there is in the other also, This is my body, for the holy scripture is a perfect rule not onely of doyng, but also of speakyng. Paule calleth it bread three tymes, Ergo it is bread, &c. And wheras they vrge so much this Pronoune (illum) it is not in the Grecke canon which hath panem, bread, not panem illum, that bread. There was no transubstantiation in the Manna, Ergo, nor in this sacrament, for there is this article (est) if that can prooue transubstantiation as they suppose. And if Manna were a figure (say they) then this is not. This mysterie or Sacrament we hold to be true bread, and true meate. Manna gaue lyfe vnto them, as this doth vnto vs, yet was it but a figure. MarginaliaTheir ought to be a certaine analogie in euery Sacrament betwene the thing that signifieth, & the thing that is signified.In euery sacrament there ought to be a certaine analogie, both of the interne and externe thyng of the Sacrament, as Augustine sayth, writyng to Bonifacius, but betwixt the formes of bread and wyne, and the body of Christ, there is no analogie at all,  

Ergo, they make not a Sacrament. As of many graynes, &c. This similitude of Paule is spoken of þ^e substance of bread, not of the forme thereof, otherwyse Paule should in vayne compare vs to bread. As in Baptisme there is materiall water, so in the sacrament of the Eucharist is materiall bread. Dionysius called the Sacrament of the Christes bodye no otherwyse then bread. Eusebius in ecclesiastica historia doth the same. Tertullian, lib. 4. against Marcion, sayth thus, He gaue hys body, that is (sayth he) a figure or type of hys body. Cyprian sayeth, In his last supper he gaue bread and wyne, and hys body vpon the crosse. The same Cyprian epist 6. lib. 1 and epist 3. lib. 2. sayeth.MarginaliaCyprian epist. 6. Cyprian epist. 6. li. 1. epist.3 li.2. Christ dranke wyne at his last supper, because he would root out the heresie of certaine who onely vsed water in the ministration thereof. Chrysost. hom. 13. vpon Math. sayth, That onely bread remayneth, &c. Theodoretus sayth in hys first dialogue, bread remayneth still in hys first nature as before. Augustine sayth, The bread doth not loose his first nature after the consecration, but receyue þ^e another qualitie, whereby it differeth from common bread. The same August. lib. 3. MarginaliaAug. li. 3. contra Maximinum.agaynst Maximinus sayeth: Sacramentes are figures, beyng one thyng in deede, and shewyng forth an other thyng: he speaketh of no transubstantiation here. Agayne, writyng to Bonifacius he sayth, The Sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ, and so is the sacrament of wyne also, &c. The sacraments of the olde and new law, are all one in substaunce of matter, notwithstandyng they be diuers in signes: which Sacramentes, why should they not be one, whē as they signified al one thing. The body of Christ when it was on the earth, was not in heauen, so now it beyng in heauen, is not on the earth.   Wherby it may appeare, MarginaliaTransubstantiation a most blasphemouse errour.that transubstantiation is a most blasphemous, sacrilegious, and damnable errour, and a most vayne, vnsauory, and diuelish papisticall inuention, defended and maintayned onely by the papistes, the professed and sworn enemies of all truth. Those who impugn this doctrine of transubstantiation, are no new vpstartes, as the enemies of the truth the papists beare the world in hand. But contrarily, those who maintayne this diuelish doctrine, are new sprong vp cocatrices, as Manicheus, Euticus and others. Gelasius sayth, The sacramentes which we receyue, are diuine thyngs, yet cease they not to bee bread and wyne in nature. Out of this puddle of transubstantiation, hath sprong vp adoration of the sacrament, and inducyng men to beleeue that Christ hath many bodies.

[Back to Top]

MAthew, Marke, Luke and the apostle Paule, call it a commemoration or remembraunce of Christes body and bloud. And Paule to the Hebrews sayth: By one onely oblation once offered, are we made perfect to eternall saluation, &c. By hym therefore doe we offer vp the sacrifice of laud and prayse to God, that is the fruit of the lips, &c. It is called the Eucharist, MarginaliaWhy it is called the Eucharist.because we offer to God praise and thankesgeuyng, with deuout myndes, and it is called the cup of thankesgeuyng, because we geue thankes to God thereby also. You shall preach forth the Lordes death, &c. that is, you shall geue thanks & be myndfull of his death, &c. Geue your bodies a quick and liuyng sacrifice, &c. The sacrifice of prayse and thankesgiuing, shall honour me, &c. Chrysostome sayth, The wyse men offered three kyndes of sacrifices, gold, frankencense and myrrhe, so we doe also, namely vertue, prayer, and almes deedes. These be the sacrifices wherewith Christ is pleased. MarginaliaNo other sacrifice, but onely prayse and thankesgeuing.And Augustine sayth there are no other sacrifices thē prayer, prayse and thanksgeuyng, &c. Chrysostome homil. 46. vpon Iohn sayth, to be conuerted or turned into Christ, is to be made pertaker of hys body and bloud.

[Back to Top]

CHrist whose wordes are to be beleeued, sayd, This is my body, he said not this bread is my body, or w^t this bread, or vnder this bread, or by this bread, but sayd plainly, This is my body. And this he prooued by these reasons:MarginaliaThree vaine reasons, to proue the bread to be transubstāciate. First, for that it was prefigured before. Secondly, for that it was promised. Thirdly, for that it was geuen. The transubstātiation of the bread was prefigured by the Manna which came downe from heauen, all that bread was heauenly, and without any earthly matter or substance adnexed. Secondly, it was promised in those wordes of Christ, þ^e bread that I will geue, is my flesh, &c. Thirdly, it was geuen by Christ, and exhibited in hys last supper, sayeng: Take, eate, this is my body.

[Back to Top]

WE geue thee thanks most holy Father, that thou hast hid these thyngs from the wyse and prudent, and hast reuealed them to babes, for pryde is the roote of al heresies whatsoeuer. And on the other side, to acknowledge our owne infirmitie and imperfection, is the first steppe to the true vnderstandyng of the truth. Nestorius  

the heretike affirmed, that there were two persons in Christ, one that was man, another that was God, therefore he sayd that in the Eucharist was contayned true flesh, but onely of hys pure manhoode. Agaynst hym did the counsell of Ephesus   conclude, sayeng: That there was the reall fleshe of the sonne of God, &c. This he proued by the words of Christ. My flesh is meate in deede, and what flesh that is, he teacheth vpon the sixt of Iohn, that is, quoth he, the fleshe vnited to the deitie, and quickened by the holy Ghost, &c. Now that that flesh is in the Sacrament, it is playne by MarginaliaHillarius li. 8. de trinitat.Hillarius, lib. 8. de Trinitate, he prooued the same also out of MarginaliaChrisost. ho. 45.Chrysostome, homil. 45. vpon Iohn. We are one bodye with hym, mēbers of his flesh, and bones of his bones, &c. Agayne in the same homilie, we are ioyned to hys flesh, not onely by fayth and loue, but also in very deede, and truely. And agayne it pleased me to become your brother, and by the same thyngs wherin I was ioyned to you, haue I geuen my selfe agayne vnto you, &c.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaChrist is in the Sacrament really after a sort.Perne.  

I graunt vnto you that Christ is in the sacrament truely, wholy, & verely, after a certaine propertie & maner: I deny not hys presence, but hys reall and corporall presence I vtterly deny, for doubtles hys true and natural body is in heauen, and not in the sacrament: notwithstādyng he dwelleth with vs, and in vs after a certaine vnitie. And also in the 6. chapter of Iohn, he speaketh not of the flesh of Christ crucified, &c.

[Back to Top]

Parker. The flesh of Christ as it is in the sacramēt, is quick and geueth lyfe, Ergo,his reall and substantiall fleshe is in the sacrament.

MarginaliaHow Christes fleshe geueth lyfe.Perne. The flesh of Christ in that it is vnited to the deitie, doth viuifie, and geueth lyfe, but not otherwyse.

Rochest. Christ dwelleth in vs by fayth, and by fayth we receiue Christ both God and man, both in spirit and flesh, that is, this sacramentall eatying is the meane and waye whereby we attayne to the spirituall eatyng, and in deede for the strengthenyng of vs to the eatyng of this spirituall foode, was this sacrament ordeyned. And these words This is my body, are ment thus, MarginaliaHow these wordes, this is my body are ment.by grace it is my true body, but not my fleshly body, as some of you suppose.

[Back to Top]

Parker. We are ioyned to Christ, not onely by faith, but also in very deede, ergo&c.

Rochest. We are ioyned to Christ that is, we are made pertakers of his flesh and of immortalitie. MarginaliaThere is a vnion betweene mā, and womā, yet no transubstantiation.And so lyke case is there a vnion betweene man and woman, yet is there no transubstantiation of eyther, or both, &c.

Pollard. The sacrament is not bare bread and nothing els, onely because it is called bread so often in the Scriptures, and that I prooue by three reasons.  

MarginaliaWhy is it called bread so often.First, it is called bread because of the similitude. Secondly, because of the mutation. Thirdly, for the matter whereof it is made and compact, as the Angels are called men, the holy ghost a tonge, the rod of Aaron a serpent, and such lyke. The wordes of Christ do teach the same thyng, as appeareth in the healyng of the woman of Canaans daughter, Iairus sonne   , and many others, &c. Ergo, &c. Then he prooued agaynst Rochester, that somewhat els was in the Sacrament besides power and grace by this reason. The euill receyue the body of Christ, as is playne out of Augustine, homil. 21. de verbis domini, bnt the euill and wycked receyue not the vertue or grace, Ergo, there is not onely grace and vertue in the sacrament.

[Back to Top]

Rochest. The euill do not receyue the Lord in Sacrament,