1576 Edition | Book 9 | Page 1353 
Marginalia1552. declareth) is an outward signe of an inuisible grace. His wordes are: Sacramentum est inuisibilis gratiæ visibile signum.
CloseThe Catholic understanding of Augustine's definition of a sacrament in the context of the Eucharist is that the outward signs of bread and wine conceal the invisible grace of Christ's corporeal, glorified body and blood. Protestant objections included the argument that a corporeal body (as opposed to a spiritual one) can only be in one place at one time.
[Back to Top]| Fe- | One thyng can not be both visible and inuisible. |
| ri- | But the Sacrament is visible, and the body of Christ inuisible: |
| son. | Therefore they are not one. |
Which thyng S. Augustine openeth very well by these wordes: Aliud est sacramentum, aliud res sacramēti. Sacramentum est quod in corpus vadit: res autem Sacramenti est corpus Domini nostri Iesu Christi. Moreouer, I remember that Christ ministred this Sacrament not to great and deepe Philosophers, but to a sort of ignoraunt and vnlearned Fishers, which notwithstandyng vnderstode Christes meanyng right well, & deliuered it euen as they tooke it at Christes hand, to the vulgare and lay people and fully declared vnto them the meanyng therof. But the lay pople, nor scarcely the Apostles themselues could vnderstand what is ment by transubstantiation, impanation, dimensions, qualitates, quantitates, accidens sine subiecto, terminus a quo, & terminus ad quem, per modum quanti. This is no learnyng for the vnlearned and rude people, wherefore it is likely that Christ ment some other thyng then hath bene taught of late dayes. MarginaliaChrist is no foode for the body but for the soule. Furthermore, Christes body is foode, not for the body, but for the soule, and therefore it must be receyued with the instrument of þe soule which is fayth
CloseVerity's argument is that the Eucharist is spiritual food, with which Catholics agree, but is not exclusively so. According to the Church's tradition, especially in the writings of Cyril of Alexandria, one of the Fathers of Church who was instrumental in defining Christ's human incarnation at the General Council of Ephesus (451), Cyril also iterated in his writings that there was a growing physical union between Christ and those who received the Sacrament. Bishop John Fisher of Rochester and Bishop Thomas Watson of Lincoln in the 1520s and 1550s, respectively, propounded Cyril's views.
[Back to Top]Custome. What meane you by this spirite, and by spirituall eating? I pray you vtter your mynde more playnely. For I know well that Christ hath a body, and therefore must be eaten (as I thinke) with the mouth of the body. For the spirite and the soule as it hath no body and flesh, so it hath no mouth.
[Back to Top]Veritie. You must vnderstand that a man is shaped of two partes: of the body, and of the soule. And eche of them hath his lyfe and his death, his mouth, his teeth, his foode, and abstinence. For like as the body is nourished and fostered with bodily meates, or els can not endure, so must the soule haue his cherishyng, otherwise will it decay, and pine away. And therfore we do & may iustly say that the Turkes, Iewes, and Heathen be dead, because they lacke the lyuely foode of the soule. But how then, or by what meane will you feede the soule? Doubtlesse not by the instrument of the body, but of þe soule. For that whiche is receaued into the body hath no passage frō thēce into þe soule. For Christ saith, That what so entreth into the belly, is conueyed into the draught. MarginaliaMath. 15. And where as you say that the spirite hath no mouth lyke as it hath no body or bones, you are deceaued. MarginaliaWhat is to hunger and eate righteousnes. For the spirite hath a mouth in his kynde, or els how could a man eate and drinke Iustice? for vndoubtedly his bodily mouth is no fit instrument for it. Yet Christ sayth, that he is blessed that hungreth and thirsteth for Iustice. If he hunger and thyrst for Iustice, belyke he both eateth and drinketh it, or otherwise he neither abateth hys hunger, nor quencheth his thyrst. Now if a man eate and drinke righteousnesse with his spirite, no doubt his spirite hath a mouth. Whereof I will reason thus:
[Back to Top]MarginaliaArgument.
| Da- | Of what soeuer sorte the mouth is, such is his foode. |
| ti- | But the mouth of the spirite is spirituall, not bodily: |
| si. | Therfore it receaueth Christes body spiritually, not bodily. |
And in lyke maner Christ speakyng of the eatyng of hys body, nameth hym selfe the bread, not for the body, but of lyfe for the soule, and sayth: Hee that commeth to me, shall not hunger, and hee that beleueth in me, shall neuer thyrst. MarginaliaIohn. 6. Wherefore who so wyll be relieued by the body of Christ, must receaue hym as he will be receaued, with the instrument of fayth appoynted thereunto, not with his teeth or mouth. MarginaliaHow Christes body is taken by fayth. And where as I say that Christes body must be receaued & taken with fayth, I meane not that you shal plucke downe Christ from heauen and put him in your fayth
CloseCatholics would argue that Christians received Christ in the Eucharist both with faith and orally. While Protestants and Catholics agreed on the spiritual virtues of receiving Holy Communion as described by Verity, Catholics would insist that Communion is also food for the spiritual benefit of the soul and the body, as alluded to by Paul in I Corinthians 11:30. As to the common Protestant accusation against Catholics that they 'shall pluck down Christ from heaven', Catholics would answer that Christ is indeed seated in glory in heaven, but he is also present wherever mass is celebrated in his divine, risen, glorified body as he promised in John 6; for nothing is impossible with God. Therefore Catholics would utterly reject Verity's statement, 'Christ's body … hath nothing to do with our body …'
[Back to Top]Nowe to returne to our former purpose, seeing it is plaine that Christes body is meate for our spirit, and hath nothing to do with our body, I wil gather thereof this reason. The sacrament is bodily foode and increaseth the body: Ergo the sacrament is not the very body Christ. That it nourisheth the body, it is euident
CloseVerity remarks that Eucharist does feed the body as any food or drink does, for the Eucharistic doctrine established in the Edwardian Reformation and reaffirmed in the Elizabethan Religious Settlement of 1559 was that the elements of the sacrament remain bread and wine before, during and after the Communion Service.
[Back to Top]
CloseVerity uses the common Protestant trope of what becomes of the Catholic Eucharist should a mouse somehow get hold of a host and consume it. The Catholic response was that although shameful if not sacrilegious for those charged with caring for the Sacrament, such an action would have no effect upon almighty God or upon any creature incapable of reason or belief.
[Back to Top]Christes body is spirituall meate. Wherfore as I sayd before, seeing that Christes body is spiritual meat, and the bread of the sacrament bodily, I may cōclude that the sacramēt is not Christes body. MarginaliaDrinking mans bloud agaynst the lawe. Beside this, where as it was forbidden in the old law
CloseCatholics would object that Christ's body under the signs of bread and wine is indeed his corporeal body born of the Virgin Mary and which hung upon the Cross, yet it is also his risen, glorified body, and the Mosaic Law cannot apply to it; not least because, according to Paul in Galatians 3:13, Jesus' salvific death was itself a violation of the Mosaic Law.
[Back to Top]Agayne, when the Sacrament was delt, none of them all crouched downe and tooke it for his God, forgetting him that sat there present before their eyes, but tooke it, and eate it, knowing that it was a sacrament and a remembraunce of Christes body. MarginaliaKneeling to the sacrament forbidden in olde Councels. Yea, the olde Councels commaunded that no man shoulde kneele downe at the tyme of the Communion, fearing that it should be an occasion of idolatry
CloseIt is noteworthy that in his marginal notes Foxe cites no canons of any General Councils of the Church to support his claim regarding kneeling.
CloseIt is not inconceivable that in times of persecution under the Romans Communion could be brought to the sick, imprisoned or dying by the laity, being a time of emergency. St Tarcisius (Third-Fourth Century) was martyred by a Roman mob for carrying the Eucharist, and possessed any early cult, according to the fourth-century writings of Pope Damasus I. Tarcisius has often been portrayed in literature and art as a youth, even a boy, but there is no certainty as to his age, or whether he was in fact a layman (he may have been a deacon).
[Back to Top]
Close'Hanged him up': placed the reserved Eucharist in a container (pyx or tabernacle) to be given to the sick or to be adored. The tradition and history of the reservation of the eucharist outside Mass is much older than the thirteenth century, as, for example, the fourth-century record of Tarcisius' martyrdom attests (see above). Among the earliest records of this practice are the writings of St Justin Martyr (first century).
[Back to Top]
Close'Begod': to make the Eucharist God: believed by Catholics amd denied by Protestants.
Futhermore, if the bread be turned and altered into the body of Christ, doubtles it is the greatest miracle that euer God wrought. MarginaliaApostles and olde Doctors make no miracle nor maruell at the Sacrament. But the Apostels sawe no miracle in it. Nazianzenus an old writer, and S. Augustine intreating of all the miracles that are in the scripture, number the sacrament for none. As for the Apostels it appeareth well that they had it for no marueil, for they neuer mused at it, neyther demaunded how it might be: whereas in other thinges, they euermore were full of questions. As touching S. Augustine, he not onely ouer hippeth
Close'Overhippeth': overlook
CloseCatholics would argue that Christians received Christ in the Eucharist both with faith and orally. While Protestants and Catholics agreed on the spiritual virtues of receiving Holy Communion as described by Verity, Catholics would insist that Communion is also food for the spiritual benefit of the soul and the body, as alluded to by Paul in I Corinthians 11:30.
[Back to Top]