MarginaliaAn. 1554. Aprill.be read in hys place. In the meane season let vs now fall to the Argumentes.

MarginaliaArgument.Ched. The Scriptures in diuers places doe affirme that Christ gaue his natural body. Mat. 26. Mark. 14. Luk. 22.

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

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

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

Ched. The text of the Scripture maketh against you: for the circumstance therto annexed doth teach vs, not only there to be the body, but also teacheth what maner of body it is, and saith: The same body which shalbe geuen.

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

Ched. The maior is the text of scripture. He that denieth the maior, denieth the scripture. For the scripture sayeth: This is my body which shalbe geuen for you.

Cran. MarginaliaThe body of Chyrist conteined not really but sacramentally.I graunt he said it was his body that shoulde bee geuen but he sayde it was not his bodye which is here conteined: MarginaliaChrist sayth not, this is my body which is here conteyned but this is my body which shall be geuen for you.but the body (saith he) that shall be geuen for you. As though he should say: This bread is the breaking of my body, and this cup is the shedyng of my bloud. What wyll ye say then? Is the bread the breaking, and the cup the sheding of the bloud really? If you so say. I deny it.

Ched. If ye aske what is the thyng there conteyned: because his Apostles should not doubt what body it was that should be geuen, he sayth: This is by body which shalbe geuen for you: and my bloud which shall be shed for many: Ergo, here is the same substance of the body which the day after was geuen, 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 substance of the body.

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

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

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

Ched. This answer is against the scripture, which sayeth that he gaue his body.

Cran. It did signifie that which they did eate.

Ched. They did not eate the body as the Capernaites dyd vnderstand it: but the selfe same body which was geuen for the sinnes of the world: Ergo it was his body which should be geuen, and his bloud 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 þ^e cros except you vnderstand it spiritually. And after he denied also the argument as vtterly nought, as he might well do, the Maior in the second figure beyng 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 M. Chedsey had put forth this argument & prosecuted the same, and Doct. Cranmer answered as before is shewed, D. Oglethorp, one of those doctors which the Prolocutor called Censores (belike to be Arbiters to order the disputations) sayd on this wyse.

MarginaliaDoct. Oglethorp breaketh Priscians head & speaketh false latine.D. Ogle. You come in still with one euasion or startyng hole to flee to. He vrgeth the scriptures, saying that Christ gaue his very body. You say that he gaue his body in bread. Quo modo prædicatur corpus? qualis est corpus? qualis est prædicatio, panis est corpus?

MarginaliaCranmer aunswereth to Oglethorpe.Cran. You should say Quale corpus. I answer 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, speakyng sacramentally, for it is a sacrament of his body.

MarginaliaDoct. Cranmer might haue foūd fault with thys argument as well as wyth his latin beyng made in no mode or figure.Ogle. This worde body beyng prædicatum, doth signifie substaunce.

But substantia is not predicated denominatiuely:

Ergo, it is an essentiall predication: and so it is his true body, and not the figure of his 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 thing that Christ hath lesse care for his spouse the church, then a wise housholder hath for hys family in making his will or testament.

Cran. Your reason is drawn 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. MarginaliaTropes may be vsed in mens testaments, why not?For what matter is it so it be vnderstode and perceiued? I say Christ did vse figuratiue speech in no place more, then in his sacramentes, and specially in this his supper.

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

Cran. Yes, he may vse them well inough. You know not what tropes are.

Ogle. The good man of the house hath a respect that hys heires after his departure may lyue in quiet and wythout brablyng.

But they cannot be in quiet if he do vse tropes:

Therfore (I say) he vseth no tropes.

Cran. I deny your Minor.

West. Austine in hys booke entituled, De vnitate Ecclesiæ. the x. chap. 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 fortè ea contempserat. Quomodo ergo effugiemus iram die, si vel non credentes, vel contemnentes, expulerimus verba nouissima & vnici filij dei & domini nostri saluatoris, & ituri in cœlum & inde prospecturi quis ea negligat, quis non obseruet, & inde venturi vt de omnibus iudicet?MarginaliaAugst De Vnitate Ecclesiæ. That is to say.

What a thing is this I pray you? when the last words of one lying on his death bed are heard: which is ready to go to his graue, no man saith that he hath made a lye: and he is not accompted his heire, which regardeth not those wordes. How shall we then escape gods wrath if either not beleuyng or not regardyng, we shall reiect the last woordes both of the only sonne of god and also of our lord and sauior, both ascending into heauen, and beholding from thence who despiseth and who obserueth then not, and shall come from thence to iudge all men?

MarginaliaArgument.The argument is thus formed.

MarginaliaAunswere.Cran. I deny the Minor. As who say it is necessary that he which vseth to speake by tropes and figures, should lye in so doyng.

Ogle. Your iudgement is disagreing with all churches.

Cran. Nay, I disagree with the papisticall church.

Ogle. This you do through the ignorance of Logike.

Cranmer. Nay, this you say through the ignoraunce of the Doctours.

Commentary     Close

Foxe deleted a passage that described Weston's behaving courteously to Cranmer (See textual variant 50).

Cran. Bread.

West. What gaue he?

Cran. Bread.

West. What brake he?

Cran. Bread.

West. What did they eate?

Cran. Bread.

MarginaliaArgument.West. He gaue bread, therfore he gaue not his body.

He gaue not his body, therfore it is not his body verily, in dede and in truth.

Cran. I deny the argument.

Cole. This argument holdeth a disparatis.MarginaliaDisparata, is a Schoole terme, meaning diuers substances being so sondred in nature that one can neuer be sayd to be the other. It is bread: Ergo, it is not the body: and it is such an argument or reason, as cannot be dissolued.

Cran. The lyke argument may be made: He is a rocke: Ergo he is not Christ.

Cole. It is not lyke.

West. He gaue not his body in dede: Ergo, it was not his body in dede.

Cran. He gaue hys death, his passion, and the sacrament of his passion. MarginaliaThe sacrament setting the figure aside formally is not Christes body.And in very dede setting the figure aside, formally it is not his body.

West. Why? then the scripture is false.

Cran. Nay the scripture is most true.

Weston. This saith Chrysostom Homil. 61. ad populum Antiochenum. Necessarium est dilectissimi, mysteriorum