MarginaliaAn. 1554. Aprill.sufficient. Almighty God graunt that wee may truely leane to one sacrifice of Christ: and that we to him againe may repay our sacrifices of thankes giuing, of prayse, of confessing his name, of true amendement, of repentance, of mercifulnes towardes our neighbours, and of all other good workes of charitie.MarginaliaChrist sacrificed once for sinne: we sacrifice dayly by thākesgeuing and thankfull workes of charitie. For by such sacrifices we shall declare our selues neither ingratefull to God, nor altogether vnworthy of this holy sacrifice of Christ. And thus you haue out of the testimonies of holy scripture, & of the auncient Doctors of the Church, the true & sincere vse of þ^e Lordes holy supper, & the fruite of þ^e true sacrifice of Christ. Which who soeuer through captious or wrested interpretatiōs, or by mens traditions shal go about, otherwise then Christ ordayned them, to alter or trāsubstantiate, he shall aunswere to Christ in the latter day, when he shall vnderstand (but then to late) that he hath no participation with the body and bloud of Christ, but that out of the supper of eternall life he hath eaten and drunken eternall damnation to him selfe.

West. Because we wyll not consume and spend the tyme in wast, this your writyng which you exhibite, hereafter shalbe read in his place. In the meane season let vs now fall to the Argumentes.

MarginaliaArgument.Ched. The Scriptures in diuers places do affirme that Christ gaue hys naturall body. Math. 26. Marke. 14. Luke. 22.

Ergo, I do conclude that the naturall body is in the Sacrament.

MarginaliaAunswere.Cran. To your Argument I aunswere: If you vnderstand by the body naturall [organicum] that is, hauyng such proportion and members as he had lyuing here, then I aunswere negatiuely.

Furthermore, concernyng the Euangelistes, thus I say and graunt, that Christ tooke bread and called it hys body.

Ched. The text of the Scripture maketh agaynst you: for the circumstaunce therto annexed doth teach vs, not onely there to be þ^e body, but also teacheth what maner of body it is, and saith: The same body which shall be geuen.

MarginaliaAunswere.Cran. I vnderstand not yet what you meane by this word MarginaliaThys word [conteyned] distinguished.[conteined]. If ye meane really, then I deny your maior.

Ched. The maior is the text of Scripture. He that denyeth the maior, denyeth the Scripture. For the Scripture sayth: This is my body which shal bee geuen for you.

Cran. I graunt he sayd it was hys body that should be geuē: MarginaliaThe body of Christ conteyned not really but sacramentally.but he sayd not, it was his body which is here conteined: but the body (sayth he) that shall be geuen for you. As though he should say: MarginaliaChrist sayth not, this is my body which is here cōteyned, but thys is my body which shall bee geuen for you.This bread is the breaking of my body, and this cup is the sheedyng of my bloud. What will ye say thē? Is the bread the breakyng, and the cup the sheeding of the bloud really? If you so say, I deny it.

Ched. If ye aske what is the thyng there conteyned: because his Apostles shoulde not doubt what body it was that should be geuen, he sayth: This is my body which shalbe geuen for you: and my bloud which shalbe sheed for many: Ergo, here is the same substaunce of the body which the day after was geuē, and the same bloud which was shed. And here I vrge the Scripture, which teacheth, that it was no fantasticall, no fayned, no spirituall body, nor body in fayth, but the substaunce of the body.

Cran. You must proue that it is contained: but Christ sayd not, which is contained. He gaue bread, and called that his body. I sticke not in the wordes of the Scripture, but in your worde which is fayned and imagined of your selfe.

Ched. When Christ tooke bread and brake it, what gaue he?

Cran. He gaue bread. The bread sacramentally, and his body spiritually, and the bread he called his body.

Ched. This aunswere is against the scripture, whych sayth that he gaue his body.

Cran. It did signifie that which they did eate.

Ched. They did not eate þ^e body as the Capernaites did vnderstand it: but the selfe same body whych was geuen for þ^e sinnes of the world: Ergo it was his body which should be geuē, & his blood which should be shed.

MarginaliaAunswere.Cran. I deny the Maior, which is, that the same naturall body is geuen in the sacrament which was geuen on the crosse, except you vnderstand it spiritually. And after he denied also þ^e argumēt as vtterly nought, as he might well do, the Maior in the second figure being not vniuersall.  

Commentary     Close

Foxe reworded a syllogism made by Chedsey. In the 1563 edition, the syllogism concludes 'having the minor and the Conclusion both negative in the first figure' (1563, p. 943). In later editions the syllogism concludes: 'the major in the second figure being not universal' (1570, p. 1596; 1576, p. 1362; 1583, p. 1432). A curious feature of many of the corrections which Foxe made to this disputation in the 1570 edition, is that they made the Catholic arguments clearer and more forceful.

[Back to Top]

When maister Chedsey had put forth this argument and prosecuted the same, and Doctor Cranmer aunswered as before is shewed, D. Oglethorpe, one of those Doctors which the Prolocutor called Censores (belike to be Arbiters to order the disputations) sayd on this wyse.

D. Ogle. You come in styll wyth one euasion or starting hole to flee to. He vrgeth the scriptures, saying that Christ gaue hys very body. You say that hee gaue his body in bread. MarginaliaDoct. Oglethorpe breaketh Priscians head and speaketh false latin.Quomodo prædicatur corpus? qualis est corpus? qualis est prædicatio, panis est corpus?

MarginaliaCranmer aunswereth to Oglethorpe.Cran. You should say, Quale corpus. I aunswere to the question: It is the same body which was borne of the virgin, was crucified, ascended: but tropically, and by a figure. And so I say: Panis est corpus, is a figuratiue speech, speaking sacramentally, for it is a sacramēt of his body.MarginaliaDoctour Cranmer might haue found fault with thys argument, as well as with hys latin being made in no mode nor figure.

Ogle. Thys woorde body being prædicatum, doth signifie substaunce.

But substātia is not predicated denominatiuely:

Ergo it is an essentiall predication: and so it is his true body, and not the figure of hys body.

Cran. Substantia may be predicated denominatiuely in an allegory or in a metaphore, or in a figuratiue locution.

Ogle. It is not a likely thyng that Christ hath lesse care for his Spouse the church, then a wise housholder hath for his family in making his wyll or testament.

Cran. Your reason is drawen out of the affaires of men, and not taken out of the holy scriptures.

Ogle. But no housholder maketh his testament after that sort.

Cran. Yes, there are many that so do. For what matter is it, so it be vnderstoode and perceiued? I say Christ did vse figuratiue speech in no place more, then in his sacramentes, and specially in this hys supper.

Ogle. No man of purpose doth vse tropes in his testament: for if hee doe, he deceiueth them that he comprehendeth in hys testament: therefore Christ vseth none here.

Cran. MarginaliaTropes may be vsed in mens testamentes, why not?Yes, he may vse them wel inough. You know not what tropes are.

Ogle. The good man of the house hath a respect that his heires after his departure may lyue in quiet and without brabbling.

But they can not be in quiet if he do vse tropes:

Therefore (I say) he vseth no tropes.

Cran. I deny your Minor.

Weston. Austine in his booke entituled, De vnitate Ecclesiæ, the tenth chapter, hath these wordes following.

MarginaliaA place of Austen recited by the Prolocutor.Quid hoc est rogo? Cum verba nouissima hominis morientis audiantur ituri ad inferos, nemo eum dicit esse mentitum, & illius non iudicatur hæres qui forté ea cōtempserat. Quomodo ergo effugiemus iram dei, si vel non credentes, vel contemnentes, expulerimus verba nouissima & vnici filij dei & domini nostri saluatoris, & ituri in cœlum & inde pro