Thus are they driven to wander in vanities, and to seek up strange and monstrous forms of speech, such as the ancient catholic doctors never knew, lest they should seem plainly and simply to say, as the learned father Tertullian Tertull. con- saith: Hoc est corpus meum, hoc est, figura corporis mei1: "This is my body, that is to say, this is a figure of my body;" or, as it is written in their own Dist. 2. Hoc decrees: Vocatur corpus Christi, id est, significat [corpus Christi]2: "It is called est. In Gloss. the body of Christ, that is to say, it signifieth the body of Christ." tra Marcion. Hieron. in cap. v. St Hierome saith: Tam diu... quærunt hæretici nova veteribus [ad]jungere, et eadem recentioribus immutare, donec [eos] et sensus humanus et verba deficiant3: "The manner of heretics is so long to mingle and blend new things with the old, and still to alter new for new, until both their wits and their speech begin to fail them." Here note, good reader, that in this whole article M. Harding hath alleged no manner doctor, nor old nor new. The reason thereof is this, for that of the old doctors he had none to allege, and of his new doctors he was ashamed. [1 Tertull. Op. Lut. 1641. Adv. Marcion. Lib. IV. 40. p. 571. See before, page 447, note 13.] [ Corp. Jur. Canon. Lugd. 1624. Decret. Gratian. Decr. Tert. Pars, De Consecr. Dist. ii. Gloss. in can. 48. col. 1937. See before, page 503, note 13.] WHETHER THE FORMS BE THE SACRAMENT. THE TWENTY-FIFTH ARTICLE. THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY. OR that the accidents, or forms, or shews of bread and wine be the sacraments of Christ's body and blood, and not rather that bread and wine itself. [WHO ARE THE SACRAMENTS OF CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD, THE ACCIDENTS, OR THE BREAD AND WINE.-ARTICLE XXV. H. A, 1564.] Paschali. De Cons. Dist. 2, cap. Omnia. M. HARDING. THE FIRST DIVISION. hundred and untruth, ever proved. Forasmuch as, by the almighty power of God's word pronounced by the priest in the consecration of this sacrament, the body and blood of Christ are made (253) The two really present, the substance of bread (253) turned into the substance of the body, fifty-third and the substance of wine into the substance of the blood; the bread (which is con- presumed, In Homil. sumed away by the fire of the divine substances, as Chrysostom and never saith, and now is become the bread which was formed by the hand of the Holy Ghost in the womb of the virgin, and decocted with the fire of the passion in the altar of the cross, as St Ambrose saith) cannot be the sacrament of the body, nor the wine of the blood. Neither can it be said that the bread and wine which were before are the sacraments, for that the bread is become the body, and the wine the blood, and so now they are not; and if they be not, then neither be they sacraments. Therefore, that the outward forms of bread and wine which remain be the sacraments of Christ's body and blood, and not the very bread and wine itself, it followeth by sequel of reason, or consequent of understanding, deduced out of the first truth, which of St Basil, Epist. 65. [In in an epistle ad Sozopolitanos, speaking against certain that went Latino codice.] about to raise up again the old heresy of Valentinus, is called τὸ ἐν διανοίαις ἀκόλουθον. of which sequel of reason in the matter of the sacrament many conclusions may be deduced in case of want of express scriptures. Which way of reasoning Basil used against heretics, as also sundry other fathers, where manifest scripture might not be alleged. THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY. M. Harding presumeth that his new fantasy of transubstantiation must needs stand for good. And therefore, imagining that the bread and wine are wholly removed, and cannot be the sacraments, he thinketh he may well conclude that the forms and shews that are left behind must needs be the sacraments. But this error is soon reproved by the consent of all the old catholic fathers of the church. St Augustine saith: Quod videtis, panis est 10: "The thing that ye see August. ad (speaking of the sacrament) is (not a form or an accident, but) very bread." Infant. [ The, H. A. 1564.] [5 ̓Αλλ ̓ ὥσπερ κῃρὸς πυρὶ προσομιλήσας οὐ δὲν ἀπουσιάζει, οὐδὲν περισσεύει· οὕτω καὶ ὧδε νόμιζε συναναλίσκεσθαι τὰ μυστήρια τῇ τοῦ σώμaтos ovoía. -Chrysost. Op. Par. 1718-38. De Pœnit. Hom. ix. Tom. II. col. 350. Conf. Op. Lat. Basil, 1547. De Euch. in Encæn. Admon. Sum. Tom. III. col. 919.] [... illum utique intelligo panem, qui manu sancti Spiritus formatus est in utero virginis, et igne passionis decoctus in ara crucis.--Ambros. in Corp. Jur. Canon. Decret. Gratian. Decr. Tert. Pars, De [ And the wine, H. A. 1564.] [ Basil. Op. Par. 1721-30. Ad Sozop. Epist. cclxi. (al. lxv). 3. Tom. III. p. 402.] [ These words are not in H. A. 1564. They appear in H. A. 1565.] [10 August. Op. Par. 1679-1700. Serm. cclxxii. ad Infant. Tom. V. col. 1103. See before, page 776, note 11.] Cæsar. Chrysost. ad St Chrysostom1, Theodoretus?, Gelasius, and other learned fathers confess by Gelas. contra manifest and express words, that "there remaineth still in the sacrament the very nature and substance of bread and wine." Therefore this doctrine is built upon a false ground, and cannot stand. Eutych. Theodor. Dial. 1 et 2. De LL. et et Lon. Con. Cypr. Lib. ii. Chrysost. in Hebr. Hom. 16. Chrysost. in De Consecr. Dist. 2. Quid sit sanguis. But Chrysostom saith: "The bread is consumed by the force of the divine presence." And St Ambrose, saith M. Harding, reporteth the same. It is great frowardness, whatsoever any one or other of the fathers happen to utter in vehemency and heat of talk, to dissemble the manner of their speech, and to draw and force the same violently to the rigour of the letter. Paulus saith: In fraudem [legis facit],... qui, salvis verbis legis, sententiam ejus circumvenit1: "He doth wrong to the law, that, following only the bare words, defraudeth the meaning of the law." St Cyprian saith: Passio Christi est sacrificium quod offerimus: "The sacrifice that we offer is the passion of Christ." Chrysostom saith: Baptisma Christi sanguis ejus est: "The baptism of Christ is Christ's blood." And again he saith: In mysteriis sanguis ex Christi latere hauritur: "In the time of the holy communion the blood of Christ is drawn out of his side." St Gregory saith: [Christus] iterum in hoc mysterio moritur: "In this mystery (of the holy communion) Christ is put to death again.” I trow, M. Harding will not so straitly force us to believe, only upon the sight of these bare words, either that the holy communion is Christ's passion, or that the water of baptism is Christ's blood, or that Christ is slain and put to death in the time of the holy mysteries, or that Christ's blood at that time is drawn and poured from his side; and that without help of figure, verily, really, and indeed. By such manner of amplification and kind of speech St Chrysostom saith, "The bread is consumed;" not for that there remaineth in the sacrament no bread at all, but for that, in comparison of the death of Christ, that there is laid forth and represented before us, the material bread seemeth nothing. For otherwise Chrysostom most plainly confesseth that the nature of bread remaineth Chrysost. ad still. These be his words: In sacramento manet natura panis9: “In the sacrament there remaineth still the nature of bread." Cæsar. In Encan. Chrysost. in 51. And as he saith, "The bread is consumed;" even so in the same place he seemeth to say, the priest is consumed. His words be these: Ne putes, te accipere divinum corpus ab homine 10: "Think not that thou receivest the divine body of a man." And to like purpose he speaketh of the sacrament of baptism: Non baptizaris a sacerdote: Deus ipse tenet caput tuum11: "Thou art not baptized of the priest ; it is God himself that holdeth thy head." Thus the holy fathers, entreating of the sacraments, use to advance 12 our minds from the sensible and corruptible elements to the cogitation of the heavenly things that thereby are represented. And therefore Chrysostom saith: Chrysost. in Mysteria omnia interioribus oculis videnda sunt13: "We must behold all mysteries with our inner eyes;" which inner eyes doubtless have no regard to any corruptible and outward thing. 1 Cor. cap. ii. Chrysost. in Matt. Hom. 83. Hereby the feebleness of M. Harding's sequel may soon appear. [' Chrysost. Op. Par. 1718-38. Epist. ad Cæsar. [3 Gelas. Episc. Rom. adv. Eutych. et Nestor. in Lib. 1. Tit. iii. 29. Tom. I. p. 78.] [5 Cypr. Op. Oxon. 1682. Ad Cæcil. Epist. lxiii. p. 156; where passio est enim Domini.] [Chrysost. Op. In Epist. ad Hebr. cap. ix. Hom. xvi. Tom. XII. p. 159. See before, page 518, note 4.] [9 Chrysost. Op. Epist. ad Cæsar, Monach. Tom. III. p. 744. See before, page 545.] [10 Id. De Pœnit. Hom. ix. Tom. II. p. 350.] [13 Id. in 1. Cor. cap. ii. Hom. vii. Tom. X. p. 51. sometime guide ourselves by discourse and drift of reason1." Notwithstanding St Augustine saith: Hæc consuetudo periculosa est 15: "The custom hereof is very August, de dangerous." But in this case M. Harding wanteth neither the scriptures nor Lib. iii. the authority of ancient doctors. It is plain by the manifest words of St Paul, of St Chrysostom, of St Augustine, of Theodoretus, of Gelasius, and of other more holy fathers, both Greeks and Latins, that in the sacrament, after the words of consecration, the very nature and substance of the bread remaineth still. It were much for M. Harding to forsake all these, and to trust only to a bare shift of simple reason. Episc. M. HARDING. THE SECOND DIVISION. Doctr. Christ. cap. xxviii. And whereas there must be a likeness between the sacrament and the thing of the sacrament (for, if the sacraments had not a likeness of things August. Epist. 22, ad Bonifacium whereof they are sacraments, properly and rightly they should not be called sacraments 16; as the sacrament of baptism, which is the outward washing of the flesh, hath a likeness of the inward washing of the soul), and no likeness here appeareth to be between the forms that remain and the thing of the sacrament, (for they consist not, the one of many corns, the other of grapes, for thereof cometh not accident, but substance;) hereto may be said, it is enough that these sacraments bear the likeness of the body and blood of Christ, forasmuch as the one representeth the likeness of bread, the other the likeness of A strange recap. Hoc est quod wine, which St Augustine calleth (254) visibilem speciem elementorum 17, "the visible form of the elements." De Cons. Dist. 2, dicimus. THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY. semblance. The two hundred and fifty-fourth untruth. For St Augustine by these words meant stance What meaneth M. Harding, thus to encumber himself with these vain and the very submiserable follies? St Augustine saith: "A sacrament must have a resemblance bread. August. or likeness of that thing whereof it is a sacrament. For without this re- Epist. 23, ad Bonifac. semblance or likeness," he saith, "a sacrament is no sacrament 18." Therefore M. Harding cometh in with his fantasy, and telleth us that his forms and accidents are the resemblance and likeness of the body of Christ. But, alas! wherein standeth this comparison of resemblance and likeness? Or wherein are M. Harding's accidents and Christ's body like together? Certainly M. Harding himself, notwithstanding he can say many things, yet he cannot truly say that Christ's body is either round, or plain, or white, or thin, or any way like unto his accidents. Yet must there be a certain likeness in effects between the sacrament and the thing itself whereof it is a sacrament. Of which effects the one is sensible, and wrought outwardly to the body; the other is spiritual, and wrought inwardly in the mind. As, for example, in the sacrament of circumcision the outward visible cutting in the flesh was a resemblance of the inward spiritual cutting of the heart. In the sacrament of baptism the outward washing of the body is a resemblance of the inward spiritual washing of the soul. Likewise in the sacrament of the holy communion, as the bread outwardly feedeth our bodies, so doth Christ's body inwardly and spiritually feed our souls. Thus is feeding an effect common unto them both. And therein standeth the resemblance and likeness of the sacrament. Therefore Rabanus Maurus saith: Quia panis corporis cor confirmat, ideo ille congruenter corpus Christi nominatur; Raban. Maur. et, quia vinum sanguinem operatur in carne, ideo illud refertur ad sanguinem 19 : xxxi. "Because the bread confirmeth the heart of our body, therefore is the same Lib. i. cap. [14 See before, p. 791.] [15 August. Op. Par. 1679-1700. De Doctr. Christ. Lib. III. cap. xxviii. 39. Tom. III. Pars 1. col. 56.] [16 Id. Ad Bonifac. Epist. xcviii. 9. Tom. II. col. 267. See before, page 503, note 11.] [17 Id. in Lib. Sentent. Prosp. in Corp. Jur. Canon. Decret. Gratian. Decr. Tert. Pars, De Consecr. Dist. ii. can. 48. col. 1936; where visibili [JEWEL, II.] elementorum specie.] [18 See above, note 16.] [19 Ergo quia panis corporis cor firmat, ideo ille corpus Christi congruenter nuncupatur. Vinum autem quia sanguinem operatur in carne, ideo ad sanguinem Christi refertur.-Raban. Maur. Op. Col. Agrip. 1626-7. De Inst. Cler. Lib. 1. cap. xxxi. Tom. VI. p. 12.] 16 conveniently called the body of Christ; and, because wine worketh blood in our flesh, therefore the wine hath relation unto the blood of Christ." Now, if M. Harding, touching this effect of feeding, will compare his accidents with Christ's body, then must he say that we eat accidents, and drink accidents, and be fed with accidents, and live by accidents; even as in the inner man we eat Christ, and drink Christ, and be fed with Christ, and live by Christ. Otherwise he must confess that, touching the effect of feeding, his accidents have no resemblance of Christ's body, and therefore can in no wise be called sacraments. But, saith M. Harding, the accidents represent the likeness of bread; and the bread that was representeth the body Christ1. Here is another subtle drift of M. Harding's reason; from accidents to bread, and from bread to Christ's body. And so we have here fancy upon fancy, and one likeness upon another; but neither scripture, nor council, nor doctor, either Greek or Latin, or old or new, to avouch the same. But here appeareth a marvellous perverse order in nature. For, by M. Harding's drifts, neither can the bread signify Christ's body, but only when the bread is abolished and nothing left to signify; nor can these accidents signify the bread, but only when there is no bread remaining there to be signified. And so the effect of M. Harding's drift and of this resemblance passeth from nothing to nothing, and standeth in nothing. Here it behoved M. Harding to have foreseen the inconveniencies that might have followed. For, if the accidents of the bread be the sacrament, forasmuch as in one piece of bread there be sundry accidents, it must needs follow of these positions, that in one piece of bread be sundry sacraments, and so sundry sacraments in one sacrament. Innocentius himself espied this inconvenience; and therefore he demandeth this question: Cum sint multa species, cap. xxxviii. quomodo non sunt multa sacramenta2? Innoc. De Offic. Miss. Ambros. De illis qui init. But this resemblance or likeness St Augustine calleth visibilem speciem elementorum, "the visible form of the elements." By which words, saith M. Harding, he meant only the shews and accidents of the bread. Indeed St Augustine's words be true; but M. Harding's exposition is not true. For St Augustine by this word species meant not the outward forms or shews, as it is supposed, but the very kind and substance and nature of the bread. So St Ambrose saith: Ante benedictionem verborum cœlestium alia species Myst. cap. ix. nominatur; post consecrationem corpus [Christi] significatur3: "Before the blessing of the heavenly words it is called (not another form or another shew, but) another kind or nature; but after the consecration Christ's body is signified." Which thing may also plainly appear by St Augustine himself in the same De Consecr. place. For thus he writeth: Panis, qui corpus Christi est, suo modo vocatur corpus Christi, cum re vera sit sacramentum corporis Christi, &c. Vocaturque ipsa immolatio carnis [Christi], quæ sacerdotis manibus fit, Christi passio, mors, crucifixio; non rei veritate, sed significante mysterio1. He saith, (not the form, not the shew, not the accident, but) "The bread, that is the body of Christ (not verily or indeed, but) after a manner, is called the body of Christ; whereas it is indeed a sacrament of the body of Christ, &c. And the oblation of the flesh of Christ, that is made with the priest's hand, is called the passion, the death, and the crucifying of Christ; not in truth of the matter, but by a mystery signifying." Dist. 2. Hoc est, quod dicimus. M. HARDING. THE THIRD DIVISION. Thus the forms of bread and wine are the sacraments of the body and blood [Body of Christ, 1565, 1609.] [2 Sed quæritur, Utrum species panis et veritas corporis unum sunt sacramentum, an diversa sint sacramenta? &c. He concludes: Potest non incongrue responderi, quia omnia simul accepta sunt unum eucharistiae sacramentum, eo quod nullum sacramentum solum significet per se, sed omnia simul panis speciem repræsentant, quæ corpus Christi con tinet et significat.-Innoc. Papæ III. Op. Col. 1575. Myst. Miss. Lib. IV. cap. xxxviii. Tom. 1. pp. 392, 3.] [3 Ambros. Op. Par. 1686-90. Lib. de Myst. cap. ix. 54. Tom. II. col. 339.] [*...panis, qui vere Christus caro est, suo &c.August. in Corp. Jur. Canon. Lugd. 1624. Decret. Gratian. Decr. Tert. Pars, De Consecr. Dist. ii. can. 48. col. 1937.] |