MarginaliaAn. 1554. Aprill.Wat. Is not that bread one?

Ryd. It is one, of the church being one, because one bread is set forth vpon the table: and so of one bread altogether do participate, whych cōmunicate at the table of the Lord.

Wat. See how absurdly you speake. Do you say all whych be from the beginning to the end of the world?

Ryd. All, I say, which at one table together haue communicated in the mysteries, might wel so do. Albeit the heauenly and celestiall bread is likewise one also, wherof the sacramentall bread is a mystery: the which being one, all we together do participate.

Wat. MarginaliaWatson cauilleth about thys word [all.]A peruerse aunswere. Which all? Meane you all Christian men?

Ryd. I do distribute this word [all]: for all were wont together to communicate of one bread diuided into partes. All, I say, whych were in one congregation, & whych all dyd communicate together at one table.

Wat. What? do you exclude then from the body of Christ, al them which did not cōmunicate being presēt?

Feck. But MarginaliaCyprianus De Cœna Domini.Cyprian sayth: panis quem nulla multitudo consumit. i. Bread which no multitude doth consume. Whych cannot be vnderstanded, but onely of the body of Christ.

Ryd. Also Cyprian in this place did speake of the true body of Christ, and not of materiall bread.

Feck. MarginaliaM. Fecknams reason.Nay, rather he dyd there entreate of the sacrament in that tractation De cœna Domini, writing vppon the Supper of the Lord.

Ryd. Truth it is, and I graunt, he intreateth there of the Sacrament: but also hee doth admixt somethyng therewithall of the spirituall manducation.

Smith. When the Lord saith: This is my body, he useth no tropicall speech:

Ergo, you are deceyued.

Rid. I deny your antecedent.

Smith. I bring here MarginaliaAugust. in Psal. 33. Concio. 1.Austine in Psal. 33. Conc. I. expounding these wordes: Ferebatur in manibus suis, he was caried in his own handes. I. Regum.

Hoc quomodo possit fieri in homine, quis intelligat? Manibus enim suis nemo portatur, sed alienis. Quomodo intelligatur de Dauid secundum literam, non inuenimus: de Christo autem inuenimus. Ferebatur enim Christus in manibus suis cum diceret: Hoc est corpus meum. Ferebat enim illud corpus in manibus suis. &c. That is. How may this bee vnderstanded to be done in man? For no man is caried in hys own handes, but in the handes of other. How this may be vnderstanded of Dauid after the letter, we do not finde. Of Christ we finde it. For Christ was borne in hys own handes when he sayth: This is my body, for he caried that same body in hys own handes. &c.

Austine here did not see how thys place after the letter could be vnderstanded of Dauid, because no mā can cary him selfe in hys own hands. Therefore sayth he, this place is to be vnderstanded of Christ after the letter. For Christ caryed him selfe in his own handes in his supper, when he gaue the Sacrament to hys disciples, saying: This is my body.

Rid. I deny your argument, & I explicate the same. Austine could not finde after his own vnderstandying, how this could be vnderstand of Dauid after the letter. Austine goeth here from other in this exposition, but I go not from hym. MarginaliaThe place of Augustine aunswered.But let this exposition of Austine be graunted to you: although I know this place of scripture be otherwyse read of other men, after the veritie of the Hebrew text, and also otherwyse to be expounded. Yet to graunt to you this exposition of Austine, I say yet notwithstanding it maketh nothyng agaynst my assertion: for Christ did beare him selfe in hys own handes, when he gaue the sacrament of hys body to be eaten of hys disciples.

Smith. Ergo, it is true of Christ after the letter, that he was borne in hys owne handes.

Ryd. He was borne literally, and after that letter which was spoken of Dauid: but not after the letter of these wordes: Hoc est corpus meum.

I graunt that S. Austen sayth, that it is not found literally of Dauid, that he caryed hym selfe in his owne handes, and that is found of Christ. MarginaliaThe place of Austen how Christ was caryed in his handes ad literam. i. literally.But this word [ad literam] literally, you do not well referre to that which was borne, but rather it ought to be referred to hym that did beare it. S. Austens meanyng is this: that it is not read any where in the Bible, that this carnall Dauid, the sonne of Iesse, dyd beare him selfe in his hādes, but of that spirituall Dauid which ouerthrew Goliath the deuill: that is, of Christ our Sauiour, the sonne of the Virgin it may well be found literally, that he bare hym selfe in his owne handes after a certaine maner, namely in carying the Sacrament of hym selfe.MarginaliaFerebatur, quodā modo, in manbus suis, Aug. i. Christ was borne in his own handes Sacramentally. And note that S. Austen hath these wordes [quodam modo] after a certain maner: which manifestly doth declare how the Doctours meanyng is to be taken.

Smith. When then was he borne in his owne hādes and after what letter?

Ryd. He was borne in the Supper sacramētally, whē he sayd: This is my body.

Smith. Euery man may beare in hys owne handes a *Marginalia* A figure he may beare, but not a Sacrament. figure of hys body.

But Augustine denyeth that Dauid could cary him selfe in hys handes.

Ergo, he speaketh of no figure of his body.

Ryd. If Austen could haue found in all the Scripture that Dauid had caryed the Sacrament of hys body, thē he would neuer haue vsed that exposition of Christ.

Smith. But he dyd beare hym self in his own hands:

Ergo, he dyd not beare a figure onely.

Ryd. He dyd beare hym selfe, but in a Sacrament: and Austen afterward addeth MarginaliaQuodam modo.[quodā modo] that is: Sacramentally.

Smith. You vnderstand not what Austen ment when he sayd [quodam modo]: For he mēt that he did beare hys very true body in that Supper, not in figure and forme of a body, but in forme and figure of bread:

Ergo, you are holden fast, nether are ye hable to escape out of thys labirinth.

Doctour Weston repreated this place againe in English. Which done, then Doct. Tresham thus began to speake, moued (as it semed to M. Ridley) with great zeale, and desired that he might be in stede of Ioh. Baptist in conuertyng the hartes of þ^e fathers, and in reducyng the sayd B. Ridley agayne to the mother Church. Now at the first, not knowyng the person, he thought he had bene some good old man, which had the zeale of God, although not accordyng to knowledge, and began to aunswere hym with mansuetude & reuerrence. But afterward he smelled a foxe vnder a shepes cloathyng.

MarginaliaDoctour Tresham prayeth for conuerting of Byshop Ridley.GOd almyghty graunt that it may be fulfilled in me, that was spoken by the Prophete Malachie of Iohn Baptiste, which may turne the hartes of the Fathers to the children, and the hartes of the children to their fathers, that you at length may be conuerted. The wise man sayth: Sonne, honor thy father, and reuerēce thy mother. But you dishonour your father in heauen, and pollute your mother the holy Church here on earth, whyle ye set nought by her.

Ryd. These bywordes do pollute your Schole.

Tres. If there were an Arrian which had that subtile wytte that you haue, he myght soone shift of the authoritie of the Scriptures and fathers.

West. Either dispute, or els hold your peace, I pray you.

Tres. I bryng a place here out of the Councel of Laterane, the which Councell representyng the vniuersall Church, wherin were congregated 300. Byshops and 70. Metroplitans, besides a great multitude of other, MarginaliaThe Decree of Laterane Councell alleaged for transubstātiation.MarginaliaOf thys Councell read before pag. 332. 338.decreed that bread and wyne, by the power of Gods word, was transubstantiate into the body and bloud of the Lord. Therfore whosoeuer sayth contrary, can not be a child of the Church, but an hereticke.

Ryd. Good Syr, I haue heard what you haue cyted out of the Councel of Laterane, & remember that there was a great multitude of Bishops & Metropolitanes,