ly returneth again: and som denie it, other some affyrme that the reall bodye of Christe goeth downe into the stomake of the receiuers, and dothe there abide, onely so long as they shal cōtinue to be good. But an other sorte holde that the body of Christ is caryed into heauen, so sone as the formes of bread be brused with the teeth. O workers of wonders. Truely, and most truly I see that fulfilled in these men, wherof sainct Paul prophecied. 2. Thessalo. 2. Because they receiued not the loue of the truthe, that thei might be saued, God shall sende them strong delusion that they should beleue lyes, and bee all damned whiche haue not beleued the truth. Thys grosse presence hath broughte foorth that fonde phantasy of MarginaliaBy this deuice of concomitaunce the papists imagyn as much to be receiued vnder one kynde as both.concomitaunce, whereby is broken at this day, and abrogated the commaundemēt of the Lorde for the distributing of the Lordes cup to the laitie.

Marginalia6. & 7. It geueth occasion to Heretikes to maintein & defende theyr errours: as to Martion, which sayde that Christ had but a phantasticall bodye, and to Eutiches whiche wickedly confounded the two natures in Christ.

Marginalia8Finally, it falsifieth the sayinges of the godly fathers and the Catholike fayth of the Curche, which Vigilius a martir and graue writer saieth, was taughte of the Apostles, confyrmed with the bloude of martyrs, and was continually mainteined by the faithfull, vntyll his tyme. By the sayinges of the fathers, I meane of Iustine, Irenee, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, Emisene, Athanasius, Cyril, Epiphanius, Hierome, Chrysostome, Augustine, Vigilius, Fulgentius, Bertram, and others, moste aunciente fathers. All those places, as I am sure I haue redde, makyng for my purpose, so am I wel assured that I coulde shew the same, if I myght haue the vse of mine owne bookes. Whiche I wyll take on me to doe, euen vppon the peryl of my lyfe, and the losse of all, that I may lose in this world.

But nowe my brethren thinke not, because I disallow that presence, whiche this first proposition mainteineth (as a presence whiche I take to be forged, phantasticall, and besides the autority of Goddes worde, perniciously brought into the churche by the Romanistes) that I therfore goe about to take away the true presence of Christes body in his supper, rightly and duelye ministred, whiche is grounded vpon the word of God, and made more playne by the commentaries of the faythfull fathers. They that thynk so of me, the Lorde knoweth how farre they are deceiued. And to make the same euidente vnto you, I will in fewe woordes declare what true presence of Christes body in the sacramēt of the Lordes supper I holde and affyrme wyth the worde of God, and the auncient fathers.

MarginaliaThe trewe presence of Christs body in the Supper. I say and confesse with the Euangelist Luke and with the Apostle Paule, that the breade on the whiche thankes are geuen, is the bodye of Christ in the remembraunce of hym and of hys death, to be set foorth perpetually of the faithful vntyll his comming. I say and confesse the bred whiche we breake, to be the communion & partaking of Christs body. With the auncient & the faithfull fathers, I saye and beleue that there is not onely a signification of Christes bodye sette foorth by the sacrament, but also that therwyth is geuen to the Godly and faythful the grace of Christes body, that is the foode of lyfe and im-

mortalitie. And this I holde with Ciprian. I saye also with saint Augustine, that we eate life and we drynke life: with Emisene that we feele the lord to be present in grace: with Athanasius that we receyue celestiall foode, whiche commeth from aboue: the propertye of natural communion with Hillarius: the nature of fleshe & benediction whiche geueth lyfe in bread & wine with Cirill: And with the same Ciryll the vertue of the very fleshe of Christ, lyfe and grace of his body, the propertye of the onely begotten, that is to say, life: as he hymself in plain words expoundeth it. I confesse also with Basile, that we receyue the mysticall aduente and commynge of Christe, grace, and the vertue of his verye nature: the Sacramente of hys verye fleshe with Ambrose: the bodye by grace, with Epiphanius: spiritual flesh, but not that which was crucified, with Hierome: Grace flowynge into a sacrifice, and the grace of the spirite, with Chrysostome: grace and inuisible veritye, grace and societie of the members of Christes bodye with Augustine. Finally with Bertram (which was the last of all these) I confesse that Christes body is in the sacrament in this respect: namely (as he writeth) because there is in it the spirit of Christ, that is, the power of the word of god, whiche not onely fedeth the soule, but also clenseth it. Oute of these I suppose it maye clerely appeare vnto al men, how farre we are from that opinion whereof some goe about falslye to slaunder vs to the worlde, saying we teach that the godly & faythful shuld receiue nothing els at the Lords table, but a figure of þ^e body of Christ.

☞ After the consecration there remayneth no substance of bread and wine, neither any other substance, then the substance of God and manne.

THe seconde conclusion is manifestly false, dyrectly agaynst the woord of God, the nature of the sacrament, and the moste euident testimonies of the godly fathers: And it is the rotten foundation of the other two conclusions, propounded by you, bothe of the firste, and of the thyrde. I wyll not therefore nowe tarye vppon any further explication of this aunswere, being contented with that which is already added afore, to the aunswere of the fyrst proposition.

Marginalia1 IT is very playne by the woorde of God, that Christ dyd geue bread vnto his disciples, and called it his body: but the substaunce of bread is an other maner of substaunce then is the substaunce of Christes body, god and man: Therefore the conclusion is false.

Marginalia2The second part of myne argument is plain, and the first is proued thus:

That which Christ dyd take, on the which he gaue thankes, and the which he brake, he gaue to his disciples & called it his body:

But he tooke bread, gaue thankes on bread, and brake bread.

Ergo the fyrst part is true. And it is cōfyrmed with the autorities of the fathers, Irene, Tertulliā, Origen, Cyprian, Epiphanius, Hierom, Augustine, Theodorete, Cyril, Rabanus, and Bede, whose places I wyll take vppon me to shew, most manifeste in this behalfe, yf I maye be suffred to haue my bokes (as my request is.)

Bread is the body of Christ.

Ergo it is bread: