non tanquam aquæ simplici Cyril. In Illuminat, 3. studeas huic lavacro:... ne aquæ simplicitati mentem adhibeas14: "Behold not this bath as simple water: consider not the simplicity of the water." Of these conferences of places we may well gather thus: The water in the holy mystery of baptism, notwithstanding it be not bare and common water, yet nevertheless continueth still in the nature and substance of very water; so likewise the bread in the holy mystery of Christ's body, notwithstanding it be not bare and common bread, yet nevertheless in nature and substance is bread still. But Cyrillus saith, it is no bread, it is no wine, notwithstanding it appear so unto the senses; Chrysostom saith, the substance of bread is consumed; Emissenus saith, it is turned into the substance of Christ's body; and Damascenus and Theophylactus, latter 15 writers of no great credit, avouch the same. It is plain that both Cyrillus and all other old learned fathers labour evermore, with all vehemency and force of words, to sequester, and pull their hearers from the judgment of their senses, to behold that bread that giveth life unto the [" Cyril. Hierosol. Op. Par. 1720. Catech. xxii. Myst. iv. 6. p. 321; Catech. xxi. Myst. iii. 3. pp. 316,7.] [12...Romanus pontifex qui non puri hominis, sed veri Dei vicem gerit in terris.-Innoc. III. in Corp. Jur. Canon. Lugd. 1624. Decretal. Gregor. IX. Lib. 1. Tit. vii. cap. 3. col. 217.] [13 Cyril. Hierosol. Op. Catech. xxi. Myst. iii. 3. pp. 316, 7.] [14 Id. Catech. iii. 3, 4. pp. 40, 1.] [15 Later, 1565, 1609.] |