but the sacrament of the Lord, as Iudas, who in deed eate not the true body of the Lord.

MarginaliaThe euill receaue not the Lordes sacrament.Pollard. In the sacrament be three thyngs, to wit, an outward signe, the matter of the Sacrament, and the fruite of the same, the euill receyue the outward signe, and the subiect of the Sacrament, but not the fruite of the Sacrament, Ergo, there is some what els in the Sacrament than onely grace. Also euery Sacrament ought to haue a certaine similitude with the matter of the Sacrament, but the materiall bread hath not such similitude with the body of Christ, which is the matter of the Sacrament, Ergo, materiall bread is not a Sacrament.

[Back to Top]

Perne. I deny your Minor, for materiall breade doth so nourish the bodye, as the fleshe of Christ doth the soule.

THorough the shortnesse of tyme I am so constrayned, that neyther I can speake without losse of my reputation, nor yet hold my peace without offence to God. For in speakyng (as I doe) without great premeditation before this honourable, worshipfull, and learned audience, I shall but shewe foorth my childishnesse herein  

, and if I should hold my peace, I myght be thought to betray the truth of Gods cause. And therfore whilest I can neyther speake for the breuitie of tyme, nor yet hold my peace gods truth beyng in controuersie, I haue determined although with the impairyng of my good name, to render a reason of my fayth, which if I cannot affourd probably in words, yet wyll I not faulte in sayeng nothyng at all. For it seemeth better that I be esteemed altogether foolish and vnlearned, amongst so many graue learned Fathers & Doctours, then to forsake the iust defence of the truth, which euery good christian man throughout the world, hath euer holden inuiolable. For who so forsaketh the manifest knowen truth, had neuer any true fayth therein. MarginaliaVnecrteinty amongest the Doctors.Which thyng that I may ouerpasse in Berengarius, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, and many others   , who are certaynely knowen to be of no lesse variaunce amongest themselues, then vncertayn of theyr fayth what to beleeue. Zuinglius wryteth thus of hymselfe. Although this thyng which I meane to intreate of doth lyke me very well, yet notwithstandyng, I dare define nothyng, but only shew my poore iudgement abroad to others, that if it please the Lord, others may be therby instructed by the spirit of God which teacheth all good thynges. In vayne doe I spende many wordes. You see playnely he dare not define anye thyng certainely, but doubteth whether it please GOD or not. Oecolampadius writyng to a certayne brother of hys, sayth thus: Peace be with thee. As farre as I can coniecture out of the learned Fathers these wordes, Iohn. 6. This is my body, be figuratiue locutions, &c. You see hereby how vncertaine they be of their opinions. They leane not to the Scriptures, to Doctors, not yet to the trueth, but to supposals and coniectures, who therefore hereafter wyll cleaue vnto them? But nowe I come to your Oration, whose beginnyng pleased me very well, and whose pogresse therein offended me not. But in the end you concluded in such sort, that you left the whole matter to me, as it were confirmyng my partes by the same. And herein you framed a Syllogisme after this maner. What Christ tooke, that he blessed, what he blessed, that he brake, what he brake that he gaue, Ergo, what he receyued he gaue, &c. Whereto I aunswer wyth a lyke Syllogisme out of Genesis.MarginaliaAn vnsauery comparison. God tooke a ribbe out of Adams side, what hee tooke, he built, what he built that he brought, what he brought, that hee gaue to Adam to be hys wyfe, but he tooke a ribbe, Ergo, he gaue a ribbe to Adam to wyfe, &c. Also in your sayd Oration, you shute much at those wordes of Paule, where he calleth it bread so often, &c. But the Scripture in another place calleth it water, when in deede it was wyne, a rodde when it was a playne serpent.

[Back to Top]

Rochest. You haue pretended great zeale & words inough, but what pith or substance your reasons will affourd, we shall see hereafter.

Vauisor. Christ gaue the same flesh to vs, that he receyued of the virgine, but he tooke true and naturall flesh of her, Ergo, he gaue vs true and naturall fleshe. My Maior I prooue by MarginaliaAugust. sup. Psal. 98.August. vpon the 98. Psalme.

Rochest. M. Vauisor you are in a wrong boxe, for þ^t place maketh altogether for maintenāce of adoration, if it make for any thyng.

Vauisor. I know it very well, and therefore I alledge it as the ground of my reason. These bee Augustines woordes, Christ of the earth receyued earth, and of the flesh of Mary, he receyued flesh, acknowledge his substance therefore?

MarginaliaAnno. 1549.Rochest. I acknowledge it.

Vauisor. And in the very same flesh he walked here vppon the earth, acknowledgge his substaunce.

Rochest. I acknowledge it.

Vauisor. And the very same fleshe he gaue vs to eate, acknowledge hys substaunce.

Rochest. I acknowlege not hys reall substance to be there, but the propertie of hys substance.

Vauisor. Then Vauisor recited the place, to the ende hee myght prooue that hys reall substaunce ought to bee acknowledged as well in the last place, as in the first and second, affirmyng it out of Saint Augustine, who sayeth thus. The Disciples of Christ approchyng the Lordes table, by fayth dranke the same bloud which the tormenters most cruelly spilt, &c. but the tormenters spilt no figure of bloud, Ergo, &c. this place will not permit the other so to be illuded.

[Back to Top]

Rochest. It is no illusion good M. Vauisor, but surely you would moue a Saint with your impertinent reasons.

Vauisor. I beseech your fatherhood to pardon my rudenes, for surely I cannot otherwyse speake without breache of conscience.

Perne. That place of Augustine is to bee vnderstoode of a spirituall kynd of eatyng.

Vauisor. I demand whether the faythfull may receyue spiritually, so as they neeede not to receiue sacramentally.

Perne. They may.

Vauisor. Then thus to you: To the spirituall eatyng, there is no need to come to the Lordes table, for so it is the meat of the soule, not of the teeth, but the faythfull come to the Lordes table, Ergo that place is to be vnderstood of a sacramentall eatyng.  

And agayne, Augustine sayth, that he caried hymselfe in hys hands.

[Back to Top]

Rochest. Augustine sheweth a little after, what he meaneth thereby, where he sayeth he caried hymselfe in his owne hands, after a certayne sort or maner.

Vauisor. True it is that after one maner he sate at the table, and after another maner was in the sacrament.

I Vnderstand the meanyng of this worde Proprietas, proprietie, well enough, for in Hillarie and Eusebius, it signifieth not the vertue or power of any substance or beyng, but rather a naturall beyng or substance.

Rochest. I commend your great diligence in searchyng of authors, but in diuinitie the matter standeth not so, for the proprietie of essence in the deitie, is the very essence, and what soeuer is in God, is God.

Yong. True it is (most reuerend father) that this worde Proprietas, proprietie, in Hillary in hys 8. booke de Trinitate, intreatyng there of the diuinitie of the father, of the sonne, and of the holy ghost, is so meant and taken, but the same Hillary almost in the same place speaketh of our communion and vnitie wyth Christ, &c. Tertullian also writyng of the resurrection of the flesh, affirmeth that the fleshe of our sauiour is that whereof our soule is allied to God, that is it which causeth that our soules are ioyned to hym, but our flesh is made cleane, that the soule may be purged, our flesh is annoynted, that the soule may be made holy, the flesh is sealed, that the soule may be comforted, the fleshe is shadowed with the imposition of the handes, that our soule may be lightened with the glory of the spirite. Our flesh is clothed with a body and bloud, that the soule may be fed and nourished of God.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaWhen our bodyes be fed with the bodye and bloud of Christ.Rochest. The fleshe in deede is fed with the body and the bloud of the Lord, when our bodies by mortification are made lyke to his body. And our body is nourished when the vertue and power of the body of Christ doth feede vs. The same Tertullian is not afrayd to cal it flesh, and bloud, but he meaneth a figure of the same.

[Back to Top]

Yong. Then by your leaue it should follow by good consequence, that where anye mortification is, there must needes be a sacramentall communion, which cannot be. Ergo, &c.

¶ Here endeth the third, and last Disputation holden at Cambridge. 1549.

This disputation continued three dayes. In the first dyd aunswer Doctour Madew. Agaynst whome disputed Doctour Glinne, M. Langdale, M. Segewike, M. Young.

In the second disputation did answer Doctor Glinne. Agaynst whome disputed M. Grindall, M. Perne, M. Gest, M. Pilkington.