MarginaliaAn. 1552. MarginaliaGregorius in Registro. Notwithstanding whether we take leauened or vnleauened bread, we are all one body of our Lord and Sauiour. &c.

Da-	Where bread leauened or vnleauened is taken, there is substance of bread and not accidences onely.
ri-	In the Sacrament bread is receaued either leauened or vnleauened:
j.	Ergo, in the Sacrament is substaunce of bread and not accidences onely.

Da-	The body of Christ is named of that which is propor tioned round, and is vnsensible in operation.
to-	Accidences onely of bread haue no figure of roundnes:
co.	Ergo, the body of Christ is not named of accidēces, but of very bread substauntiall.   Commentary     Close According to the metaphysics of the ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle, which became enshrined in Catholic theology through its use by St Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century, 'substance' refers to the inherent nature of an object; 'accidents' refer to the elements of an object that are not inherent. In the case of bread, for example, the shape and color are accidents of the substance of a piece of bread. [Back to Top]

The wordes of the Euāgelist speakyng of that which Christ tooke, blessed, brake, and gaue, do importe it to be bread, and nothyng els but bread.

Ergo, the substaunce of bread is not to be excluded out of the Sacrament.

MarginaliaChrysost. 1. Cor. 11. [illegible text]. 27. Christ in bread and wyne sayd: do this in remembraunce of me.

MarginaliaCyrill. in Ioan. lib. 4. cap. 14. He gaue to them peeces or fragmentes of bread.

Also the same Cyrill sayth: In bread we receaue his precious body, and his bloud in wyne.

Ergo, by these Doctours it remayneth bread after consecration.

Before the blessing of the heauenly wordes, it is called an other kynde of thyng. After consecration the body of Christ is signified.

Da-	The Analogie   Commentary     Close St Augustine gave the traditional definition of Sacraments as visible signs ('analogy', 'similtude'of invisible grace, grace being the Holy Spirit or God's divine self at work in the world. Protestants argued that regarding the Eucharist the bread and wine are the 'analogy' that signify Christ's true but spiritual presence. Catholics argue that visible signs or analogy are the accidents of the outward signs of bread and wine after the substance of the bread and wine have been consecrated and completely transformed into the invisible but true, spiritual and corporeal body and blood of the Risen Christ. [Back to Top] and resemblaunce betwene the Sacra ment and the thyng signified must euer be kept, in all Sacramentes.
ti-	In the Sacrament of the Lordes body, this Analo- gie or resemblaunce can not be kept, if bread be transub stantiated:
si.	Ergo, the substaunce of bread must needes remayne in the Sacrament of the Lordes body.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaAugust. Epist. ad Dardanum. The Maior  

of this Argument is certaine by S. Austen, Lib. De catechisandis rudibus, & Epist. ad Dardan. Where hee sayth: Sacramentes must needes beare a similitude of those thynges wherof they are Sacramentes, or els they can be no Sacramentes.

The Minor is thus proued.

MarginaliaApologie or proportion betwene the outward nourishing of bread in our bodyes, and the inward nourishing of Christes bodely death in our soules.

Ba-	The resemblaunce betwene the Sacramēt and the bo- dy of Christ is this: that as the properties of bread & wyne do nourish outwardly: so the properties of the bo dy of Christ do nourish spiritually.
ro-	Without the substaunce of bread and wyne there is no resemblaunce of nourishyng.
co.	Ergo, without the substaunce of bread and wyne the Analogie can not hold.

Ba-	Agayne, an other resemblaunce and similitude or Ana- logie of this Sacrament is this, that as one loafe of bread, and one cuppe of wine conteyneth many cornes and many grapes: so the mysticall congregation contei- neth many members, and yet maketh but one body:
ro-	Without the substaūce of bread & wine, no such resem- blaunce or similitude of coniūction can be represented:
co.	Ergo, without the substaunce of bread and wyne, the Analogie of this spirituall coniunction can not hold.

Ba-	Euery Sacrament consisteth in two thynges, that is, in the thyng signifiyng, and the thyng signified.
ro-	Without the substaunce of bread and wine, there is no- thyng that signifieth in the Sacrament:
co.	Ergo, the substaunce of bread & wyne in the Sacramēt can in no wise be transubstantiate from their natures.

[Back to Top]

The Minor is thus to be proued.

Fes-	There is no signification in any Sacrament without the element.
ti-	The substaunce of bread and wyne is the element of this Sacrament:
no.	Ergo, without the substance of bread and wyne there is no similitude nor signification in this Sacrament.

And for somuch as the aduersaryes grounde their transubstantiation so much vppon these wordes of Christ: This is my body:  

which they expounde onely after þ^e literal sense, without trope   or figure: now that this their exposition is false, and that the sayd wordes are to be taken figuratiuely and spiritually, by three causes it is to be proued: 1. First by the wordes of the Scripture: 2. By the nature of a Sacrament: 3. By the testimonies of the fathers.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaThree causes prouyng that these wordes of Christ, Hoc est corpus meū, are not to be taken literally but spiritually.
Places of scripture making agaynst transubstantiation. 1. First by these wordes of the Scripture, where he sayth: Do this in remembraunce of me: for so much as remembraunce properly serueth not for thinges corporally present, but for thinges rather beyng absent.  

[Back to Top]

2. Secondly, where he sayth: Vntill I come. Which wordes were vayne, if he were already come by consecration.

3. Thirdly, where Saint Paule sayth: The breaking of bread, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?  

Which wordes of breakyng in no case can be verified vpon the body of Christ, which for the glory therof is vnpossible.

4. Furthermore where as the Lord byddeth them to take and eate, it is euident, that the same can not be vnderstand simply of the body of Christ without a trope, forsomuch as he can not be eaten and chawed with teeth, as we vse properly in eatyng other meates to do.  

5. The wordes moreouer of Luke and Paul spoken of the cuppe, do argue likewise that the other wordes spoken of the bread must needes be taken mystically. As where it is sayd: This cup is the new Testament: which wordes must needes be expounded, thus: this cuppe doth signifie the new Testament.  

6. Item, these wordes of S. Iohn chap. 6. My wordes be spirite and life. The flesh profiteth nothyng. &c.  

7. Item, where in the same place of S. Iohn, Christ, to refell the carnall vnderstanding of the Caparnaites of eating hys body, maketh mention of hys Ascension. &c.  

MarginaliaThe second cause, the nature of a sacrament. The second cause why the wordes of Christ: This is my body, can not be litterally expounded without trope, is the nature of a Sacrament: whose nature and propertie is to beare a signe or signification of a thyng, to be remembred, which thing after the substanciall and reall presence, is absent. As touching which nature of a Sacrament sufficiently hath bene sayd before.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaThe thyrd cause, the testimonye of the fathers. The third cause, why the wordes of consecration are figuratiuely to be taken, is the testimonye of the auncient Doctours.

This is my body: that is to say, this is a figure of my body. MarginaliaTertullianus Contra Martionem. Lib. 4.

Christ gaue a figure of hys body. MarginaliaAugustinus, Psal. 3.

He did not doubt to say: This is my body, when he gaue a signe of his body. MarginaliaAugust. contra Adamantum. Chap. 12.

Christ represented vnto vs hys body. MarginaliaHieronimus.

Austen in his booke De Doctrina Christiana declareth expressely that this speach of eating the body of Christ, is a figuratiue speach.MarginaliaAugust. De Doctrinæ stiana Lib.

As thou hast receaued the similitude of his death: so thou drinkest the similitude of his precious bloud. MarginaliaAmbros de Sacram. Lib. 4. cap. 4.

Fe-	The death of Christ is not present really in the Sa- crament but by similitude.
ri-	The precious bloud of Christ is present, in the Sacra ment as his death is present:
o.	Ergo, the precious bloud of Christ is not present really in the Sacrament.

The Minor of this Argument is proued before by the wordes of Ambrose.

Di-	The true naturall body of Christ is placed in heauē.
sa-	The true naturall body of man can be but in one place at once, where he is:
mis.	Ergo, the true natural body of Christ can be in no place at once, but in heauen where he is.

[Back to Top]

The Maior is playne by these Scriptures: Iesus was takē vp to heauen, and sitteth at the right hand of God. Math. 26.  

MarginaliaMath. 26. The poore ye haue alwayes with you, but me you shall not alwayes haue. Ioh. 12.   MarginaliaIohn. 12. I leaue the world and go to my father. Ioh. 16.   MarginaliaIohn. 16. Many shall say in that day: Lo, here is Christ, and there is Christ, beleue thē not. Math. 24.   MarginaliaMath. 24. Whō the

[Back to Top]