1583 Edition | Book 9 | Page 1398 
MarginaliaAnno 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 only. | |
| ri- | In the Sacrament bread is receaued either leauened or |
| vnleauened: | |
| j. | Ergo, in the Sacrament is substaunce of bread and not |
| accidences onely. |
| Ba- | The body of Christ is named of that which is propor- |
| tioned round, and is vnsensible in operation. | |
| ro- | Accidences only of bread haue no figure of roundnes: |
| co. | Ergo, the body of Christ is not named of accidences, but |
of very bread substantiall.
CloseAccording 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 Euangelist speaking of that whyche Christ tooke, blessed, brake, and gaue, do importe it to be bread, and nothing else but bread.
Ergo, the substance of bread is not to be excluded out of the Sacrament.
MarginaliaChrisost. 1. Cor. 11. homil. 27.Christ in bread and wyne sayde: do this in remembraunce of me.
MarginaliaCyrill. in Ioan. lib. 4. cap. 14.He gaue to them peeces or fragments of bread.
Also the same Cyrill sayth: In bread we receaue his precious body and his bloud in wyne.
Ergo, by these Doctours it remaineth bread after consecration.
Before the blessing of the heauenly words, it is called another kynde of thyng. After consecration the body of Christ is signified.
| Da- | The Analogie
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] |
| ment and the thing signified, must euer be kept in all | |
| Sacraments. | |
| ti- | In the Sacrament of the Lordes body, this Analogie |
| or resemblaunce can not be kept, if bread be transub- | |
| stantiated: | |
| si. | Ergo, the substance of bread must needes remayne in the |
| Sacrament of the Lords body. |
MarginaliaAugust. epist. as Dardanum.The Maior
CloseThe 'major' of an argument is its chief point; the 'minor' is the proof ascertaining ('certaine') the major's veracity.
The Minor is thus proued.
| MarginaliaAnalogie or proportion betweene the outward nourishing of bread in our bodyes, and the inward nouryshing of Christes bodely death in our soules.Ba- | The resemblaunce betweene the Sacrament and the |
| body of Christ is this: that as the properties of bread | |
| and wyne do nourish outwardly: so the properties of | |
| the body of Christ do nourish spiritually. | |
| ro- | Without the substaunce of bread and wine, there is no |
| resemblaunce of nourishing. | |
| co. | Ergo, without the substaunce of bread and wyne, the |
| Analogie can not hold. |
| Ba- | Agayne, another resemblaunce and similitude or Ana- |
| logie of this Sacramente is this, that as one loafe of | |
| bread, and one cuppe of wine conteineth many cornes | |
| and many grapes: so the mysticall congregation cōtei- | |
| neth many members, and yet maketh but one bodie: | |
| ro- | Without the substance of bread & wine, no such resem- |
| blaunce or similitude of cōiunction can be represented: | |
| co. | Ergo, without the substaunce of bread and wyne, the |
| Analogie of this spirituall coniunction can not holde. |
| Ba- | Euery Sacrament consisteth in two thynges, that is, |
| in the thing signifieng, and the thing signified. | |
| ro- | Without the substance of bread and wine, there is no- |
| thing that signifieth in the Sacrament: | |
| co. | Ergo, the substaunce of bread and wyne in the Sacra- |
| mente, can in no wise be transubstantiate from theyr | |
| natures. The Minor is thus to be proued. | |
| Fes- | There is no signification in any Sacrament without |
| the element. | |
| ti- | The substaunce of bread and wine is the elemente of |
| this Sacrament: | |
| no. | Ergo, without the substaunce of bread and wine, there |
| is no similitude nor signification in this Sacrament. |
And for somuch as the aduersaries ground their tran-substantiation so much vpon these wordes of Christ: This is my body:
CloseMatt. 26: 26; Mark 14: 22; Luke 22: 19 - the Gospel narratives of the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper. Martyr claimed that Catholics read this phrase only according to the literal sense of interpreting the Bible, not the analogical, figurative or 'spiritual' sense. Catholics claim they understand this Biblical text in both the literal and spiritual senses.
[Back to Top]
Close'Trope': metaphor; in this case a visible object signifying Christ's Eucharistic presence. A sacrament could not exist without the visible sign of invisible grace, and Martyr claimed that the Catholic Eucharist did not have one, since the substance was completely transformed. Catholics maintained that the accidents of bread and wine - the outward signs of the transubstantiated elements - served as the trope or figure of Christ's corporeal body and blood, and so could be called 'bread' and 'wine'.
[Back to Top]1. First by the wordes of the Scripture. 2. By the nature of a Sacrament. 3. By the testimonies of the fathers.
MarginaliaPlaces of Scripture making agaynst transubstantiation.1. First by these wordes of the scripture, where he sayth: Doe this in remembraunce of mee, for so muche as remembraunce properly serueth not for thinges corporally presēt, but for thinges rather being absent.
CloseLuke 22: 19; I Corinthians 11: 23-26 (the institution narrative as given by St. Paul). Martyr held that Christ is spiritually present in the bread and wine, not literally, for otherwise there would be no need to remember Christ, since one remembers only that which is not there. Catholics state that the Eucharist is a memorial that makes truly but mystically present Christ's one sacrifice on the cross, as well as making his body and blood corporeally present.
[Back to Top]2. Secondly, where he saith: Vntill I come.
CloseI Corinthians 11: 27. Catholics claim Christ shall come personally at the end of time in the majesty of his glorified and risen body to judge the living and the dead; they also claim he comes truly, corporeally and spiritually in the Eucharist of his glorified and risen body and blood, since for Christ, who is truly divine as well as truly human, nothing is impossible.
[Back to Top]3. Thirdly, where S. Paule sayth: The breaking of bread, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
CloseI Corinthians 10: 16-17. Catholics claim that Christ's one death upon the cross, where he body was broken, becomes truly, mystically present in the Mass. They also receive Christ's true, corporeal, risen, glorified body and blood, which can no longer be broken as it was upon the cross, but Christ's one body can be given to people whenever and wherever they receive the Eucharist.
[Back to Top]4. Furthermore where as the Lord biddeth thē to take and eate, it is euident, that the same cannot be vnderstand simply of the body of Christ without a trope, forsomuch as he cannot be eaten and chawed with teeth, as we vse properly in eating other meates to doe.
CloseA common objection to Catholic Eucharistic doctrine at the time. Catholics claim that Christ's risen, glorified body is not susceptible to whatever befalls any other kind of food, including chewing.
5. The wordes moreouer of Luke and Paule spoken of the cuppe, doe argue likewise that the other words spoken of the bread must needes be taken mistically. As where it is sayd: This cup is the new testament: which woordes must needes be expounded thus: thys cup doth signifie the new Testament.
CloseLuke 22: 19 and I Corinthians 11: 25. Catholics maintain that Christ's body and blood both represent Christ's New Testament or covenant: his promise to be with his Church always, including in the sacrament of the Eucharist, in contrast to the Hebrew covenant in which God's presence and protection was dependent upon Jewish adherence to the Law of Moses. It is unclear whether Martyr means the Eucharist represents the New Testament as only meaning the Christian scriptures.
[Back to Top]6. Item, these wordes of S. Iohn. chap. 6. My wordes be spirite and life. The flesh profiteth nothing &c.
CloseJohn 6: 63. The beginning of the conclusion of Jesus' 'The Bread of Life Discourse' in John 6. Catholics would remind those who denied Christ's corporeal presence in the Eucharist, that such a reading of John 6: 63 seemed to deny that 'The Word became Flesh and dwelt among us' (John 1: 14): God became incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ.
[Back to Top]7. Itē, where in the same place of S. Iohn, Christ to refell the carnal vnderstanding of the Capernaites of eating his body, maketh mention of his Ascension. &c.
CloseJohn 6: 62. Perhaps the chief Protestant argument against Christ's corporeal presence in the Eucharist at the time was that Jesus had ascended into heaven and told his disciples he would not return until the end of time. Jesus 'refells' (refutes) the 'Capernaites' (people of Capernaum, though actually he is addressing his disciples) who find Jesus' self-description as 'the bread of life' that must be eaten for salvation difficult to accept. Jesus counters by asking if they would believe if they see him doing something else impossible: ascending into heaven (which seems to imply that they will, though no mention of it is given in John's Gospel, but see Luke 24: 51 and Acts 1: 9). Catholics state that Christ is personally present in heaven and is also corporeally present in the Eucharist, for nothing is impossible for God.
[Back to Top]MarginaliaThe secōd cause, the nature of a Sacrament.The second cause why the wordes of Christ: This is my body, cannot be litterally expounded without trope, is þe nature of a sacrament: whose nature and propertie is to beare a signe or signification of a thinge to be remembred, which thing after the substantiall and reall presence, is absent. As touching which nature of a sacrament sufficiently hath bene sayd before.
[Back to Top]MarginaliaThe third cause, the testimonye of the fathers.The third cause, why the woordes of consecration are figuratiuely to be taken, is the testimonie of the auncient Doctours.
MarginaliaTertullianus Contra Martionem. Lib. 4.This is my body: that is to say, this is a figure of my body.
MarginaliaAugustinus. Psal. 3.Christ gaue a figure of his body.
MarginaliaAugust. contra Adamantum.He did not doubt to say: This is my body when he gaue a signe of his body.
CloseHieronimus is Saint Jerome.
MarginaliaCap. 12. Hieronimus.Christ represented vnto vs his body.
MarginaliaAugust de Doctrina Christiana. Lib.August. in his booke De Doctrina Christiana declareth expressely that this speache of eating the body of Christ, is a figuratiue speach.
MarginaliaAmbros. de Sacram. lib. 4. cap. 4.As thou hath receaued the similitude of his death: so thou drinkest the similitude of his precious bloud.
| Fe- | The death of Christ is not present really in the sacra- |
| ment 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.
CloseThe second argument has already been alluded to. Catholics claim that Christ is both present in heaven and in the Eucharist on earth.
| Di- | The true natural body of Christ is placed in heauen. |
| sa- | The true naturall body of man can be but in one |
| place at once, where he is: | |
| mis. | Ergo, the true naturall body of Christ can be in no |
| place at once, but in heauen where he is. |
The Maior is playne by the Scriptures: Iesus was taken vp to heauen, and sitteth at the right hand of God. Math. 26
CloseMatthew 26: 64.
CloseJohn 12: 8.
CloseJohn 16: 28.
CloseMatthew 24: 23.