Skip to main content

Full text of "A Defence of the true and Catholick doctrine of the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Saviour Christ : with a confutation of Sundry errors concerning the same"

See other formats

A I NW 20 1990 
D E F E lA::^0ej2^j_^jjj?^ 























ST. John's square. 


Where doctrine is true, it will not be over- 
thrown by railing" accusation against the teach- 
ers of it, nor even by an exposure of their infir- 
mities or sins. The Reformation in England 
is founded upon doctrines which are true. Of 
these Archbishop Cranmer considered his doc- 
trine of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in 
contradistinction to what is maintained upon 
this subject by the Church of Rome, as the 
chief; and he emphatically pronounces it "the 
true doctrine." Yet as endeavours have been 
made to weaken this doctrine, and calumnies 
against the teacher of it have been rendered sub- 
servient to these endeavours ; any minister of 
the Reformed Church of England, however hum- 
ble may be his power, is truly exercising his 
duty, while, in calling the attention of the pub- 
lick to the great doctrine which chiefly distin- 
guishes the Church of England from the Church 

A 2 


of Rome, he rescues also from reproach, where 
it is not deserved, the character of the great 
prelate who taught it. Such is the design of 
the following pages ; in which the assertions of 
eminent scholars, who are opposed to the Refor- 
mation and its children, are sometimes challeng- 
ed merely by the exercise, which seeks no lofty 
name, of referring to authorities. Ingenuity in 
selection, perspicuity of statement, and elegance 
of style, may lead us indeed delightfully along 
through a narrative, or a volume of history; 
but elegance of style, perspicuity of statement, 
and ingenuity in selection, without accuracy, 
change at once the captivating light of any 
point into a mournful gloom. 

I have presumed, in citing the Strictures 
upon Southey's Book of the Church by J, Mer- 
lin, to name Dr. Milner as the author; Mr. 
Butler, in his Book of the Roman Catholic 
Church, having expressly stated, and others of 
the Romish communion having asserted, (while 
the internal evidence in the Strictures also leads 
to the same conclusion,) this learned Ro- 
manist as such. Yet I had rather that the in- 


fbrmation was unauthorized ; as it is pitiable to 
find, in two editions of the Strictures, that the 
dishonesty of Bonner, in fabricating a speech 
for Cranmer, (the ** grievous lie," as Strype in- 
dignantly calls it, Eccl. Mem. iii. 238,) and 
publishing it as if pronounced by the Arch- 
bishop, is stated as existing in Strype's Eccle- 
siastical Memorials ''from tht Lambeth Records;' 
when not a word is extant, or known to have 
been extant, in any record at Lambeth, relating 
to this matter ; and, as I have said, (Introduct. 
p. cix,) no reference is made to such records 
by Strype. Let it never more be supposed, by 
the reference of Dr. Milner, that the Lambeth 
Records sustain the wicked fabrication of Bon- 

With his usual kindness, and condescension, 
his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury has 
allowed me; upon the present occasion, to exa- 
mine the Records in Lambeth Library. And for 
admission to the State-Paper Office, and the exa- 
mination of some documents there preserved 
respecting Cranmer, I have been greatly in- 
debted to the very liberal permission of the 


Right Honourable Mr. Secretary Peel ; and to 
the obliging assistance of Robert Lemon, Esq. de- 
puty-keeper of the Records in that Office. Nor 
may I omit this opportunity of saying, that to 
the care and zeal of Mr. Lemon the country 
is indebted for a most exact arrangement of 
innumerable historical papers in the Office, 
for the discovery of several hitherto unknown, 
and for his interesting remarks upon many of 
them. I have also gratefully profited by the 
inspection of the Registers of the Archbishops 
and of the Dean and Chapter of York ; and in 
the Library of the latter I have discovered an 
unknown Manuscript of the celebrated Sir John 
Harington, from which I have gathered some 
important circumstances respecting the persecu- 
tion of the Protestants in the reign of Mary. 
In this Manuscript there are also several curious 
illustrations of the reign of Elizabeth ; some of 
which, as well as other original materials, I hope 
to copy, if health and opportunity favour me, 
into a vindication of the history of that time 
against some recent misrepresentations. 




Account of Archbishop 
Cranmer's book i, ii, iii, xiii. 

The connection of this 
book with our Church 
and State - - i, ii. 

Protestant Constitution 
described - - iii. 

The Reformation worth 
maintaining - - iii. 

The Archbishop's confer- 
ence with Ridley upon 
the subject of his book iv, v. 

Character of Fox's Acts 
and Monuments - iv. 

Dr. Milner's censure of 
Fox - - - V. 

Bertram's book upon the 
Sacrament of the Lord's 
Supper - - V, vii. 

The Archbishop's zeal for 
publishing books in the 
national language, in 


order to promote the 
Reformation - - viii. 

Original letter of the Arch- 
bishop on the preceding 
subject - - ix. 

Metrical psalmody - x. 

The Archbishop's book 
attacked by Bp. Gar- 
diner and Dr. Smith xi, xiv. 

The Archbishop's fine de- 
fence of his book and 
of himself - - xii. 

The Archbishop not a Lu- 
theran or a Zuinglian 

xii, Ixxi, Ixxii. 

Process against the Arch- 
bishop firstprintedfrom 
a manuscript in the 
Lambeth Library - xiv. 

The Archbishop's letter 
to King Edward VL xvi. 

Manuscript remains of the 




Archbishop in the State 
Paper Office - xix, xx. 

The Fathers and School- 
men appealed to by the 
Archbishop - xx. 

The study of them recom- 
mended, together with 
other good writers xxi, xxii. 

The Fathers, and Bibles, 
the strongest arguments 
against Popery - xxii. 

The sense of the Church 
of England as to the 
Real Presence xxii, xxiii. 

The Archbishop's, and 
Ridley's, and Hooper's, 
assertions upon this 
subject - xxiii, xxiv. 

Their martyrdom in de- 
fence of those asser- 
tions - - xxiv. 

Mr. Butler unfairly cites 
Bp. Jeremy Taylor on 
the subject of Transub- 
stantiation and the Mass 

xxiv, XXV. 

Bp. Jeremy Taylor pro- 
nounces both Transub- 
stantiation and theMass 
as idolatrous - xxv. 

Mr. Butler cites Bp. Gun- 
ning, but conceals what 
should have been added 
respecting him - xxvi. 

Mr. Butler's remarks on 


the Article of our 
Church respecting 

Transubstantiation xxvii. 

Answered - - xxix. 

The Archbishop's senti- 
ments upon universal 
redemption and rege- 
neration in baptism 

XXX, xxxi. 

The character of the Arch- 
bishop - xxxi, Ixi, cxiii. 

The slander upon the me- 
mory of Anne Boleyn 
considered - xxxii, et seq. 

Sanders's, and Bayly's, 
and Phillips's notices 
of it - - xxxii. 

Mr. Baddeley's notice of 
the same, with his rail- 
ing against Cranmer 


Dr. Lingard's and Mr. 
Butler's notices of Anne 
Boleyn - - xxxiii. 

Mr. Southey's notice of 
her story as blackened 
by the Romanists xxxiii. 

Rastal's pretended book, 
upon which the calum- 
ny against Anne Bo- 
leyn is founded, con- 
sidered - - xxxiv. 

Character of Sanders xxxv, 

Dr. Lingard's account of 




the elevation of the 
Archbishop to the see 
of Canterbury consi- 
dered - xxxvi, et seq. 

Dr. Lingard's remarks 
upon the Archbishop's 
protestation against the 
pope, together with 
Mr. Butler's, answered, 

xxxix, xl, xli. 

The authority of the 
Archbishop's register 
as to this point - xli. 

Misrepresentation of San- 
ders and Phillips on the 
subject - xli, et seq. 

The Archbishop's own as- 
sertion as to this pro- 
test - - xliii. 

Cardinal Pole's assertions 
not always to be relied 
upon - - xlv. 

Dr. Lingard's account of 
the Archbishop's con- 
duct, as to the divorce 
of queen Catherine, 
considered - xlv. et seq. 

Original letter of the 
Archbishop on the sub- 
ject - - xlvi. 

Dr. Lingard and Dr. Mil- 
ner ought to have seen 
this letter - xlvi, xlix. 

Dr. Lingard's account of 


king Henry's union 
with Anne Boleyn - 1. 

Bishop Gardiner's opinion 
upon it the same as the 
Archbishop's - 1, li, Hi. 

Dr. Lingard's description 
of the marriage of the 
King and Anne Boleyn 
in a garret, considered Iv. 

Dr Milner's observation 
on the marriage, cor- 
rected - - _ Ivi. 

The Archbishop's notice 
of falsehoods, reported 
of him, omitted by Dr. 
Lingard in his citation 
of his Grace's letter - Ivi. 

Dr. Lingard's statement 
as to the king's supre- 
macy - Ivi, Ivii. 

Dr. Lingard's notice of 
the Archbishop upon 
this occasion, but his 
concealment of bishop 
Gardiner's having writ- 
ten a violent book 
against the pope's su- 
premacy - Ivii. 

Dr. Lingard's reflection 
upon the learning or 
fanaticism of the Arch- 
bishop refuted Ixi. et seq. 

The title of Antichrist 
applied to the pope Ixii, Ixiii. 


Curious application of 
it in this view by 
the Romanists them- 
selves - - Ixiii. 

Dr. Lingard's charge 
against the Archbishop, 
as to the trial and pu- 
nishment of Lambert, 
answered - Ixiv, et seq. 

Dr. Milner and Mr. But- 
ler agree with Dr. Lin- 
gard, and also as to the 
case of Anne Askew 

Ixiv, et seq. 

The Archbishop's aver- 
sion to cruelty - Ixv. 

Dr. Lingard refers to re- 
cantations of Anne As^ 
kew, which were denied 
by herself - - Ixvi. 

Bishop Gardiner the fore- 
most in the proceedings 
both against Askew 
and Lambert " Ixvii. 

Dr. Milner's remark up- 
on the Archbishop as a 
Lutheran, or Zuinglian, 
answered - - Ixxi. 

Original letter of the 
Archbishop in 1540, 
shewing his aversion to 
the Church of Rome Ixxiii. 

The Archbishop's oppo- 
sition to the Act of the 
Six Articles Ixxvi, et seq. 


Dr. Lingard's citation of 
a letter upon this sub- 
ject, considered - Ixxvii. 

Mr. Butler's expostula- 
tion with Mr. Southey 
upon this subject con- 
sidered - Ixxix, Ixxx. 

Dr. Lingard's mis-state- 
ment as to the Arch- 
bishop in the discussion 
of this point - Ixxxi. 

The Archbishop's spirit 
in the cause of religion Ixxxi. 

Dr. Lingard's charge 
against the Archbishop 
in the case of Joan 
Bocher, answered Ixxxiii. 

Dr. Lingard's notice of 
the case of Van Parris 


Phillips's mis-statement 
of the cases both of 
Van Parris, and of Bo- 
cher - Ixxiii, Ixxxv. 

Dr. Milner alleges the 
cruelty of the Archbi- 
shop to both by a re- 
ference to Burnet Ixxxv. 

The passage, referred to 
in Burnet, explained 

Ixxxv, et seq. 

Dr. Lingard's account of 
the Archbishop's beha- 
viour, upon the acces- 
sion of Mary to the 




throne, considei'ecl Ixxxvii, 
et seq. 

Dr. Thornden, one of the 
dissembling nionks,who 
were enemies to the 
Archbishop Ixxxix, et seq. 

Conspiracy of the dissem- 
bling monks of Christ 
Church, Canterbury, 
against the Archbishop xc. 

Character of several mem- 
bers of theArchbishop's 
cathedral - - xci. 

Dr. Lingard's partiality to 
the bishops Gardiner 
and Bonner - xci, xcii. 

Sir John Harington's ma- 
nuscript narrative of 
Bp. Gardiner's cruelty 

xcii, et seq. 

His description of Bp. 
Gardiner and Bp. Bon- 
ner - - xciv, xcv. 

Cardinal Pole's character 

xcv, xcvi. 

Dr. Lingard's suggestions 
that Bonner and Gar- 
diner were not quite so 
guilty, as they have 
been represented •• xcvii. 

Dr. Lingard's mistaken 
relation of the Protes- 
tants who were burned 
in the reign of Mary xcvii. 


Bp. Bonner's character xcviii. 

Dr. Lingard's relation of 
the code of ecclesiasti- 
cal laws, compiled by 
the Archbishop and his 
associates - xcix, et seq. 

Tlie Reformatio Legum 
Ecclesiasticarum ex- 
plained - xcix, et seq. 

Dr. Lingard's insinuation 
as to the Archbishop's 
and his associates' in- 
tention in these laws - c. 

Mr. Butler's belief of the 
wish of the Archbishop 
and his associates - c. 

The Archbishop and his 
associates defended - ci. 

The cruel persecution by 
Mary and her agents ci, cii. 

Dr. Lingard's exhibition 
of the Archbishop in his 
last days - - cii. 

Dr. Lingard mistakenly 
adds a seventh recanta- 
tion to those which the 

, Archbishop is said to 
have made - - ciii. 

Strype's account of the six 
recantations - ciii, et seq. 

Suspicious circumstances 
observable in them cv,etseq. 

The order, by the Privy 
Council, for the Arch- 




bishop's recantation in 
the first instance to be 
burnt - - cvii. 

The preparation of part 
of these recantations for 
the Archbishop obvious 

cviii, et seq. 

The original copy of them 
dishonestly published 
by Bp. Bonner cviii, cix. 

And dishonourably privi- 
leged by queen Mary cviii. 

Dr. Lingard's observation 
upon the recantations 
considered - - cix. 

Dr. Milner's strange re- 
ference to the Lambeth 
Records, in confirma- 

tion of these recanta- 
tions, exposed - cix. 

The real speech of the 
Archbishop at his mar- 
tyrdom, instead of that 
prepared for him ex, cxi. 

Account of the Archbi- 
shop's last moments cxi, cxii. 

Observations on the Re- 
formation in England, cxiii. 

Milton's character of it cxiv. 

Blackstone referred to in 
behalf of it - cxiv. 

Concluding remark upon 
it in an Essay, honour- 
ed with the approbation 
of the University of 
Oxford - - cxv. 



I. An account of the Archbishops work. II. The 
vindication of the Archbishop's character. 

I. The work of Archbishop Cranmer, which 
is reprinted in the following pages, has long 
ceased to be a book of frequent occurrence. 
Nearly three centuries have passed since it first 
appeared ; since it was also afterwards embo- 
died in the prelate's admirable vindication of it 
against Bishop Gardiner ; and since it likewise 
was published in a Latin translation. Of its 
celebrity our theologians and ecclesiastical wri- 
ters often speak. Over the pages of it no dis- 
cerning reader will turn without finding abun- 
dant examples of irresistible argumentation, as 
well as impressive eloquence. And the indisso- 
luble connection of it with our Church and State 
every Protestant will admit, when the learned 



amongst them call to mind, and the unlearned 
are informed, that to the establishment of the 
Reformation in England this w'^ork in the highest 
degree contributed, and that it refutes the doc- 
trine which chiefly distinguishes the Church of 
Rome from the Church of England. 

That no reader may be interrupted in the pe- 
rusal of this important treatise, the orthography 
of it in the following pages is that of our own 
time ; the spelling of words in the time of Cran- 
mer being so unsettled, as that in the same 
page, and even in the same line, a single expres- 
sion presents often different forms. Sometimes 
an archaism, or a seeming vulgarism, which the 
recollection of the time excuses, is found in this 
discourse ; but the words and reasoning all 
along are in unison with the prelate's own decla- 
ration of *' '^ making inore clearly appear the light 
from the darkness''' The contents of the mar- 
tyr's book, like the publick tables that of old 
were hung up in temples and market-places, 
sliould be in characters so " ^ plain, that he may 
run that readeth them T yes, and that he may 
mark them too; that he may mark them as form- 
ing much of the basis of that Protestant Consti- 
tution, " ^ under which we have enjoyed more 

* Defence of the true Doctrine, &c. present edition, p. So. 
" Habakkuk ii. 2. 

* Substance of the Speech of the Right Hon. Robert Peel in 
the House of Commons, May 9, 1 81 7, on the Right Hon. Henry 


liberty, we have acquired more glory, we pos- 
sess more character and power, than hitherto 
has fallen to the lot of any other country on the 
globe ;" and that hence he may mark them £is 
proclaiming with a voice never to be silenced, 
we trust, that '* "^ the Reformation was worth 
estabUshing," and therefore *' it is worth main- 

The treatise before us, while it principally 
discusses the subject of Transubstantiation, and 
the Sacrifice of the Mass, delivers some excel- 
lent observations upon certain doctrines adopted 
by our Church, (besides that which concerns the 
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper,) agreeing also 
with the primate's decision upon such points in 
the publick formularies of our faith. They shall 
be noticed in the present Introduction. But I 
ought, in illustration of the work, first to state 
the history of it, and then shew how the differ- 
ence in question between the Churches of Rome 
and England is marked, and how the great re- 
former determined upon other points. 

** * During the time of king Henry the eighth, 
until the entering of king Edward, it seemeth 

Grattan's motion, That the House should resolve itself into a 
Committee, to take into consideration the laws affecting the 
Roman Catholicks of the United Kingdom. Third edition, 
p. 40. 

^ Sermons and Charges by Bp. Harrington, p. 437. " If the 
Reformation was worth establishing, it is worth maintaining." 

• Fox's Acts and ^Fonuments. 
u 2 


that Cranmer was scarcely yet thoroughly per- 
suaded in the right knowledge of the Sacrament, 
or at least was not yet fully ripened in the same; 
wherein shortly after being more groundedly 
confirmed by conference with bishop Ridley, in 
process of time did so profit in riper knowledge, 
that at last he took upon him the defence of that 
whole doctrine, that is, to refute and throw down, 
first, the corporal presence ; secondly, the fan- 
tastical transubstantiation ; thirdly, the idola- 
trous adoration ; fourthly, the false error of the 
Papists, that wicked men do eat the natural 
body of Christ; and, lastly, the blasphemous 
sacrifice of the mass. Whereupon in conclusion 
he wrote five books for the publick instruction of the 
Church of England: avhich instruction yet 


Such is the ^ faithful statement of Fox, the 

' I have great pleasure in citing the following passage from 
tlie Preface to Dr. Wordsworth's Ecclesiastical Biography; 
assuring the reader also, that in numerous researches which it 
has been often my duty to make among ancient registers, and 
other records, the accuracy of Fox in such as he has ap- 
plied to his purpose is indisputable. " I am well aware," Dr. 
Wordsworth says, " that by the extent to which I have availed 
myself of Fox's Acts and Monuments, I fall within the sphere 
of such censures as that of Dr. John Milner, in which he speaks 
of ' the frequent publications of John Fox's lying Book of 
Martyrs, witli prints of men, women, and children, expiring in 
llamos ; the nonsense, inconsistency, and falsehoods of which,' 


martyrologist, in respect to the work before us. 
Cranmer himself has also informed us, in his 
Profession of faith in 1555, that *'^his book 
was made seven years ago ;" and it was ^ about 
the year 1546, when Ridley, by reading the 
work of ' Bertram concerning the Body and 

lie saj's, * he had in part exposed in his Letters to a Preben- 
dary.' I am not ignorant of what has been said also by Dr. 
Milner's predecessors in the same argument, by Harpsfield, 
Parsons, and others. But these writings have not proved, and 
it never will be proved, that John Fox is not one of the most 
faithful and authentick of all historians. We know too much 
of the strength of Fox's book, and of the weakness of those of 
his adversaries, to be further moved by Dr. Milner's censures, 
than to charge them with falsehood. All the many researches 
and discoveries of later times, in regard to historical documents, 
have only contributed to place the general fidelity and truth of 
Fox's melancholy narrative on a rock which cannot be shaken." 

« Fox's Acts and Mon. 

^ Ridley communicated his thoughts upon Bertram's book 
to Cranmer about the year 1546. Strype's Life of Cranmer, 
B. 2. ch. 25. 

* Bertram, who is also called Ratramnus, asserts our doc- 
trine as expressly as we (Protestants) ourselves can do ; deli- 
vering it in the same words, and proving it by many of the 
same arguments and authorities which we bring. See Bishop 
Burnet on the 28th Article. He was a monk of the Abbey of 
Corbey, in the ninth century. Mabillon says, that he had seen 
a manuscript of his work on the Eucharist eight hundred years 
old. Cave gives him the highest character as a man and a 
scholar, and adds, " excepta lite Eucharistica, ah ipsis scrip- 
toribtis pontificiis suvimis elogiis ornatns." Li the London edi- 
tion of the Catalogus Testium Veritatis, 1686, all the objections 


Blood of Christ, had been led to examine 
closely the prevailing opinion of the corporal 
presence ; when, having found it much opposed 
in the ninth century, especially by this learned 
writer, he communicated the result of his in- 
quiry to Cranmer. Henceforward, indeed, they 
both pursued the subject with more than ordi- 
nary care ; and the Archbishop brought toge- 
ther their observations into the present Z)e/e«ce 
of the TRUE doctrine, as he has justly entitled his 
book. But a supposition that Ridley was the 
author of this book, or rather a wish to deprive 
Cranmer of the merit due to his own learning 
and research, appears to have been at the time 
expressed. " ^ How," said Secretary Bourne, 
in his examination of Ridley in the Tower, 
•' how can you then make but a figure or a sign 
of the Sacrament, as that book doth which is set 
forth in my Lord of Canterbury s name ? I wiss 
you can tell who made it : Did not you make it ?" — • 
*' And here," Ridley himself relates, " here was 
much murmuring of the rest, as though they 
would have given me the glory of writing that book ; 
— Master Secretary, quoth I, that book was 
made of a great learned man, and one who is 
able to do the like again ; as for me, I assure 

of the Romanists against this writer are learnedly and acutely 

^ Ridley's Life of bishop Ridley, (from Fox,) p. 440. 


you, be not deceived, I was never able to do or 
write any such like thing : he passeth me no 
less than the learned master his young scholar : 
— But, Sir, methinks it is not charitably done, 
to bear the people in hand that any man doth 
so lightly esteem the Sacrament, as to make of 
it a figure only ; but that but maketh it a bare 
figure without any more profit ; ivhich that hook 
doth often deny, as appeaixth to the reader rnost 

It is highly probable, that soon after the con- 
sultation of Cranmer and Ridley upon this sub- 
ject, the Archbishop caused an English trans- 
lation of Bertram's book to be published ; a 
circumstance, which has been overlooked by the 
historians of the English Reformation. For in 
1548', and in 1549, two editions of this plain, 
brief, and very useful discourse, made their ap- 
pearance, royally privileged, with the following 
title: " The boke of Barthram, priest, intreat- 
inge of the bodye and bloude of Christe, wryt- 
ten to great Charles the emperoure, and set forth 
seven hundred years ago." It is printed in a 
small form, but in types usually given to books 
of a larger size ; as if it had been intended to 
gratify the eye of age, as well as youth. And 
this accords with the accustomed zeal of Cran- 

' By T. Raynalde in 1548, and by A. Kitson in 1549. 
Ames, Hist, of Printing, p. 220. The copy however, which 
is now before me, is printed by Raynalde in 1549. 


mer to exhibit the most valuable information in 
the national language : Witness his successful 
motion, almost immediately after his consecra- 
tion, that the Scriptures should be translated 
into English, and his subsequent joy that the 
translation might be used by all : Witness his 
exertions also to bring into use prayer in the ver- 
nacular tongue, and thus to render publick de- 
votion intelligible to all. Of this pious diligence, 
though many other instances might be given, all 
contributing to promote the Reformation, I vs^ill 
add only one which Burnet and Strype had 
not seen, but vv^hich Collier has with a slight 
alteration or two printed, and which presents 
to us the great prelate, in the pursuit of his 
noble object, employing the aids of metre 
and of musick. It is contained in an origi- 
nal letter, which appears to have been written 
subsequently to the " "" Royal Mandate for 
publishing and using the prayers in the English 
tongue;" the King having observed, in this di- 
rection to the Archbishop, that '' the people 
heretofore understood no part of such prayers 
or suffrages as were used to be sung and said." 
The whole of this Mandate, as Strype has well 
observed, runs in such a pious strain, as though 
none but Cranmer had been the suggester of it. 
It is printed entire in Burnet's History of the 
Reformation, and great part of it is copied by 

" Burnet's Hist, of the Reformation, vol. i. Records, p. 264, 


Strype in his Memorials of the Archbishop ; 
and it is dated in June, 1544. In the succeed- 
ing August the Archbishop was also called upon 
by the Privy Council to appoint processions in 
the English tongue. The following is the Arch- 
bishop's letter, copied from the original now re- 
maining in the State-Paper Office. 

*' It may please your Maiestie to be aduer- 
tised, that according to your Highnes' com- 
mandemente, sent vnto me by your grace's 
secretary Mr. Pagett, I haue translated into 
the English tongue so well as I coulde, in so 
shorte tyme, certeyne processions to be vsed 
vpon festiuall dales, yf, after due correction and 
amendemente of the same, your highnes shall 
thinke it so conuenient : In whiche translation, 
forasmoche as many of the processions in the 
Lattyn were but barren, (as me semed,) and 
litle frutefull ; I was constrayned to vse more 
than the libertie of a translator: ffor in some 
processions I have alterid diners wourdes, in 
some I haue added parte, in some taken parte 
awaie. Some I have lefte oute hole, either for 
bycause the matter apperid to me to be little to 
purpose, or bycause the dales be not with vs 
festiuall dales. And some procession I haue 
added hole, bycause I thought I hadd better 
matter for the purpose than was the procession 
in Latten : the iudgemente wherof I referre 


holie vnto your Maiestie. And after your highnes 
hath corrected yt, yf your grace coinande some 
devoute and solempne note to be made there- 
vnto, (as is to the procession whiche your Ma- 
iestie hath alredie set furth in Englishe,) I truste 
it woU moche excitate and stirre the hearts of all 
men vnto deuotion and godlynes. But in myn 
opinion the songe" that shalbe made thervnto 
sholde not be full of notes, but as nere as may 
be for euery sillable a note, so that it may be 
songe distinctly and deuoutly, as be in the ma- 
tens and euen song, Venite, the hymnes Te Deum, 
Benedictus, Magnificat ^ Nunc Dimittis, and all the 
psalmes and versicles, and the masse Gloria in 
e.vceisis, Gloria Patri, the Crede, the Preface, the 
Pater noster, and some of the Sanctus and Agnus, 
As concernyng the Salve festa dies, the Latin note 
(as I thinke) is sobre and distinct enoughe. 
Wherefore I haue trauailed to make the verses 
in Englishe, and have put the Latten note vnto 
the same. Neuertheles, thei that be connyng 
in syngyng can make a moche more solempne 

" This passage leads us to believe, that metrical psalmody 
might at this time have been thought of by Cranmer, espe- 
cially by what follows in the letter as to his English verses ; 
and, it may be added, by the imitations of the Archbishop's 
endeavour, which soon fallowed in the stanzas of Sternhold, 
Hunnis, and others. So that the psalmody in question may 
seem to be of higher authority, than hitherto has been con» 
ceded to it. 


note thereto. I made them only for a profe to 
see how Englishe wolde do in songe. But by- 
cause myn Englishe verses lacke the grace and 
facilitie which I wolde wishe they hadd, your 
Maiestie may cause some other to make theyra 
againe, that can do the same in more pleasante 
Englishe and phrase. As for the sentence, I 
suppose, [it] will serue well enough. Thus Al- 
mightie God preserue your Maiestie in longe and 
prosperous helth and felicitie. ffrom Bekisborne 
the vij"" of October. 

" Your grace's most bounden, 
•' chaplayne and bedisman, 

'* T. Cantuarien. 

The Discourse of the Archbishop upon the 
Lord's Supper, almost immediately after the 
publication of it, was attacked by bishop Gar- 
diner, then a prisoner in the Tower, in ** An 
Explication and Assertion of the true Catholick 
Faith touching the most blessed Sacrament of 
the Altar, ivith confutation of a book [the Arch- 
bishop's] written against the same, 1551 ;" and 
printed, according to Strype, in France. Ano- 
ther opponent also. Dr. Smith, then at Louvain, 
published an answer to Cranmer. Both adver-? 
saries brought against the Archbishop the accu- 
sation of inconsistency. Finding in his Defence 
of the true Doctrine, that Consubstantiation, as 
well as Transubstantjation, was opposed, they 


reminded the author that formerly he had been a 
Papist, then a Lutheran, and lastly a Zuinglian, 
in his sacramental profession. The Archbishop 
was instant in his reply ° to both ; confuting as 
well " the crafty and sophistical cavillation" of 
Gardiner, as such places in the puny book of 
Smith as " seemed any thing worthy the answer- 

° It may be proper to extract, from the reply at large, the 
following words. " After it had pleased God," the Archbishop 
says, " to shew unto me by his word a more perfect knowledge 
of his Son Jesus Christ, from time to time, as I grew in know- 
ledge of him, by little and little I 2^ut away my former igno- 
rance. And as God of his mercy gave me light, so through 
his grace I opened my eyes to receive it ; and did not wilfully 
repugn unto God, and remain in darkness. And I trust in 
God's mercy and pardon for my former errors, because I erred 
hut of fraiUiess and ignorance." Answer to Gardiner, p. 402, 
He had just before ingenuously also said, after denying an al- 
legation made by Smith, that he was " in the error of the real 
presence, and in divers other errors, &c. for lack of good in- 
struction from his youth ; the outrageous floods of papistical 
errors at that time overflowing the world ; for the which, and 
other offences of his youth he daily prayed to God for mercy 
and pardon." And in the first part of his book he observes, 
in the same honourable spirit, " It is lawful and commendable 
for a man to learn from time to time, and to go from his igno- 
rance that he may receive and embrace the truth. As for me, 
I am not, I grant, of that nature that the Papists for most 
part be, who study to devise all shameful shifts, rather than 
they will forsake any error, wherewith they were infected in 
their youth." Answ. &c. p. 62. As to the accusation of his 
being a Loitheran, or a Zuinglian, see the observation in a sub- 
sequent page on Dr. Lingard's similar opinion. 


ing." This answer was eagerly expected, and 
well received; was printed in 1551 ; and again i* 
in 1552, according to Ames, which Strype, how- 
ever, has not noticed. And as a proof not only 
of the welcome which it had experienced, but 
of the high character which it maintained, it 
was republished in 1580. Archbishop Parker '^ 
indeed has said of it, that no controversy against 
the Papists was ever handled more accurately ; 
and succeeding writers of distinction have be- 
stowed their eulogy upon the language as well 
as the spirit of it, upon its acuteness as well as 
its zeal. Of his own confidence in the great 
doctrine, which he so learnedly and copiously 
maintained, he gave this solemn testimony in 
his last most impressive words: " As' for the 
Sacrament," said the venerable martyr as he 
approached the stake, " As for the Sacrament, 
I believe as I have taught in my book agai7ist the 
bishop of Winchester ; the which my book teacheth 
so true a doctrine of the Sacrament, that it shall 
stand at the last day before the judgement of 
God, where the papistical doctrine, contrary 
thereto, shall be ashamed to shew her face." It 
is in this book that the Defence of the true doctrine 

p Ames, Hist, of Printing, p. 227. 

■i Strype's Life of Cranmer, B. 2. ch. 25. 

"' Fox's Acts and Mon. 


is incorporated * ; the whole of which, together 
with the whole of Gardiner's attack upon it, is 
there reprinted, with additional observations* 
And it is this Defence, against which the indig- 
nation of Roman Catholicks was in vain exer- 
cised. In vain, as to silencing it, was it made 
an article' in the charges brought against the 
mighty prelate. In vain, as to weakening its 
effect, was it proposed to him by his cunning 
enemies as a theme for recantation ^ Gardiner 
indeed affected to answer it in Latin under a 
feigned name; when the Archbishop, though 
then in prison, vindicated his own work to a very 
great extent, and intended some addition to that 
vindication, if it might have been", " before his 
life," as he said, ** were taken away, which he 
saw was likely to be within a very short space." 
After that event, the learned Peter Martyr in- 
deed appeared as his acute and elaborate de-^ 

But as Gardiner, under the assumed title of 
M. A. Constantius, had so unfairly proceeded 

• Now and then an amended reading may be observed in 
this reprint of the Defence, which I have followed by enclosing 
the reading in brackets. 

' See the Process against him, first printed from the manu- 
script in the Library at Lambeth Palace at the close of the 
Oxford edition of Strype's Life of Cranmer, 1812. p. 1077, 
et seq. 

" Strype's Life of Cranmer, B. 2. ch. 25. The work is sup- 
posed to be lost. 


with Cranmer's book as to confound the method 
of it, and to disjoin and mangle passages in 
subserviency only to his own objections ; the 
Archbishop was of opinion, that if learned 
foreigners saw his Defence of the true doc- 
tr'me translated into the Latin tongue, (as the 
second attack of Gardiner was written in that 
language,) it would sufficiently vindicate him in 
their judgement and esteem. Sir John Cheke, 
an accomplished scholar, elegantly performed 
this service for the Archbishop ; and the Defence 
in Latin, with some additions ', appeared in 
1553; as it also again appeared in 1557, with 
observations which had been made upon a re- 
view of this translation by the archbishop him- 
self in prison, and which had fallen into the 
hands of the English exiles at Embden, who 
offered in this publication their grateful sense of 
duty to the memory of the martyred primate. 
Prefixed to this Latin translation is an epistle 
from Cranmer to King Edward VI, in which he 
says, that " it was his care of the Lord's flock 
committed to him, which induced him to renew 
and restore the Lord's Supper according to the 
institution of Christ : which was the reason that, 
about three years before, he had set forth a book 
in English against the principal abuses of the 
papistical mass." But the whole epistle is writ- 

* Strype's Life of Cranmor, B. 2. cli. ;?5. 


ten, as Strype observes, (who, however, has not 
copied it, nor has Burnet in his History of the 
Reformation,) with so much sharpness of wit, 
as well as in a pure and elegant style, as to 
render the insertion of it in the note below desi- 
rable ^'. Strype has mentioned a manuscript 

■ I copy the Letter from the edition of 1557, a book not often 
to be met with. 

" Illustrissimo ac nobilissimo Principi Edvardo Sexto, An- 
glice, Francice, et Hibernice Regi, Jidei defensori, et in terris 
secundum Christum Ecclesice Anglicance et Hiberniccs capiti su- 
premo, Thomas Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus. 

" Pro cura Dominici gregis mihi commissa, in quo salutari 
pastu verbi Divini erudiendo omnem curam cogitationemque 
meam collocare debeo, Illustriss. Princeps, Coenam Domini 
(quae multis et magnis superstitionibus violata est, et ad quae- 
stum translata,) renovandam ad Servatoris Christi instituta et 
redintegrandam putavi ; et de vero ejus usu ex verbi Divini et 
veteris ac sanctae Ecclesiae authoritate commonefaciendos esse 
otTines judicavi, quorum cura, et instructio, ad officii mei 
authoritatem aliqua ex parte pertinet. 

" Itaque ante triennium Missae papisticae abusus praecipuos 
(quibus non modo Ecclesia Anglica, sed etiam totus pene orbis 
foedatus atque infectus fuerat,) libello quodam Anglo confutavi, 
et verum atque Christianum ejus usum restituendum docui. 
Quo libra ita multi sunt ad sanam de ea re opinionem adducti, ut 
veritatis vim, quanta esset, sentirem, et gratiae Servatoris 
Christi beneficia intelligerem, ut ad veritatis lucem patefactam 
occaecati homines splendorem hicis acciperent, et (ut Paulus 
praedicante Anania) oculorum aciem perciperent. Hoc ita 
aegre Stephanus Gardinerus, Wintoniensis turn Episcopus, 
tulerat, ut nihil sibi prius faciendum putarit, quam ut librum 
tarn utilem et plausibilem confutaret; ratus, nisi opera sua 
aliqua impedimenta objicerentur, nullos deploratae jam«t dere- 


written by the archbishop, preserved in the 
library of Bene't College, Cambridge, entitled 

Ilctae pen^ sententiae adj uteres fore. Itaque eadem ipse lingua 
iisdem de rebus conscribit, et firmatam jam de vero Coenae usu 
sententiam evertere conatur, et papisticam opinionem, supev- 
stitionibus undique diffluentem, revocare conatur. Post hunc 
prodiit M. Antonius Constantius, Stephano Gardinero ita affi* 
nis et germanus, ut idem ipse esse videatur ; tanta est inge- 
niorum subtilitas, scripturae sophistices similitude. Sed uter- 
que idem tractat, alio tamen modo. 

" Constantius enim libro Latine scripto argumenta meaper- 
sequitur, ut sibi optimum videtur ; et, ut causam juvet, ssepe 
truncata, saepe inversa, saepe disjecta, sic introducit, ut non 
magis a me agnosci potuerint, quam Medese liberi in multa 
membra disjecti et deformati. Neque enim de hujusmodi cor- 
poris forma, neque de uUa re recte judicare possumus, ubi tota 
species ante oculos proposita non cat in quam intueri, quasi ia 
Phidiaa Minervam, debemus ; et non particulam aliquam, sicutl 
Momus crepidam Veneris, lacessere. Itaque ut melius mea de 
hac controversia opinione sententia teneretur, lihrum meum de 
Anglo in Latinum convertendum curavij ut omnes intelligerent 
nos neque obscuram nostram sententiam, neque abditam esse 
velle, quam cum multis bonis et doctis viris communem habe- 
mus, et cum verbo Dei, et verbi defensatrice vera Ecclesia, 
consentientem. ■■I'.- 

" Nemo est autem ex omnibus dignior, in cujus nomine li- 
bellus hie appareat qiiam in tuo. Es enim non modo Papista* 
rum opinione Fidei defensor^ (qui hoc non k seipsis protulerant, 
sed Deo per illos ad ipsovum perniciem prsemonente,) sed etiam 
bonorum omnium authoritate dignus, in quem tantum EcclesifiB 
munus conferatur. Es hujus Ecclesiae Anglicse et Hibernic« 
supremus in terris moderator, sub quo quasi sub Moyse partem 
spiritus et magnam multorum curam atque administrationem 
commissam habeo. Es etiam non modo legibus nostria tanta 



De re sacramentaria ; and Burnet and Collier, as 
well as Strype, have printed other dispersed 

regni Rex, sed etiam natura, quae Majestatem tuam ita ad 
omnem excellentiam formavit, ut quae singula in aliis exqui- 
sita sunt, ea in Majestate tua perfecta emineant. Video in re- 
gibus mediocre aliquid esse non posse, et authoritate veteris 
proverbii in eo confirmor, et gaudeo banc excellentiam non 
modo ad meliorem partem, sed etiam ad optimam, esse trans- 
latam. Haec non laudandae Majestatis tuse gratia, sed cohor- 
tandae potius dico, ut res, in hac estate tarn illustres, uberri- 
mos postbac et excellentissimos tantse dignitatis splendores in 
constanti aetate ferant. Quanta enim ornamenta ingenii et doc- 
trinae, vel ab optima natura, vel bonis praeceptoribus tribui 
poterant, eadem in te omnia excellentia sunt ; et quod in pri- 
mis laudabilissimum est, timer Dei, et verse religionis studium, 
in quibus Majestas tua ea cum laude versatur, qua seipsum Rex 
et Propheta commendavit quum dixerat, Senibus se intelligen- 
tiorem esse, quia mandata Dei inquirebat. 

*' Hiis aliisque gravibus de causis commoveor, ut hunc librum, 
jam Lat'inmn factum, nomini tuo ofFeram. Spero autem rei 
ipsa; satisfactum hoc libro esse, qui non modo summam verae 
doctrinae continet, sed omnia adversariorum argumenta, (quae 
quidem recitatu digna sunt) refutat. Sed quia nimis curiosi 
quidam sunt, et nulla, ne diligenti quidem et plena rerum ex- 
plicatione contenti, et eandem materiam argumentorum, (ne 
nihil dicere videantur,) in alias formas transmutJHit, et ordinem 
naturae pro licentia ingeniorum confundunt ; ideo nostram ad 
Stephani Gardineri librum responsionem, Latinam factam, brevi 
in lucem educemus, ut nullus (ne sophistis quidem) ad contra- 
dicendum locus relictus sit : qua ratione putabo non modo uni, 
sed Gardinero etiam et Constantio quoque esse satisfactum ; 
ft quod de comosdiis ille dixit, hoc de personatis istis dicen- 
dum, Unum cognoris, ambos cognoris. Quod si quaedam uno 
in libro pertractata sunt, quae in altero preeLermissa fuerint, 


observations by Cranmer upon the same sub- 
ject. To bring together whatever relates to the 
archbishop's inquiries, and determinations, as 
to this important doctrine, 1 may add, that in 
the State-Paper Office there remain, in the pri- 
mate's hand-writing, a paper De Sacramento 
EucharisticB ; another, De 3Iissa piivata ; and in a 
thin folio (among discussions upon " other points) 
De Eucharistia, and De Sacramentorum usu ; and 

iisdem ego responsionem neam adjungam, ut adversarii, si qui 
relicti sint, vel non habeant quod objiciant, vel, si objecerint, 
videant quid responderi ad ilia possit. Hse sunt causae, Rex 
nobilissime, quae me ad emittendum hune librum impulerunt, 
eumque sub majestatis tuae autoritate divulgandura. Te spero 
ita hoc meum studium accepturum, quemadomodum et causae 
sequitas fert, et officium meum postulat, et dementia tua in 
aliis honestis causis solet facere. Dominus Jesus majestatem 
tuam servet. Lambethae, Idibus Martiis. M. D. LIII." 

^ The book is indorsed, " a boke conteyning dy vers Articles, 
ice." and contains discussions 

De unitate et trinitate personarum. 

De peccato originali. 

De duabus Christi naturis. 

De Justificatione. 

De Ecclesia. 

De Baptismo. 

De Eucharistia. 

De Penitentia. 

De Sacramentorum usu. 

De ministris Ecclesiae. 

De ritibus ecclesiasticis. 

De rebus civilibus. 

De corporum resurrectione et extremo judicio. 


in English, What a Saci^ament is. These were, 
no doubt, composed before the Defence of the 
true doctrine had been written ; and with other 
theological observations have been preserved, 
bearing an indorsement upon one of them, (the 
whole having been contained in a bundle,) ''Most 
of ^ these papers Archbishop Cranmer's hand^ 

The Defence of the true doctrine, as Fox has al- 
ready told us, and as Strype has repeated the 
information, was written on purpose for the pub- 
lick instruction of the Church of England. 
Written too as it was by Cranmer in his mature 
age, after all his great reading, and all his dili- 
gent study of the fathers and ecclesiastical wri- 
ters, with whose judgments and opinions in the 
doctrine he thus became intimately acquainted; 
it is, as Strype has justly'' concluded, the more 
to be valued. And yet the use which Cranmer 
made of the fathers and schoolmen, in appealing 
to their authority for confutation of the Roman- 
ists, in his dispute with them, has been strangely 
undervalued by " some ; as if with the Roman- 

* The other separate papers, which I inspected at the State 
Paper Office, are the following : 

De Sacerdotum et Episcoporum ordine ac ministerio. 

De potestate ac primatu Papae : indorsed 1537. 

De Fide. 

De veneratione sanctorum, et imaginibus : two loose books. 

•* Strype's Life of Cranmer, b. 2. ch. 25. 

' Dr. Glocester Ridley, in his valuable life of Bishop Ridley, 
censures very justly the inconsiderate observation of Mr. Gil- 


ists any argument could be more effectual, than 
that which laid open the weakness of pretences 
under which they sheltered themselves from the 
efficacy of scriptural arguments alone ; or as if 
the archbishop might have been content to give 
merely a rational account of his faith ; and, by 
disavowing the authority of the fathers as in- 
sufficient, have '^ acknowledged that he held opi- 
nions contrary to the Church through all ages 1 
No : the archbishop knew the value of the au- 
thority in question ; and accordingly in Injunc- 
tions, given by King Edward the Sixth, in the 
first year of his reign, to the Dean and Chap- 
ter of York, (and to the governours also of 
other cathedrals,) of which Cranmer no doubt 
was the author, especial attention is directed 
to this point. *' ^ Item, they shall make a li- 
brarie in some convenient place within their 
churche, within the space of one yeare next en- 

pin in his life of Latimer, that Ridley and Cranmer should have 
avoided appealing to the fathers. The strongest arguments 
that can be produced against Popery, as Atterbury has ob- 
served, are the Fathers and Bibles. 

"* See Ridley's Life, ut supr. p. 493. 

® Register of the Dean and Chapter of York, fol. 46. a. 
Burnet mentions this register, but I think that he had never 
seen it. See his History of the Reformation, vol. 3. under the 
year 1547. If he had examined it, he would surely have ex- 
tracted from it some of the valuable information which it con- 
tains, as applicable to the noble purpose in which he was en- 


suyng this visitation, and shall have in the same 
Saynte Augustynes, Basill, Gregorie Nazianzeney 
Hierome, Ambrose, Chrisostome, Cipriane, Theophi- 
lact, Erasmus, and other good writers' workes." 
But more powerfully, than in a mere recommen- 
dation of the study of the fathers, Cranmer has 
illustrated the ^ obligations of his cause to them 
in his Defence of the true doctriiie; and upon the 
copiousness, as well as the accuracy, of citations 
in it from their works, the reader may fix his 
attention without fear of contradiction, and with 
full confidence in their value. 

Of Cranmer, and Ridley, and the rest of the 
Protestant Clergy, who framed the Communion 
Service in 1548, which the Defence before us 
illustrates throughout, and which is our liturgi- 
cal rejection of Transubstantiation, it has how- 
ever been lately asserted, that they believed 
somewhat equivalent to Transubstantiation in 
what they taught, and asserted, of the ^ real pre- 

' Just as it is said of our Established Church generally : 
" She has produced the strongest arguments against Popery — 
Fathers and Bibles." Atterbury, Preface to his Answer to 
some Considerations on the spirit of Martin Luther, &c. See 
also a preceding note. 

^ It will be proper here to recite the words of Cranmer in 
the Preface to his book against Gardiner, with which Arch- 
bishop Sharp has closed his excellent discourse upon tlie sense 
of the Church of England as to the real presence in the Eucha- 
rist. This passage " of the most learned Archbishop Cran- 
mer," Dr. Sharp truly affirms, " may go further than any other 


sence of Christ in the Sacrament. Now the 
fact is, that they positively disowned any mate- 
rial presence of Christ's body, or any part of it, 
either by conversion, substitution, or union ; and 
believed no other than a figurative presence of 
Christ's body properly so called, yet affirming 
the Eucharist to be a true and real communica- 
tion of the virtues and benefits of his body, not 
merely a figurative commemoration of them. 
And Cranmer, and Ridley, and Hooper, not to 

man's ybrf/ic ascertaining, and cleamig, the sense of our Church 
in this matter, since he had the principal hand in compiling both 
our Liturgy and our Articles." — " When I say and repeat many 
times in my book," Cranmer says, " that the body of Christ is 
present in them that worthily receive the sacrament ; lest any 
man should mistake my words, and think that I mean, that 
although Christ be not corporally in the outward visible signs, 
yet he is corporally in the persons that duly receive them : this 
is to advertise the reader, that I mean no such thing : but my 
meaning is, that the force, the grace, the virtue, and benefit, of 
Christ's body that was crucified for us, and of his blood that 
was shed for us, be really and effectually present with all them 
that duly receive the sacraments ; but all this i understand 
OF HIS SPIRITUAL PRESENCE ; of the whicli he saith, / will he 
with yoti until the world's end. And, Wheresoever two or three 
be gathered together in my Name, there am I in the midst of 
them. And, He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, 
dmelleth in me, and I in him. Nor no more truly is he corpo- 
rally or really present in the due ministration of the Lord's 
Supper, than he is in the due ministration of Baptism ;" that is 
to say, in botli spiritually, by grace. Abp. Sharp's Serm. vol. 
7. p. 370, 


mention other learned Protestants, have left us 
their ample '' assertions and their full belief in 
proof of this, and in vindication of the honour of 
our Reformed Church ; and with their blood 
sealed the truths which they taught. But the 
author, who would involve these great men in 
the very error of their adversaries, betakes him- 
self also to other expedients, in connection with 
his pretence ; and brings forward the celebrated 
Jeremy Taylor, " ' the bishop of Down; thmi 
whom the whole Protestant Church boasts no fairer 
name; who had fully examined Transubstantia- 
tion and the Mass, and declared, after his exa- 
mination of them, that the doctrine of the Catho- 
lick Church upon them was not idolatrous." 
But was this really the full cvamination of bishop 
Taylor upon the subject ? Not so : the few 
lines from *'The Liberty of Prophesying," which 
are adduced, were the observation of Taylor in 
his younger days, and were published in 1647 ; 
but in *' The Dissuasive from Popery," pub- 

*" I have printed in the Appendix to this volume, the opi- 
nions and assertions of Ridley and Hooper, upon this impor- 
tant subject. 

• The Book of the Roman Catholic Church, 1825, by Charles 
Butler, Esq. p. 321 ; and the Enquiry as to the Declaration 
against Transubstantiation, &c. published anonymously in 
1822, but of which Mr. Butler avows himself the author in 
the Book of the Roman Catholic Church, and copies it into the 
eighteenth letter in that recent work. 


lished by him, when reading and judgment were 
matured, in 1664, the masterly, and learned, 
and eloquent pages throughout denounce Tran- 
substantiation and the Mass as absolutely idola- 
trous. The learned remarker upon '' Cranmer, 
and Ridley, and Taylor, knows that I am correct 
in my assertion ; and he knows, or ought to 
know, that a very vigilant prelate of the English 
Church long since noticed the endeavour, which 
the remarker has stated, made by Taylor in his 
•' Liberty of Prophegyiog" to free the Papists 
from formal idolatry ; the prelate adding, *' ^ but 
the same Dr. Taylor afterwards, in his Dissua- 
sive from Popery, fully confutes Dr. Hammond, 
(who would have the papistical worship of the 
host to be only material idolatry,) and himself; 
and truly proves, that the popish adoration of 
the host in the Eucharist is properly idolatrical." 
Now can the remarker upon Cranmer, and Rid- 
ley, and Taylor, himself a scholar of indefatiga- 
ble research, not have known this latter work of 
a man than whom the whole Protestant Church 
boasts no fairer name ? Or can he hope to con- 
tent the reader with a meagre extract from Tay- 
lor, afterwards over-ruled by himself, and pre- 
sent that as the solemn and only decision, upon 

'' Book of the Rom. Cath. Church, p. 324. 
' Bp. Barlow's Remains, p. 203. I have printed in the 
appendix an extract from Taylor's own book. 


the subject, of a man than ivhom the ivhole Pro- 
testant Church boasts no fairer name ? Is the 
suppression of truth the way to promote any in- 
quhy, civil or religious ? And is a compliment 
to the name of a great divine a compensation for 
withholding the mention of his illustrious ser- 
vices to the Protestant Church, in the elaborate 
and unanswerable Dissuasive from Popery 1 And 
is the whole truth proclaimed, when Mr. Butler 
also " cites another prelate of the English Church 
in his behalf, because that . prelate said in the 
House of Lords, when the Declaration against 
Transubstantiation was enacted by the law of 
the land, ** ° that the Church of Rome was not 
idolatrous ?" This is all that Mr. Butler tells of 
Dr. Gunning, bishop of Ely. But what was the 
conduct of this bishop ? He had reflected, no 
doubt, on the hastiness of his saying ; and 
though he had also said that he could not take 
that test against Popery, " ° yet as soon as the 
Bill was passed, he took it." How Mr. Butler 
may digest this practical answer of one of his 
own witnesses, it is not easy to say ; but it may 
be easily seen why he himself, accomplished in 
the science of the law, has not brought forward 
this evidence. But besides these appeals to 

■" Book of the Rom. Cath. Ch. p. 327. 

" Burnet, Hist, of his own Times, vmder the year 1G78. 

'' Ibid. 


Protestant divines in favour, as it is pretended, 
of Transubstantiation ; Mr. Butler has also di- 
rected his readers to the Articles of the Church 
of England, one of which, as it had been drawn 
up by Crannier, was altered in the reign of queen 
Elizabeth, and rendered ** ^ so comprehensive," 
he says, " as to let in the believers of Transub- 
stantiation." Now let our Protestant country- 
men be more fully informed as to this allegation. 
And in order to this, the old paragraph of Cran- 
mer's article is first to be observed : ** "^ Since 
the very being of human nature doth require, that 
the body of one and the same man cannot be at 
one and the same time in many places, but must 
of necessity be in some certain and determinate 
place ; therefore the body of Christ cannot be 
present in many different places at the same 
time : and since, as the holy Scriptures testify, 
Christ hath been taken up into heaven, and there 
is to abide till the end of the world ; it becometh 
not any of the faithful to believe, or confess, 
that there is a real or corporal presence, as 
they (the Papists) phrase it, of the body and 
blood of Christ in the holy Eucharist." This 
was omitted in the Articles established as they 
now stand. And why? '' The design of the 
government was at that time much turned to 
the drawing over the body of the nation to the Refor- 

P Book of the Rom. Cath. Ch. p. 324. 
■J Articles of Religion, 1552. Art. XXIX. 


mation^'' (bishop Burnet, in his History of the 
Reformation, and especially in his Exposition of 
the Thirty-nine Articles, has well observed,) " in 
whom the old leaven had gone deep; and no 
part of it deeper than the belief of the corporal 
presence of Christ in the Sacrament. Therefore 
it was thought not expedient to offend them by 
so particular a definition in this matter ; in which 
the very words real presence were rejected. It 
might, perhaps, be also suggested, that here a 
definition was made that went too much upon 
the principles of natural philosophy; which, how 
true soever, might not be the proper subject of 
an article of religion. Therefore it was thought 
fit to suppress the old paragraph ; (it luas thought 
enough to condemn Transubstantiation, Hist. Kef. 
ann. 1559 ;) though the paragraph was a part of 
the Article that was subscribed. Yet it was not 
published. But the paragraph. The body of 
Christ is given, taken, and eate7i in the Supper, only 
after an heavenly and spiritual manner, &c. Art. 
28th, this paragraph was put in its stead, and 
was received and published by the next Convo- 
cation ; which upon the matter was a full expla- 
nation of the way of Christ's presence in the Sacra- 
ment ; that he is present in a heavenly and spiritual 
manner, and that faith is the mean by which he is 
received. This seemed to be more theological, 
and IT DOES indeed amount to the same 
THING ;" that is, the declaration iu the old para- 


graph against Transubstantiation. And we see, 
Burnet continues, " what was the sense of the 
first Convocation in queen Elizabeth's reign : 
it differed in nothing from that in king Edward's 
time: and therefore, though the old paragraph 
is now no part of our Articles, yet we are cer- 
tain that the clergy at that time did not at all 
doubt the truth of it. We are sure it was their 
opinion; since they subscribed it, though they 
did not think it fit to publish it, at first ; and 
though it was afterwards changed for another 
that was the same in sense.'" (Burnet on the 28th 
Article.) So much for the circumstance of let- 
ting in, as Mr. Butler calls it, those who believed in 
Tra?isubstantiation. But unless they professed 
what the Article ^ delivers, they were let in to no 
other purpose than self-congratulation on their 
mental reserve, or than the Jesuitical pretence 
of conforming to what they did not believe. If 
indeed they had been let in without the security 
of this profession when required, there is no 
knowing to what extent a feigned submission to 
Protestantism might have carried them. 

I come now to the notice of some important 
passages in the Defence of the true doctrine, which 
relate to established articles of our faith, and 
agree with the decisions of Cranmer upon the 
subjects in our national confession. They are 

' See the present Articles of Religion, Art. 28, throughout. 


his sentiments upon the doctrines of universal 
redemption through Christ, and of regeneration 
in baptism : the former being in the preface, as 
now before the reader, p. 1, where he de- 
scrfbes the reason of Christ's coming into the 
world, and again in the work, p. 234, from his 
representation of Christ as our *' high bishop," 
until *' he took all men's sins unto himself;" 
and the latter in p. 74, where the sentence 
begins with " Forasmuch as the same is a most 
holy sacrament," and closes with *' wine is sig- 
nified ;" and again in p. 191, where '' The sum 
of Damascene" commences, and "feed the soul" 
concludes, the valuable observations. See also p. 
243. So desirous was Cranmer, from first to last, 
to maintain the belief of universal redemption, 
that in the Necessary Erudition of a Christian 
Man, published in 1543, which is admitted to be 
his work; in the Royal 'Injunctions of 1547, 
which (as I have before said) are believed to be 
drawn up by his pen ; and in the Defence now 
before us of 1550 ; he is uniform, animated, per- 

' One of the anthems, directed to be sung in these injunc- 
tions, is this: " Lyke as Moyses lifte uppe the serpent in the 
■vvildernes, even so was our Savyoure Jesus Christe lifte uppe 
upon the crosse, that whosoever belevethe in him shulde not 
perishe, but have joye for ever : ffor God so loved the worlde, 
that he gave his onelie begotten Sonne, that such as beleve in 
him shulde not perishe, but have life everlasting." Regist. 
D. and Ch. of York, fol. 47. b. 


spicuoiis, and encouraging to every true peni- 
tent. And with this confidence he closed his days 
in 1556: *' * The great mystery that God be- 
came man," he said, " was not wrought for 
little or few offences. Thou didst not give thy 
Son, O heavenly Father, unto death for small 
sins only, but for eiU the greatest sins of the 
world, so that the sinner return to Thee with his 
whole heart, as I do here at this present." 

II. From what has been said respecting the 
Archbishop's book, and other works connected 
with it, I proceed to a vindication of his charac- 
ter and conduct in regard to circumstances, 
which elsewhere have been detailed, not with- 
out misrepresenting the history both of himself 
and of the Reformation ; and which, in the de- 
preciation of both, have endeavoured to exalt 
the adversaries of Protestantism. That the cha- 
racter of Cranmer will not allow deductions, he 
must be an injudicious advocate who should pre- 
tend. I might indeed introduce his failings as 
pleading, considering his difficult station, for some 
remission of severe judgment upon them : I 
might plead his virtues as far outweighing those 
failings. But my object in these pages is only 
to examine certain statements and insinuations, 

' Fox, Acts and Mun. 


brought against him and his cause, in a tone of 
Confidence as if not to be shaken, and as if defying 
contradiction; as if it were just to condemn another, 
and take little or no notice of facts that acquit 
him ; as if the eloquence of declamation might bid 
inquiry seek no further. Hence, if I may here 
advert to the " revived slander upon the memory 
also of Cranmer's early friend, the early friend too 
of the Reformation, the celebrated "Anne Boleyn, 

" That the ribaldry, scandal, and inconsistence, which are 
found in the pages of Bayly and of Phillips upon the subject 
of Anne Boleyn, should in these times be revived, is hardly 
credible. The refutations of these malignant reflections are 
numerous ; as I shall presently recount. Phillips, who was a 
Canon of Tongres, half a century since followed Sanders, whom 
about half a century before Bayly also followed ; and they are 
accompanied by another ecclesiastick of their communion, in 
bringing forward again the report of Anne Boleyn being the 
daughter of Henry. See a Sure way to find out the True 
Religion, &'C. by the Rev. T. Baddeley, 12mo. Manchester, 
3d. ed. 1823. p. 29. But this is the person, who, in speaking 
of Cranmer, bestows upon him every infamous name which the 
imagination can form, and the pen describe, p, 72. and then in 
a note, with unparalleled efFrontery, appeals to the biography 
of Dr. Lempriere, a Protestant Clergyman, as if confirming 
all he says ; when Dr. Lempriere in fact is the eulogist of tlie 

'^ " All the account of Anne Boleyai by Sanders is so palpable 
a lie, or rather a complicated heap of lies, and so much de- 
pends on it, that 1 presume it will not offend the reader to be 
detained a few minutes in the refutation of it. For if it were 
true, verv niur-h mii>ht be drawn from it. both to disparage king 


who is not concerned to find that, to their notice 
of the calumny. Dr. Lingard and Mr. Butler 
have not distinctly subjoined the references to 
authors who have refuted it ? that they talk only 
of '* ^ an attempt" to refute it, of its being 
^'problematical,'" and of a probability in favour 
of the accused? that to " ^ the powerful argu- 
ments of Le Grand," and " the strong asser- 
tions of Sanders," as they are called, many emi- 
nent names, as of * Camden, and Herbert, and 
Ridley, and others, besides that of Burnet, 
have not been opposed ? that the '' questionable 

Henry, who pretended conscience to annul his marriage for the 
nearness of affinity, and yet would after that marry his own 
daughter. It leaves also a foul and lasting stain both on the 
memory of Anne Boleyn, and of her incomparable daughter, 
queen Elizabeth. It also derogates so much from the first re- 
formers, rvho had some kind of dependance on queen Anne Bo- 
leyn, that it seems to he of great importance for directing the 
reader in the judgment he is to make of persons and things, to 
lay ojjen the falsehood of this account." Burnet, Hist, of the 
Reformation, vol. i. p. 42, which see. Hence Dr. Southey 
has adverted to " the fiendish malignity, with which her story 
has been blackened by the Romanists." Book of the Church, 
vol. ii. p. 37. " With characteristick effrontery they asserted, 
that her mother and sister had been both mistresses of the king, 
and that she was his own daughter!" Ibid. p. 38. 

^ Lingard, Hist, of Eng. vol. vi. p. 153. 

^ Butler, Bookof theRom. Catli. Church, p. 191. 

^ See Lord Herbert's Hist, of K. Hen. VIlI. p. 250. And 
Burnet's Hist, of the Ref vol. i. p. 42, 43. And Appendix, 
p. 278, 279. 

^ " A book of one Rastal, a judge, that was never seen by 



existence of the very authority, upon which 
Sanders founded his tale, has not been stated ? 

any other person than Sanders." Burnet, Hist. Ref. vol. i. 
p. 42. And pretending no other existence, it may be added, 
than what a marginal note in Sanders's book exhibits : " hasc 
narratio a Gulielmo Rastallo judice, in vita Thomas Mori." 
There is no printed life of Sir Thomas More by Rastal. Wood 
indeed mentions a life of More by this person, as a manuscript; 
but evidently upon report, and not upon the sight of it. See 
Ath. Ox. ed. 1G91, vol. i. col. 115. Rastal was a Romanist, 
the son of John Rastal, who married the sister of Sir Thomas 
More, and who, according to Wood, " was a zealous man for 
the Catholick cause, and a great hater of the proceedings of 
K. Hen. VIII. as to his divorce, and for his ejecting the pope's 
pov:er Jiom the nation." Ath. Ox. i. col. 38. Some hasty re- 
port, some fabricated malignity, from such a parent, and in 
such times, the aon perhaps had heard, and again reported, and 
even committed to writing ; but if he did thus much, where is 
any contemporary authority to sanction the slanderous tale ? 
And why slumbered it, so gratifying as at an earlier period the 
knowledge of it must have been to the enemies of the Refor- 
mation, for more than half a century ? About thirty years 
after the first appearance of Sanders's book, the calumny re- 
appeared with a pretence by the narrator of it, that he had 
understood from several persons, while he was in England, just 
what Sanders relates ; with which he introduces into his pages 
whatever may further vilify her name, in statements most ab- 
surd, and in the grossest language. And his motive too, like 
that which inserted the tale in Sanders, sprung from revenge 
of the darkest character : it is found in a rare book, entitled, 
Examen Catholicum Edicti Anglicani, quod contra Catholicos 
est latum auctoritate Parliamenti Angliae, Anno Dom. 1606, 
&c. " Is enim rex [Henricus] — in eam dementiam est pro- 
lapsus^ ut eam, quam olim adulter ex Bolenii Vicecomitis 


and that their cold and circumlocutory avowal 
of not believing the tale, (without the proper 
guidance, however, to the testimonies that ex- 
pose the wickedness and silence the effrontery 
of the charge,) should yet be accompanied with 
the declaration of one of these gentlemen, that 
*' "^ he cannot think the historians, who have as- 
serted it, deserving the epithet oi fiendish malign 
nity, which Dr. Southey has bestowed upon 
them in his Book of the Church ?" How gratify- 
ing might it have been, if, instead of this, the 
able pen, which wrote it, had severely repre- 
hended Sanders, the leader of these historians, 

to the fiend 

Made answer meet, that made void all his wiles : 
So fares it, when with truth falsehood contends !" 

uxore, Annam (Sanderus docet, et ab Anglis plurimis anno 
prseterito, dum in Anglia essem, intellexi) procreaverat prolem, 
in matrimonium, repudiate legitima et sanctissima conjuge, 
duxerit." Ed. Paris, 1607, fol. 5. The wretched scribbler 
then proceeds to state, in words which I will not copy, that 
Anne Boleyn, not content to indulge her vicious propensities at 
home, went into France for similar purposes ; and after her re- 
turn to England, he says, " fit filia pro conjuge, scortum pro 
uxore !" His subsequent ribaldry as to queen Elizabeth would 
be laughable, if it were not malicious. So much for impartial 
narratives ! 

' Butler, Book of the Roman Cath. Church, p. 191. 

** Milton, Par. Reg. It is to be lamented that the term is 
applicable, which has been given to Sanders's calumny. **The 

c 2 


But I hasten to what immediately concerns 
the archbishop. And I shall pursue the recent 
observations of Dr. Lingard step by step ; occa- 
sionally joining to them the corresponding re- 
mark, made by other learned writers of the Ro- 
mish Church. Nor will I *' set down any thing" 
without a careful appeal to the evidences, which 
substantiate what I relate. 

The elevation of Cranmer to the see of Can- 
terbury is thus described. " I know not why 
Burnet is so anxious to persuade his hearers, 
that Cranmer was unwilling to accept the arch- 
bishoprick, and found means to delay the matter 
six months. There were few instances of the 
see of Canterbury being filled so soon after a 
vacancy. Six months indeed elapsed before his 
consecration ; but that arose from the negocia- 
tion with Rome to procure his bulls. He must 
have given his consent at least three months 
before." Lingard, Hist, of England, 2d edit, 
vol. 6. pp. 253, 254. Ought not Dr. Lingard 
here to have given Cranmer's own account of 
his declining the archbishoprick ? And is not 
Burnet right in believing the solemn asseveration 
of the primate, made in the presence of his ene- 

authority of our countryman, Sanders, a man so famous for 
veracity, that if Captain Lemuel Gulliver had not supplanted 
him, we might use the proverbial phrase, It is as true as if 
Sanders had said it /" Jortin, Additions to Neve's Remarks 
on Phillips, p. 503. 


mies ? "" /protest before you all," said Cranmer, 
** there never was man came 7norc unwillino- to a 
bishoprick, than I did to that; insomuch that 
when king Henry did send for me in post that I 
should come over, I prolonged my journey by 
seven weeks at the least, thinking that he would 
be forgetful of me in the mean time." To the 
insinuation of Dr. Martin, in his answer to this 
manly avowal, that there was a base compact 
between the king and the archbishop, the latter 
replied, with all the firmness of insulted vera- 
city : ** You say not true !" Dr. Lingard, how- 
ever, having omitted this self-defence of Cran- 
mer, is opposed to it, as we have seen, in saying 
that thej^e are few instances of the see of Canterbury 
being filled so soon after a vacancy as in si.v months ; 
as if the delay of Cranmer had been only in con- 
formity to custom, and the time in question a 
portion absolutely requisite to complete the 
forms of his elevation ; and that therefore Cran- 
mer is not to be believed. Now the predeces- 
sors of Cranmer, for more than a century at 
least, were certainly not thus impeded in their 
approach to the primacy. We inquire after the 
dates of vacancy and succession in the ^ cases of 

• Fox, Acts and Mon. 

^ Archbishop Bredwardin died Aug. 26, 1349. Islip was 
his successor, by the papal bull, dated Oct. 7, 1349, pubhshed 
in the chapter-house at Canterbury, Dec. 18, and he was con- 
secrated the 20th. Le Neve's Fasti Eccl. Angl. p. C. Arch- 


Islip, and Chicliel6, and Stafford, and Kemp, 
and Bourchier, and Dean, from 1349 to 1501, 
and find all the formalities of the bull, and the 
reception of the pall, and the consecration, 
within the time named. Then why should six 
months be required for the negociation with 
Rome, in Cranmer's case, to procure his bulls ? 
Have we not the answer in the archbishop's own 
declaration 1 And yet Dr. Lingard says, that 
** the necessary bulls for Cranmer were expe- 
dited with unusual dispatch.'" Yes ; after the see 
had long remained vacant, owing to the endea- 
vour of Cranmer to decline it, then came the 

bishop Arundel died Feb. 19, or £0, 1413. Chichele was his 
successor, by translation, March 4, 1413 ; received his tempos 
ralities in May, and his pall in July following. Le Neve, p. 7. 
Chichele died April 12, 1443. Stafford was his successor, by 
the papal bull, dated May 15, 1443, received the temporalities 
in June, was consecrated in August, and inthronized in Sep- 
tember, Le Neve, p. 7. Stafford died in June, or July, 1452. 
Kemp was his successor, by the bull, dated July 21, 1452, 
The bull of his translation reached Canterbury Sept. 21, the 
next day was read in the chapter, and the same day he received 
his cross. Le Neve, p. 7. Kemp died March 22, 1543, 
Bourchier was his successor, elected April 22 following, and 
received the bull of confirmation August 22. Le Neve, p, 8. 
Langton died Jan. 27, 1500, that is, 1500-1. Dean succeeded 
him ; elected in April following, and confirmed by the papal 
bull May 26, Le Neve, p. 8. Abundance of similar exam- 
ples, as to time, in tlie cases of prelates of other sees, might be 


papal bull, ^ bearing the protracted date ; and 
still the primate elect delayed his consecration 
another month. 

This leads us to the difficulty, as Dr. Lingard 
terms it, which occurred at this solemnity. 
" By what casuistry could the archbishop elect, 
who was well acquainted with the services ex- 
pected from him, reconcile it with his consci- 
ence to swear at his consecration canonical 
obedience to the pope, when he was already 
resolved to act in opposition to the papal autho- 
rity? With the royal approbation he called 
four witnesses into St. Stephen's chapel at 
Westminster, and in their presence '' declared, 
that by the oath of obedience to the pope, which 
for the sake of form he was obliged to take, he 
did not intend to bind himself to any thing con- 
trary to the law of God, or prejudicial to the 
rights of the king, or prohibitory of such reforms 
as he might judge useful to the Church of En- 
gland. Thence he proceeded to the altar : the 
ceremony was performed after the usual man- 
ner: and the pontifical oath was cheerfully taken 
by the new prelate, both before his consecra- 

« Warham died Aug. 23, 1532. The bull for Cranmer to 
succeed him was dated Feb. 22, 1532-3, and he was consecrated 
March 30 following. Le Neve, p. 8. Strype's Life of Cran- 
mer, b. i. ch. 4. 

'' Strype and Collier have printed the protestation, copied 
from the register of Abp. Cranmer. 


tion, and at the delivery of the pallium." Liii- 
gard. Hist. vol. 6. p. 254. . So Mr. Butler: 
" Although, when he was consecrated Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, Cranmer took the custo- 
mary oath of obedience to the see of Rome, did 
he not, just before he took it, retire into a pri- 
vate room, and protest against it ? Was this 
honourable ?" Book of the Roman Catholick 
Church, p. 216. No ; certainly such conduct 
would deserve a contrary epithet ; as the call- 
ing four witnesses only, before whom he was to 
swear, w^ould be pronounced a suspicious and 
unjustifiable act. But the suspicious and dis- 
honourable privacy has been only pretended. 
Proof is yet wanting. They, who have concurred 
with it in Phillips's ' Life of Cardinal Pole, have 
withheld the replies to it by the distinguished 
'' writers who rose immediately in the cause of 
Protestantism, and reviewed that insidious bio- 
graphy with all the accuracy requisite to detect 
its numerous misrepresentations. By them, and 
by Burnet and Strype before them, the truth 
}\ s^ been minutely drawn from authentick docu- 
ments. The scruples of Cranmer, concerning 
the legality of the customary oath, had been 
communicated to the best canonists and civi- 
lians. By their advice he was led to protest 

' See Phillips's 2d edit. vol. ii. p. 210. 
■^ Dr. Neve, Dr. Ridley, Mr. Stone, &c. 


against it ; 7iot, hmvevcr, in a private room, but 
publickly and repeatedly' ; first, in the chapter- 
house of the church in which he was to be con- 
secrated ; and then before those, by whom he 
was consecrated, at the altar of the church. 
The '" register of the archbishop commences with 
the declaration to succeeding times, (and yet 
exists,) that his protestation was thus made 
" openly and publickly, before witnesses specially 
and officially named, and doubtless in the pre- 
sence of many other unnamed. It has been 
rightly ° considered as surprising, that Phillips, 
the modern narrator of the pretended clandes- 
tinity, should have confidently asserted it, when 
the refutation of it by Fuller in particular, whom 
he cites soon afterwards, was before him. Phil- 
lips silently, and as if ashamed of his predecessor, 
partly follows indeed Sanders, who says that 
Cranmer protested only to a notary, that he un- 
willingly took the oath of obedience to the pope; 
when before him other testimonies also were 

' Burnet, Hist, of the Ref. vol. i. p. 129. And Strype, Life 
of Cranmer, b. i. ch. 4. 

" In the library of MSS. at Lambeth Palace. 

" In Dei nomine Amen. Coram vobis autentica persona, et 
testibus fide dignis, hie presentibus, Ego Thomas in Cant. 
Archiep. electus dico, allego, et in hiis scriptis palam, puhiice, 
et expresse protestor, &c. The Archbishops Protestation, 
Reg. fol. 4. 

° Stone's Remarks upon Phillips's Life of Pole, 2d edit. 
p. 233. 


open, which deny' any privacy. To the oath it- 
self, it may be observed, the coeval ab}uration 
of Gardiner has ibeen assimilated. He had 
taken the same oath to the pope, and then re- 
fused the supremacy maintained in it, with a 
declaration, '""that an engagement against right 
is by no means binding." But still that is an 
after-act, and indefensible. Cranmer, before he 
took the oath, declared the limitations by which 
he secured himself in his allegiance to the king, 
and in his determination to reform the church, 
against a power which would admit neither the 
supremacy of the former, nor the necessity of 
alteration in the latter. Even the jurist. Dr. 
Martin, the enemy of Cranmer, is opposed to 
*' the secret protest,"" as Dr. Lingard calls it; 
and admits the publicity of the fact, while he 
commented indeed severely, and in part falsely, 
upon the occasion of it. 

" "^ Martin. Did you not swear obedience to 
the see of Rome ? 

*' Cranmer. Indeed I did once swear unto 
the same. 

** Martin. Yea, that you did twice, as appear- 
eth by records and writings here ready to be shewn. 

p From Gardiner's Oratio De Vera Obedientia. See Rid- 
ley's Review of Phillips's Life of Pole, p. 308. Fox has ad- 
verted to the perjury of Gardener, and of Bonner, with irre- 
sistible strength of reasoning, in his Acts and Mon. 

"^ Fox, Acts and Mon. 


*' Craiimer. But I remember, I saved all by 
protestatiotz that I made by the counsel of the best 
learned men I could get at that time" So that here 
also we see the Archbishop believing his ov»^n 
sincerity, which at first led him to declare his 
entire repugnance to the oath, uninjured by tak- 
ing it, after his consultation with those who ad- 
vised the protest ; a belief, which, in the con- 
ference with Dr. Martin, he solemnly repeats. 
Dr. Lingard adds an observation, made by a cor- 
respondent of Burnet, (and admitted in the 
Appendix to the third volume of the History of 
the Reformation,) who says, he had two manu- 
script letters of Cardinal Pole, in which the 
Cardinal charges Cranmer with having made his 
protestation only in a private manner. The Car- 
dinal is said to charge the Archbishop with the 
matter in question : but it is not alleged that he 
substantiated the charge. Of the letters, in which 
this charge is brought forward, no account is 
given by Phillips, the eulogist of Pole, and the 
slanderer of Cranmer. No verification appears 
in a note either from the letters of Pole, pub- 
lished by Quirini; or from any other work, 
which relates to the character and conduct of 
Pole. Not a whisper is uttered as to the page 
or volume, manuscript or printed, whence the 
precious information has been stolen. But PhiU 


lips may be traced to 'Sanders; and perhaps 
he was also indebted to the correspondent of 
Burnet, who adds that Pole " 'branded the 
alleged proceeding of Cranmer with such ex- 
pressions as he was unwilling to transcribe." 
But no transcript of this indignation has yet 
descended to us. To this concealed authority 
alone Dr. Lingard refers ; leaving Sanders, and 
the published letters of Pole, and even Phillips, 
** ' by whose aid (weak masters though they be) 
he has bedimmed" occasionally the light of his- 
tory, unsummoned in its behalf. Nor has the 
observation of Martin, the civilian, in his con- 
ference with Cranmer, been noticed as it de- 
serves. For there he appeals, yet certainly with 
no friendly voice, to the record ; and there, as 
we have seen, the repetition of Cranmer s oath con- 
nects with it the repeated protestation, which Mar- 
tin indeed denies not ; but, by the abuse with 
which he loads it, confirms the fact. Collier, 

"■ Sanders says, that Cranmer protested to a single notary, 
that he took the oath against his will ; when, in fact, he neither 
protested only before a single notary, nor that he took the oath 
unwillingly ; but, as Dr. Lingard says, he took it '* cheerfully ,*" 
cheerfully, I suppose, upon the belief that by the publick pro- 
testation he had satisfied his own mind. See Burnet, Hist. 
Ref. 1. Records, p. 284. and Sanders De Schismate, &c. ed. 
1585, fol. 58. b. ed. 1586, p. 83. 

' Burnet, Hist. Ref. vol. 3. Append, p. 309. 

' Shakspeare, Tempest. 


in his Ecclesiastical History, to " which Mr. 
Phillips and Dr. Lingard often refer with appro- 
bation, has not thought the denial of the pub- 
licity in question worthy a single remark. Per- 
haps he considered, as doubtless every liberal 
inquirer after truth will consider, that the objur- 
gatory words of Pole should have been pro- 
duced ; as the reader might then see whether 
reason had given place to railing, and whether 
the circumstances stated might in any respect 
be impugned. The charges, made by Pole, have 
not escaped at all times the suspicion of " fabri- 
cation. And if the correspondent of Burnet 
had lived to read the masterly vindications, by 
Neve and Ridley in particular, of the publicity 
w^hich the accusation in his manuscript letters 
is said to contradict, he would, I am persuaded, 
have joined his voice to the absolving voices of 
them and of Burnet. 

The divorce of Catherine next occasions Dr. 
Lingard to introduce the Archbishop as a gross 
hypocrite. ** As soon as the convocation had 
separated," (after the debate on this subject,) 
** a hypocritical farce was enacted between Henry 

" Collier was indeed a piotestant, and a man of great learn- 
ing ; " but such a one as protestants generally, and justly, re- 
gard with suspicion." See Catholicus's Episcopal Oath of Al- 
legiance to the Pope, &c. p. 30. 

" See Burnet, Hist. Ref. 1. Append, p. 282. " This was a 
forgery of Cardinal Pole's, which Sanders greedily catched to 
dress up the scene." 


and Cranmer. The latter wrote a most urgent 
letter to the king, representing the evils to which 
the nation was exposed from a disputed succes- 
sion, and begging, for the exoneration of his 
own conscience, and the performance of his 
duty to the country, the royal licence to examine 
and determine the great cause of the divorce." 
Hist, of Eng. ut supr. vol. 6. p. 256. It had 
been well if Dr. Lingard had exhibited this let- 
ter of the Archbishop. It would at least have 
rectified one mistake of Dr. Milner, who also, 
in his reflections upon Cranmer, says, that " ^ he 
began an hypocritical and collusive letter to the 
King, dated March 11, 1533, representing to him 
the scandal taken at the undecided state of the 
divorce ;" while the reader also would have been 
again enabled to form his own judgment. I will 
therefore give this letter, as it still exists, in the 
hand-writing of the defamed prelate, among 
other ^ original documents respecting him in the 
State-Paper Office. 

** Please yt your highnes, that wher your 
grace's grete cause of matrimony is (as it is 
thought) thorough all Christianytie divulgated, 

^ Strictures on Southey's Book of tlie Church, p. 57. 

* There is a copy of this and of other letters written by the 
Archbishop, among the Lansdowne MSS. in the British Mu- 
seum ; some of which have been printed in the Christian 
Remembrancer, 1820, vol. ,?. p. GGl, et seq. 


and in tlie mowthes of the rude and ignoraunte 
comon people of this your grace's reahiie so 
talked of, that fewe of theym do feare to reporte 
and saye, that therof ys likely hode herafter to 
ensue grete inconuenience, daunger, and perill 
to this your grace's realme, and moche incer- 
teintie of succession, by whiche things the saide 
ignoraunte people be not a litle offended : And 
forasmoche as yt hathe pleased Almightie God 
and your grace, of your habundant goodnes to 
me shewed, to call me (albeyt a poure wretche 
and moche unworthie) unto the high and charge- 
able office of primate and archebisshope in this 
your grace's realme, wherein I beseche Almightie 
God to graunte me his grace so to use and de- 
meane myself, as may be standing with hys plea- 
sure, and the discharge of my conscience, and 
to the weale of this your grace's said realme ; 
and considering also the obloquie and ^ brute 
which dailye doth spring and increase of the 
clergie of this realme, and speciallie of the 
heades and presidents of the same, because they 
in this behalve do not forsee and prouide conve- 
nient remedies as might expell and put out of 
doubt all such inconveniences, perilles, and 
daungers, as the saide rude and ignoraunte peo- 
ple do speke and talke to be ymynent; I your 
moost humble orator and bedeman am, in con- 
sideration of the premisses, urgently constrayned 

'' Bruit, i. e. noise, rinnour. 


at this tyme most humbly to beseche your most 
noble grace, that wher my office, and duetie, 
is by you and your predecessours sufferaunce 
and graunts to directe and ordre causes spiritual! 
in this your grace's realme according to the lawes 
of God and holye churche, and for relief of 
almaner greves and infirmities of the people, 
Goddes subjects and yours, happening in the 
said spiritual! causes, to provide suche remedie 
as shalbe thought most convenient for their helpe 
and relief in that behalf; and because I wolde 
be right lothe, and also it shall not becom me 
(forasmoche as your grace ys my prince and 
souereigne) to entreprise any parte of my office 
in the said weightie cause, without your grace's 
favour obteigned and pleasure therin first knovven ; 
it may please the same to acerteyn me of your 
grace's pleasure in the premisses, to th'entent 
that the same knowen I may procede for my 
discharge, afore God, to th'execution of my saide 
office and duetie, according to his calling and 
your's : Besechyng your highnes most humbly 
uppon my knees to pardon me of thes my bolde 
and rude letters, and the same to accepte and 
take in good sense and parte, firom my Manor 
at Lamhith the xj"' day of Aprile in the first 
yere of my Consecration. 

** Your highnes' most humble 
" bedisman and Chaplain, 

" Thomas Cantuar." 


Now the observations of Dr. Lingard and Dr. 
Milner, and of other writers, upon this trans- 
action, have been gathered frofn the answer of 
the King to the Archbishop, which has been pub- 
lished ; not from the preceding letter, which 
should ^ never be kept from the eye of the reader 
of English history. Lord Herbert had probably 
never examined it ; for he says no more, in cor- 
recting an untrue assertion of Sanders upon the 
subject, than that ** " the records which I have 
seen mention only that Cranmer demanded and 
obtained leave of the King to determine the mat- 
ter, since it caused much doubt amonsf the com- 
mon people, and fears of great inconvenience in 
the matter of succession." Burnet, and Collier, 
and Strype, would not have overpassed the hu- 
mility and the piety, observable in it, if they had 
seen this letter. And though, as Strype has re- 
lated, the Archbishop by pronouncing the sen- 
tence of divorce drew upon himself an implaca- 
ble hatred from the pope and emperor abroad, 
as well as from the papists at home ; every can- 
did Romanist would at least concede to this let- 
ter the character of judicious caution, and per- 
haps be led to believe the assertion of one of 
Cranmer's biographers, that his being placed in 
this cause of the divorce at the head of other 

'' A transcript from the copy of this letter, with some 
variations, is in the Christian Remembrancer, vol. 2. p. 6G2. 
•■■ Hist, of Hen. VIO. ed. 1019. p. 347. 



commissioners, (among whom indeed was the 
active bishop Gardiner,) '* '^ gave great offence 
to the Queen, and shocked the Archbishop him- 
self." Convinced, however, that it was his duty 
to determine the King's cause, yet knowing that 
his judgement could have no effect without the 
royal permission ; therefore it was that the Arch- 
bishop, " *as the most principal minister of his 
majesty's spiritual jurisdiction within the realm," 
solicited and obtained the necessary consent, the 
King " saving to himself his pre-eminence over 
him as his subject." 

"But what, it was then asked, must be 
thought of the King's present union with Anne 
Boleyn ? How could he have proceeded to a 
new marriage before the former had been law^ 
fully annulled ? Was the right of succession 
less doubtful now than before ? To silence these 
questions, Cranmer held another court at Lam- 
beth ; and, having first heard the King's proc- 
tor, officially declared that Henry and Anne 
were and had been joined in lawful matrimony ; 
that their marriage was and had been publick 
and manifest ; and that he moreover confirmed 
it by his judicial and pastoral authority." Lin- 
gard. Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 258. Such also 
was the professed opinion, at the time, of Gardi- 
ner, the admired prelate of the Romanists, 

'^ Gilpin's Life of Abp. Cranmer. 
' Burnet, Hist. Ref. 


(though overpassed by Dr. Lingard,) who " '^pub- 
lished the King's divorce and second marriage 
to be done by the undoubted word of God, the 
censures of the most famous Universities of the 
world, the judgement of the Church of England, 
and by Act of Parliament ; whereof he himself 
was the procurer in the Universities, and in all 
points a principal doer." Or as another prelate, 
not unbefriended also by the pen of Dr. Lin- 
gard, Edmund Bonner, in his Preface to Gar- 
diner's printed Oration, has related it : ** ^ In 
this Oration De Vera Obedientia, that is, concern- 
ing true obedience, — he (Gardiner) speaketh of 
the King's marriage; which by the ripe judge- 
ment, authority, and privilege of the most and 
principal Universities of the world, and then 
with the consent of the whole Church of Eng- 
land, he contracted with the most clear and 
most noble lady, queen Anne : after that, touch- 
ing the King's title as pertaining to the supreme 
head of the Church of England : lastly of all, 
of the false, pretensed supremacy of the bishop 
of Rome in the realm of England, most justly 
abrogated." How changed in the time of Mary 
was this fellow-commissioner with Cranmer! 

' Michael Wood's Translation of Gardiner's De Vera Obe- 
dientia, a book of extraordinary rarity, having been supposed 
to be suppressed by Romanists where possible ; printed at 
Rouen in 1553. Pref. sign. A. 3. b. 

" M. Wood, ut supr. sign. b. ii. b. 


** Now he layeth all the fault to the Archbishop 
of Canterbury, as though it had been that Arch- 
bishop's only deed. Then he brake the queen's 
head, in procuring and affirming her to be ille- 
gitimate : now he giveth her a plaster with re- 
canting, and saying, she is legitimate !" But 
as the business of the divorce has been called 
** a hypocritical farce," why is not Gardiner 
also said to have ** ^ enacted'" a part in it? We 
might have admitted even a complimentary ad- 
dress to him upon the occasion, such as, ** ' my 
lord, you played once, — and were accounted 
a good actor." And of the eulogium too, be- 
stowed by Bonner upon his learned compeer, 
we might have expected some notice. But nei- 
ther Bonner, nor Gardiner, is introduced into 
the pages of Dr. Lingard with any ridicule, or 
reprehension, upon the conduct of either in re- 

'' Shakspeare, Hamlet, and Dr. Lingard. See before, p. 
xlv. Indeed, as Strype observes, " though Cranmer pro- 
nounced the sentence, he was but the mouth of the rest, (the 
bishops of Winchester, London, Bath, Lincoln, &c.) and they 
were all in as deep as he." Life of Cranmer, b. 1. eh. 4. And 
thus correctly Shakspeare, Hen. VIII. 

" By the main assent 

" Of all these learned men she was divorc'd." 

Burnet is careful that the reader should not lose sight of 
Gardiner in the business ; for to his description as a bishop he 
adds his name ; but distinguishes other prelates by the names 
only of their sees. Hist. Ref. 1. p. 131. 

* Shakspeare, Hamlet. 


gard to the divorce. For an obvious purpose it 
was sufficient to aim at the conviction only of 
one, and to leave uncensured the " "^ fellows of 
his (pretended) crime." 

Cranmer held another court at Lambeth, Dr. 
Lingard says in the preceding extract. He did: 
and there in general words, no reason being 
given in the sentence, confirmed the marriage of 
the king with Anne Boleyn. But before he 
proceeded to this confirmation, and immediately 
after pronouncing the sentence of divorce upon 
queen Catherine, he exercised his usual judg- 
ment in addressing the king upon this important 
point. The letter, in his ' own hand-writing, 
still exists in the State-Paper Office. 

" Please yt your highnes to be aduertised, 
that this xxiij day of this present moneth of 
May I haue gyven sentence in your grace's grete 
and weightie cause, the copy wherof I haue sent 
vnto your highnes by thys berar, Richard Wat- 
kyns. And when I was by the letters of Thurle- 
bye, your grace's chapleyne, aduertised of your 
grace's pleasure that I shulde cause your grace's 
counsaile to conceyve a procuracye concernyng 
the seconde matrymony, I haue sent the said 
letters vnto theym, and required theym to do 

■' Milton, Par. Lost. 

' This letter is also found among the copies before-men- 
tioned, and with varjations. 


according to the tenore therof; most humbly 
beseching your highnes, that I may knowe your 
grace's ferther pleasure concerning the same 
matrymony, assone as your grace with your 
counsaile shalbe perfectly resolved therin. ffor 
the time of the coronation is so instaunte, and 
so nere at hande, that the matter requireth good 
expedition to be hadd in the same. And thus 
our Lord haue your highnes evermore in his 
blessed tuition and gouernance. ffrom Dun- 
staple, the xxiij. day of May. 

*' Your highnes' most humble 
** Chaplain and bedisman, 
" Thomas Cantuar." 

The procuracy, mentioned by the Archbishop, 
is the instrument, by which a person delegated 
his proctor to represent him in any judicial court 
or cause. The proctor, upon the present occa' 
sion, appeared in order to assert, that the mar- 
riage had been solemnized with Anne Boleyn in 
the preceding January. And now let us for a 
moment revert to this fact. ** On the 25th of 
January, at an early hour. Dr. Rowland Lee, 
one of the royal chaplains, received an order 
to celebrate mass in a garret at the western end 
of the palace of Whitehall. There he found 
the King attended by Norris and Heneage, two 
of the grooms of the chamber, and Anne Boleyn 
accompanied by her train-bearer Anne Savage, 


afterwards lady Berkeley. — Burnet treats this 
account as one of the fictions of Sanders : but 
it is taken from a manuscript history of the di- 
vorce, presented to queen Mary thirty years 
before the work of Sanders was printed. See 
Le Grand, ii. 110." Lingard, Hist, ut supr. 
vol. 6. pp. 250, 251. That the marriage was 
private, is not to be doubted ; but that the King 
of England should condescend to the celebra- 
tion of it in a " garret, a circumstance seeking 
in vain the corroboration of Sanders, and of any 
other writer, and exhibited (as it is said) only in 
a solitary unknown manuscript, is what even 
the " " smith, with open mouth swallowing a 
tailor's news," would hardly credit. Lord Her- 
bert describes with accuracy the time and the 
circumstances of the marriage, except as to the 
presence of Cranmer ; who himself has told us 
in a letter to Hawkyns, ambassador at the Em- 
peror's Court, upon the subject of Anne Bo- 
ley n's coronation, " ° You may nott ymagin that 

" Sanders mentions the secrecy of the marriage, but evi- 
dently had no knowledge of its being celebrated in a garret. 
For after Lee had consented to proceed with the ceremony, 
" annuente rege," Sanders only says, " vertit se ad altare :" 
De Schism, ed. 1586. pp. 90, 91. But would he not gladly, 
and sneeringly, have added, in contignatione tegulis jiroxhnd, 
or some such expression, if there had been any rumour of 
the kind to bear him out ? 

" Shakspeare, King John. 

" ArchfEologia, vol. xviii. And Ellis's Letters illustr. of 
English Hist. 1821. vol. 2. p. .'JO. 


this coronacion was before her marriage, for she 
was maried nmche about saiiite Paules daye last, 
Notwithstandyng yt hath byn reported thorowte 
a great parte of the realme that I married her ; 
whiche was 'playnli) false, for I myself knewe tiot 
therofa fortenifght after yt was doniie. A n d m a n y 


gard has cited the self-defence of the Archbi- 
shop, so far as it rectifies the mistake of Lord 
Herbert, and after him of Burnet, and of Strype, 
and of Dr. p Mihier too, that he was one of the 
witnesses at the marriage. But it has not been 
denied, that the duke of Norfolk, the earl and 
countess of Wiltshire, and the brothers of the 
Queen, w^ere present at the ceremony. It may 
lead the reader often to pause, when the story 
of Cranmer meets his eye, if he regards the con- 
clusion of the defence, which I have just cited, 
and which he will not find in the pages of Dr* 

To the King's supremacy, as it is stated by 
Dr. Lingard, our attention is next required. 
" The spiritual supremacy of a lay prince was 
so repugnant to the notions to which men had 

^ Dr. Milner is mistaken not in this respect alone ; for he 
says, that Cranmer " stood witness to the monarch's nuptials 
with Anne Boleyn, on Nov. 14, 1532." Strictures on Southey, 
p. 58. Cranmer was not a witness, we see by his own testi- 
mony ; and the time was not in Nov. but in January. 


been habituated, that it was every where re- 
ceived with doubt and astonishment. To dispel 
these prejudices Henry issued injunctions, that 
the word pope should be carefully erased out of 
all books employed in the publick worship ; — 
that all clergymen, from the bishop to the curate, 
should on every Sunday and holiday teach, 
that the King was the true head of the Church, 
and that the authority hitherto exercised by the 
popes was an usurpation, tamely admitted by 
the carelessness or timidity of his predecessors. 
Cranmer, as the first in dignity, gave the exam- 
ple to his brethren, &c." (that is, as a preacher 
upon the subject.) Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 283. 
And yet Dr. Lingard has not here informed the 
reader, that Gardiner even ivrote a book, violent 
against the supremacy of the pope. The supremacy 
was invested in the King, as Lord Herbert re- 
lates it, " '^ by the approbation of his parlia- 
ment. The universities and bishops of this king- 
dom did not a little second him ; and particu- 
larly Stephen Gardiner in his Latin Sermon ' De 
Vera Obedientia, with the Preface of Dr. Bonna\" 

o Hist, of Hen. VIII. ed. 1649, pp. 389, 390, 
" Xhere is a copy of this book in the library of York Catlic- 
dral, viz. Stephani Wintoniensis Episcopi de Vera Obedientia 
Orat. 4to. Hamburgi, 1536. On the first page is a remark in 
MS. the coeval hand-writing, apparently, of some amazed or 
offended Romanist : " Apostatce Gardineri excusatio." Through- 
out the book are scorings and other marks, as if implying the 
detestation or astonishment of the penman. 


Dr. Lingard indeed ingeniously observes, that 
Henry " ' called on the most loyal and learned 
prelates to employ their talents in support of his 
new dignity: and the call was obeyed by Samp- 
son and Stokesley, Tunstal and Gardiner : by 
the former, as was thought, from affection to 
the cause, by the latter through fear of displea- 
sure." Stimulated by fear, " as was thought,'* 
behold Gardiner then, as well as Cranmer, giv- 
ing an ejcamjik to his brethren, and to the whole 
kingdom ; and introduced, with a commendatory 
analysis of the product of his fear, by the ob- 
sequious Bonner ; who concludes his address to 
the reader with observing, ** * if thou at any 
time heretofore have doubted either of true obe- 
dience, or of the King's marriage or title, or of 
the bishop of Rome's false pretensed supre- 
macy ; — having read over this Oration, (which, 
if thou favour the truth, and hate the tyranny of 
the bishop of Rome and his devilish fraudulent 
falsehood, shall doubtless wonderfully content 
thee,) throw down thine error, and acknowledge 
the truth now freely offered thee at length." 
But before we copy a syllable from the timid 
prelate's Oration, let us not fail to observe him 
represented by Dr. Lingard as merely " " con- 

* Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 284. 

• M. Wood, Transl. of Bp. Gardiner's Oratio, &c., and of 
Bonner's preface, sign, b. iiii. b. 

" Hist, nt snpr. vol. 6. p. 849. 


senting, in order to avoid the royal displeasure, 
to renounce the papal supremacy ;" not as re- 
probating it with all the learning and accuracy 
which he possessed, and which he well knew 
were rightly so employed. The title of ** " su- 
preme head of the Church of England," Gardi- 
ner accordingly asserts, *' is granted to the King 
by free common consent in the open court of 
Parliament : — wherein there is }io ^ newly invented 
matter wrought : only their will was to have the 
power, pertaining to a prince of God's law, to 
be the more clearly expressed with a fit term to 
express it by ; namely for this purpose, to with- 
draw that vain opinion out of the common peo- 
ple's heads, which the false pretensed power of 
the bishop of Rome had, for the space of certain 
years, blinded them withal, to the great impeach- 
ment of the King's authority." The zeal of 
Gardiner, and not his fear, is noticed in a man- 
ner, deserving particular attention, by one of 

" M. Wood, Transl. ut supr. fol. xviii. 

* The statute that declares the supremacy " is, as the com- 
mon lawyers term it, statutum declarativum, not introdiictivum 
novi juris ; as doth clearly appear by the preamble, which hath 
these words: AH^it the King's Majesty justly and rightfully 
is and ought to be taken and accepted supreme head of the 
Church of England, and so is recognised by the Clergy in their 
Convocation ; yet nevertheless, for corroboration and confir- 
mation thereof, Be it enacted, that the King shall be taken and 
accepted supreme head, &c." Dr. Hakewill's Answer to Dr, 
Carier, &c. 1616. p. 47. 


our most learned divines at the beginning of 
James the first's reign : " ^The Clergy were the 
forwardest in persuading the King to accept and 
assume the title of supreme head of the Church, 
as may appear in the treatises of divers bi- 
shops ; as namely, Stephen Gardiner's discourse 
of true obedience with Bonner's preface an- 
nexed to it ; Longland's sermon ; and Tunstal's 
letter to Cardinal Pole : and surely he that shall 
observe their vehement protestations, specially of 
Gardiner, ivhom I hold the most sufficient among 
them for learning, and withal the soundness and 
weight of the reasons which they enforce against 
the pope's jurisdiction, will easily believe that 
they thought in very deed as they wrote, 
that their minds and their pens concurred in 
one." Of short duration was the concurrence, 
however, (if there were any concurrence,) in 
the pens and minds of Gardiner and of Bonner. 
" * What man," says the indignant and accurate 
Fox, " what man reading this book of Winches- 
ter De Vera Obedientia, with Bonner's preface 
before the same, would ever have thought any 
alteration could so work in man's heart to make 

^ Dr. Hake will, as in the preceding note, pp. 153, 154. He 
was the author of that most ingenious, entertaining, and 
learned book, An Apology, or Declaration of the Power and 
Providence of God ; as also of other useful works ; and was 
Archdeacon of Surrey. 

* Acts and Mon. 


these men thus to turn the cat, as they say, in 
the pan, and to start so suddenly from the truth 
so manifestly known, so pithily proved, so ve- 
hemently defended, and (as it seemed) so faith- 
fully subscribed ! If they dissembled all this that 
they wrote, subscribed, and sware unto, what 
perjury most execrable it was before God and 
man ! If they meant good faith, and spake then 
as they thought, what pestilent blindness is 
this, so suddenly fallen upon them, to make that 
false now which was true before, or that to be 
now true which before was false !" 

But while Dr. Lingard has not obtruded upon 
the reader more respecting Gardiner, on this 
occasion, than what illustrates the pretended 
fear of that prelate ; he scruples not to speak of 
Cranmer, as though the archbishop were a fana- 
tick, and not a man of learning ; when, in truth, 
where Cranmer has been considered in the cha- 
racters of a scholar and a divine, his profound 
learning has ever been the object of admiration; 
and his composure of temper has ever been re- 
garded in opposition to wild notions of religion. 
** Cranmer, as the first in dignity, gave the ex- 
ample to his brethren ; and zealously inculcated 
from the pulpit, what his learning or fanaticism 
had lately discovei^ed , that the pontiff was the anti- 
christ of the Apocalypse (Poli Ep. i. p. 444.) : 
an assertion, which then filled the Catholick 
with horror, but at the present day excites no- 


thing but contempt and ridicule." Lingard, 
Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. pp. 283, 284. What ? that 
Cranmer had lately discovered this, assertion, when 
Dr. Linoard knows that what Cranmer incul- 
cated had, long before his time, and in the song 
of the poet, as well as in the disquisition of the 
theologian, been a frequent theme. " ^ As if 
his Holiness," says the admirable writer whom I 
just now cited, *' had never been graced with 
the title of Antichrist befoix Henry assumed his 
title of supreme headT Dr. Lingard will allow 
me to refresh his memory, and to subtract from 
his notices of Cranmer the imputed discovery, 
in referrino- to authors with whom he is well ac- 
quainted. I am not about to expatiate upon the 
correctness of the discovery : I profess only to 
shew, historically, that the title was not coined 
by Cranmer. WiclifFe, a century before the 
archbishop, *" believed the pope to be Antichrist. 
Chaucer, his contemporary, the father of our 
poetry ; and Dante, his senior, the famous poet 
of Italy, ^ asserted the same of the Romish 
Church. At the opening of the sixteenth cen- 
tury, the title was so often applied to the papal 

'' Dr. Hakewill, ut supr. p. 154. 

•-■ Fox, Hist. Ecclesiastica, Argent. 1564. fol. 178. Baber's 
Life of Wicliffe, prefixed to his valuable republication of Wic- 
lifFe's New Test. p. xvi. 

'' See Dr. Warton's notes on Pope, edit. Bowles, vol, v. 
p. 143. 


power, that Julius II. forbad the Clergy even 
to speak of the coming of Antichrist. The Ro- 
manists saw the tendency of this application in 
our own country at the time when Dr. Lingard 
speaks of " the discovery;" the pope being then 
(in 1533) " ^ reckoned among many as the Anti- 
Christ;" and accordingly, *' '^ by fabulous and 
ridiculous stories of Antichrist, they endeavoured 
to cast a mist before metis eyes^ that they should the 
less believe and understand the pope to be him" Of 
this ingenious device Strype has presented us 
with a ° specimen, entitled, A Popish Discourse 
of Antichrist. Now Warburton says, that *' '' on 
this common principle, that the pope, or church of 
Home, was the ver'y Antichrist foretold, was the 
Reformation begun and carried on : on this was 
the great separation from the Church of Rome 
conceived and perfected." So that the wonder 
diminishes, when we find the title considered as 
the child of fanaticism, and as an ambidextrous 
weapon in theological warfare. 

Upon the trial of Lambert very observable 
are the words of Dr. Lingard. " Of all the pro- 
secutions for heresy, none excited greater inte- 
rest than that of Lambert, alias Nicholson, a 

* Strype's Eccl. Memorials, vol. i. p. 163. 
' Ibid. p. 164. 

* Ibid. Appendix, p. 122. 

'• Serm. on the Rise of Antichrist. 


clergyman in priest's orders, and a school- 
master in London. Nor is it the least remarka- 
ble circumstance in his story, that of the three 
men %oho brought him to the stake, Taylor, Barnes, 
and Cranmer, two professed, even then, most 
certainly later, the very same doctrine as their 
victim, and all three suffered afterwards the 
same, or nearly the same, punishment." Hist. 
ut supr. vol. 6. p. 367. Has Dr. Lingard been 
able, then, to prove that Cranmer brought Lam- 
bert to the stake ? He pretends no proof. The 
particulars of the examination of Lambert, he 
admits, have not been preserved. But he fol- 
lows the assertion of Phillips, who ' says that 
Cranmer had consented to Lambert's and Anne 
Askew's death. Dr. Milner and Mr. Butler 
"^ join in asserting the especial instrumentality of 
the archbishop to that effect. Now from the 
court of the archbishop, before which he had 
been brought, Lambert appealed to the king. 
And by the king he was heard, overpowered in 
the disputation, and condemned to the stake. 
*' ' We do not find," an amiable biographer of 
Cranmer says, *' that the archbishop took any 
part in his death'' Another defender of Cran- 
mer, against the present and other assertions of 

* Life of Cardinal Pole, ut supr. vol. ii. p. 208. 
'' Strictures on Southey's Book of the Church, pp. 32^. 60 ; 
and the Book of the Rom. Cath. Church, p. 217. 
' Gilpin's Life of Cranmer. 


Phillips, observes, that " " Fuller acknowledges 
the consent which Phillips has alleged ; but I 
cannot see for what reason ; as it is not authen- 
ticated by any historian that I can meet with. 
Henry had disputed with Lambert, and ordered 
him to be burnt, or retract his opinion : and 
chancellor Wriothesley prosecuted Askew, and 
put her to the rack : — but it no where appears that 
Cranmefs advice^ or consent, was asked upon either 
of them.'" Cranmer at that time believed the 
corporal presence ; the disbelief of which was 
the crime of Lambert and of Askew. To Va- 
dian, a learned foreigner, however, who had 
written a book denying transubstantiation, and 
who wished to find a patron of it in Cranmer, 
the refusing reply evidently marks, in the strong 
expression of " ° h(£c tarn amenta controversia,'* 
the archbishop's aversion to cruelties which 
p had been practised, in consequence of such 
disputes. But while these circumstances are 
stated, who would not wish to find, instead of 
them, the testimony either of Cranmer' s oppo- 

" Stone's Remarks on Phillips, &c. ut supr. p. 240. 

" See the whole letter in Strype's Appendix to his Life of 
Cranmer, No. XXV. The date of it is believed to be 1537. 

P Alluding, most probably, to the cases of Frith and Hewet, 
which Cranmer mentions in the letter to Hawkyns, before cited ; 
the former of whom he endeavoured to save by persuasion. 
See Lingard, vol. vi. p. 366. And Ellis's Original Letters, &c. 
vol. ii. p. 40. 



sition to the proceedings, or his interference in 
behalf of the persons whom they affected ? As 
for the truly mournful tale of the martyr, Anne 
Askew, Dr. Lingard indeed refers to it only in 
a note, in which he "^ says, she was, after two 
recantations, condemned to the flames by Cran- 
mer and other bishops. And yet this injury to 
the fame of the lady is repelled in her own 
words, which Fox has preserved in her Answer 
against the false surmises of her recantation. " 'I 
have read the process," says the noble-minded 
woman, " which is reported, of them that know 
not the truth, to be my recantation. But, as the 
Lord liveth, I never meant thing less than to 
recant. Notwithstanding, this I confess, that 
in my first troubles I was examined by the bi- 
shop of London about the sacrament. Yet had 
they no grant of my mouth, but this ; that I 
believed therein, as the Word of God did bind 
me to believe : moix had they 7iever of me. Then 
he made a copy which is now in print, and re- 
quired me to set thereunto my hand. But I 
refused it. Then my two sureties did will me 
in no wise to stick thereat ; for it was no great 
matter, they said. Then with much ado, at the 
last I wrote thus: I Anne Askew do believe 
this, if God's Word do agree to the same, and 
the true catholick church. Then the bishop be- 

'^ Hist, lit supr. vol. vi. p. 458. 
' Acts and Mon. 


ing in great displeasure with me, because I made 
doubts in my writing, commanded me to prison, 
where I was a while ; but, afterwards, by the 
means of friends, I came out again. Here is the 
'truth of that matter. Anne Askew." 

In the foreground of these melancholy pro- 
ceedings should stand Gardiner, and not Cran- 
mer. But that arrangement has not been thought 
expedient in the pages of Dr. Lingard. With 
Lambert the Archbishop had, before his trial, 
expostulated * mildly on the maintenance of his 
alleged error; nor in the publick disputation 
with him was he harsh or overbearing, but ap- 
peared as it were checked by the arguments of 
his opponent ; (or as Fox describes it, " " him- 
self entangled, and all the audience amazed ;") 
when Gardiner, ** " being drowned with malice 
against the poor man, without the king's com- 
mandment, observing no order, before the Arch- 
bishop had made an end, unshamefacedly kneeled 
down to take in hand the disputation." So in 
the case of Askew, while Bonner ^ attempted 

• Entries, respecting the examination of this lady, appear to 
have been falsely made in the Register of bishop Bonner. Fox, 
Acts and Mon. 

' See Gilpin's Life of Cranmer, p. 58. 

" Acts and Mon. 

' Ibid. 

^ Ibid. Bonner lastly waited upon her in Newgate, in 
company with M. Rich. And there, the persecuted lady 
says, " M. Rich and the Bishop of London, with all their 

li 2 

Ixviii HISTORICAL and 

to inveigle her in disputation, Gardiner wasp- 
ishly called her a parrot ; for " ' she made some 
smart repartees upon this bishop of Winchester;" 
and to his severer remarks she replied, " "^ she 
was ready to suffer all things at his hands ; not 

power and flattering words, went about to persuade me from 
God : but I did not esteem their glosing pretences. Then 
came there to me M. Nich. Shaxton, and counselled me to re- 
cant as he had done. I said to him, that it had been good 
for him never to have been born." Ibid. — Shaxton had been 
bishop of Salisbury, and favoured the Reformation ; re- 
signed his bishoprick, and was in danger of suffering as a 
heretick : but he recanted ; and to complete this apostasy, 
preached the sermon at the burning of Anne Askew, and wrote 
a book in defence of articles to which upon his recantation he 
subscribed ; a transaction which escaped not the vigilance of a 
warm opponent to the Romanists, who in these articles consi- 
ders the spirit of Gardiner to be very apparent : " I call these 
articles your's, because you subscribe to them, and set them 
forth under your name. But if I were required to say my con- 
science, I could not deny but I think them Winchester's work- 
manship ; because they agree so well with his doctrine, &c." 
See the Confutation of xiii Articles whereunto N. Shaxton, late 
bishop of Salisbury, subscribed, and caused to be set forth in 
print, the year of our Lord 1546, when he recanted in Smith- 
field at London at the burning of Mrs. Anne Askew." By R. 
Crowley. Address to Shaxton, sign. A. ii. What became of 
Shaxton in king Edward's time, Burnet says, he cannot tell ; 
but he found that, in the reign of Mary, he was a cruel per- 
secutor and burner of Protestants ; yet that by the Romanists 
he was still little considered, and raised no higher than to be 
bishop suffragan of Ely. 

^ Burnet, Hist. Ref. vol. I. p. 341. 

* Fox, Acts and Mon. 


only his rebukes, but all that should follotv be- 
sides ; yea, and all that gladly." The name of 
Cranraer, throughout the narrative of this lady's 
sufferings, is ^ not once introduced either by 
Fox, or Lord Herbert, or Burnet, or Strype, or 
Collier. Upon her, it is highly probable, the 
sentence of condemnation was pronounced by 
*" Bonner, bishop of London, in whose register 
proceedings against her were recorded. Upon 
Lambert, indeed, Cromwell, the Vicar-General, 
"^ delivered the cruel judgement. 

With the case of Lambert, Dr. Lingard has 
embodied his own opinion of Cranmer's theolo- 
gical tenets, as to the doctrine of the sacra- 
ment. *' Cranmer's promptitude to reject the 
doctrine of the real presence, when he could do 
it with safety, has provoked a suspicion that he 

'' Upon no other authority, than what is contained in the 
following exclamation, Dr. Milner says, that " Cranmer was 
•publickly reproached with causing Askew's death, by her com- 
panion and friend, Joan Bocher, when, subsequently, he was on 
the point of pronouncing the same sentence on the latter wo- 
man : It is not long ago, she said, since you condemned Anne 
Askew for a piece of bread ; and now you are ready to con- 
demn me for a piece of flesh." Strictures on Southey's Book 
of the Church, p. 32. 

*= The bishop of London pronounced the sentence in the 
cases of Frith and Hewet. See Cranmer's relation of this, 
cited by Dr, Lingard, Hist, vol. 6. p. ZQQ. and Ellis's Orig. 
Lett. vol. 2. p. 40. 

<* Collier, Eccl. Hist. vol. 2. p. 152. 


did not sincerely believe it before : but Burnet 
and Strype conceive that he held the Lutheran 
tenet of consubstantiation at this period : and I 
am inclined to assent to them from the tenor of 
two letters already quoted, that to Hawkyns, 
and the other to Vadianus." Hist, ut supr. 
vol. 6. p. 368. The former of these letters, writ- 
ten by Cranmer, recites the opinion of Frith, 
who had been condemned by the bishop of Lon- 
don : *' ^His said opynion ys of such nature, 
that he thoughte it not necessary to be believed, 
as an article of our/aythe, that ther ys the very 
corporall presence of Christe within the oste 
and sacramente of the alter ; and holdeth of this 
poynte moste after the opynion of Oecolampa- 
dius. And surely I myself sent for hym iii or 
iiii tymes to persuade hym to leave that his 
imaginacion." The letter to Vadian is ^sup- 
posed to express the prudent desire of eluding, 
and, if possible, of then suppressing contro- 
versy upon the subject, knowing the King's at- 
tachment to the doctrine of the real presence ; 
because, " ^dici non potest, quantum hsec tam 
cruenta controversia — maxima apud nos bene 
current! verbo evangelii obstiterit." But Dr. 
Lingard is not correct in supposing that, at this 

' Lingard and Ellis, as in the preceding note. 
' Lingard, Hist. vol. 6. p. 367. 

» Strype, Life of Cranmer, App. No. XXV. and Lingard, 
ut supra. 


period, Cranmer held the Lutheran tenet. The 
Archbishop was asked by Martin, the civilian, 
at his trial, what he maintained as to this point , 
and his answer is preserved. 

** ^ Martin. What doctrine taught you, when 
you condemned Lambert, the sacramentary, in 
the King's presence in Whitehall ?" 

" Cranmer. / mamtained then the papists^ doc- 
trine.'" Dr. Lingard has here found it convenient 
to lean to the notions of Fox, and Burnet, and 
Strype ; who, as Dr. Wordsworth has justly 
observed, ** 'upon no better authority than the 
calumnies of his adversaries, and the slight pre- 
sumptions arising from his early familiarity with 
Germans, and his translating the Latin Cate- 
chism of Justus Jonas, have supposed that Cran- 
mer once maintained the Lutheran doctrine of 
the sacrament ; from whose hands the same error 
has been received by very many modern wri- 
ters." Hence the affirmation of Dr. Milner, 
that " ^ it is universally acknowledged that Cran- 
mer was a thorough-paced Lutheran, or Zuin- 
glian, when he travelled through Germany, and 
married Osiander's sister, [niece,] for his second 
wife, in 1529." And Gardiner and Smith 'ac- 
cused the Archbishop of being first a Papist, 

'' Fox, Acts and Mon. 

' Eccles. Biography, 1st edit. vol. S. p. 550. 

^ Strictures on Southey's Book of the Church, p. 32. 

' See before, p. xii. 


then a Lutheran, and at last a Zuinglian, in 
what he maintained upon the doctrine of the 
sacrament. And thus too Dr. Martin assailed 
the primate with this taunt, *' ™You, Master 
Cranmer, have taught in this high sacrament of 
the altar three contrary doctrines, and yet you pre- 
tended in every one verbum Domini^ — " Nay," 
replied the Archbishop, '* I taught but two con- 
trary doctrines in the same :" that is, the two 
doctrines of the Church of Rome, and of the 
Reformed Church of England. Yet Sanders, 
who cared not what he wrote, as Strype ob- 
serves, '* "so he might but throw his dirt upon 
the Reformation and the Reformers," has re- 
peated without any proof the threefold charge 
against the Archbishop. Cranmer indeed ap- 
pears to have ° faltered at the doctrine of transub- 
stantiation, after examining a .learned preacher 
who denied it, in 1539 ; and again, upon a simi- 
lar occasion, in 1541 ; though he professed the 
Romish tenet, till the conference with Ridley" 
led him wholly to disclaim it, and gave rise to 
the treatise which in the following pages is again 
presented to the publick. An original letter, 
from the Archbishop to Sir Thomas Wriothes- 
ley, is in the State Paper Office, (without the 
date of the year, but, by the date of the letter 

" Fox, Acts and Mon. 

" Strype, Life of Cranmer, B. 1. ch. 18. 

• Ibid. 


which it describes, evidently written imme- 
diately after the receipt of it in Sept. 1540,) 
in which the aversion of Cranmer to the Church 
of Rome is undisguised. 

" p Maister Wrythiosley, 
*' After my right harty recoiiiendations, theis 
be to signifie vnto you that I have receyved out 
of the realme of Pole lettres from Dantiscus, 
busshope of Varinien. who was many yeres the 
kynge of Pole his ambassadour vnto the empe- 
rour the same tyme that I was the kyng our 
master his ambassadour ; in whome I founde at 
that tyme grete humanitie and feithfulnes ; and, 
as I coude perceyve, an hart he had to serve 
the kyngs majestic our master, as if he had been 
his own subjecte ; and as lovyngely he intreated 
me, as if he had been my own brother, notwith- 
sandynge that we were of two contrary jugements ; 
for he was a meer papiste. Nevertheles, he wold 
heare me diligently, and patiently, to say al my 
mynde concernynge the busshope of Rome, and 
seemed many times to condescend vnto my juge- 
ment, and to alowe the same. Howbeit, after 
he came home into his own contray, and had ij 
busshoprycks gyven vnto hym, Jordanus conver- 
siis est retrorsum : for he returned agayne holly 

P Directed, To my loving ffrend S"* Thomas Wrythisley, 
Secretary vnto the Kyng's Majestic. 


adpapis7num. And now they say, that he is the 
gretest persecutor of Godd's worde that is in all 
the lande of Pole ; and you may perceyve by 
his lettre, (which herewith you schal receyve,) 
how much he is offended with me, for that ac- 
cordynge to Godd's worde I wrote myselfe in 
the subscription of my lettre, ecclesie Cantuarieny 
ministerum. Now syns I receyved this lettre, I 
haue been moch inquieted therwith, consider- 
ynge what haynous rumors by myschevous 
tongues be spred into so farr contrays of the 
kyng's majestic, which wolde make any true and 
lovynge subject's harte to blede in his body to 
heare or reade of his Prince. And bycause you 
sholde the better perceyve the same, I haue sent 
you Dantiscus' own letter, interlined in places 
most notable concernyng that matter; desier- 
ynge you to declare the same to the kyng's 
highnes at conuenient oportunitie, and to knowe 
his pleasure whether I shall make any answere 
vnto the said Dantiscus, and what answer I 
schal make : for the matter is of such import- 
ance, that I dare not presume to make a slender 
aunswer vpon myn own heade. Nevertheles, I 
thynke it not good to open this matter vnto the 
kyng's grace vntyl he be wel recouered of his 
disease, which I pray God shortely to put away, 
lest perad venture it myght trouble and move his 
grace, and rather be occasion of longer conty- 
nuance of the said disease. And if that had not 


been, I wolde haue come to the Courte this day 
my selfe, but I thought it veray evyl that any 
person or matter sholde at this present disquyete 
his grace. Wherefore I referr vnto your wise- 
dome to breake this matter vnto his grace at 
such tyme as you schal thynke most expedient, 
ffrom Lamhith this saynt Mathies day. 
*' Your assured, 

** T. Cantuarien." 

The original letter of Dantiscus, sent with 
the preceding, is in the same repository, but is 
in a perishing state. It is dated ** ex arce nos- 
tra Heilsberg. prima Septembris 1540." It is 
written with strong animadversion upon obvious 
occurrences in England in that year, and with 
the following prophetical application as it were 
to Cranmer : " Tu tamen ne te irvpa'^ov juopoc 
occupet, quum ea sint apud vos tempera, quae 
nulla prius in orbis Christiani regione fuerunt 
unquam, caveas." The passage is underlined 
by Cranmer, and over the Greek words are 
written by him salamandre fatiim. Part of ano- 
ther sentence, underlined also by the Archbi- 
shop, which is much decayed, is too curious to 
be omitted : " Tot scilicet bonorum Ecclesiee 
di[reptiones, qu.] — quodque magis hlc omnes 
in admiracionem ac detestacionem inducit, tot 
conjugiay tot que conti^a omnes cum humanas tum 
etiam divinas leges repudia, quae tamen, quamvis 


passim hie in vulgus sparsa pro veris habentur, 
apud me adhue sunt ambigua." Here is an 
evident allusion to the '' frequency of divorces, 
which at that time prevailed. And presently 
there is an apparent reference to the marriage 
of the King; *' de insigni ad te conjugio scrip- 

So much for this curious correspondence, 
so near the time too when the King, instead of 
promoting the Reformation, had been retracing 
his steps ; and when Gardiner had been active 
in framing, and successful in establishing, the 
merciless Act of the Six Articles. This Act 
Cranmer had opposed. Dr. Lingard thus re- 
lates the opposition: '* On the second day the 
king himself came down to the house, and 
joined in the debate : to resist the royal theolo- 
gian required a degree of courage unusual in 
the prelates of that day : and Cranmer and his 
colleagues, who had hitherto led the opposition, 
now, with the exception of the bishop of Salis- 
bury, owned themselves vanquished and con- 
vinced by the superiority of his reasoning and 
learning. On the authority of Fox we are told 
that the Archbishop persisted in his opposition 
to the last: (Fox, ii. 372. Burnet, i. 258.) but 
this statement not only seems irreconcilable with 
the Journals, but is contradicted by the express 
assertion of one of the lords who were present. 


"i Strype, Life of Cranmer, B. 1. ch. SO. 


' Notwithstanding my lord of Canterbury, my 
lord of Ely, my lord of Salisbury, my lords of 
Worcester, Rochester, and St. Davyes, defended 
the contrary a long time, yet finally his highnes 
confounded them all with goodlie learning. York, 
Durham, Winchester, London, Chichester, Nor- 
wiche, and Carlisle, have shewed themselves 
honest and well learned men. We of the tem- 
poralty have been all of one opinion ; and my 
lord chancellor (Audley) and my lord privy seal 
(Cromwell) as good as we can devise. My lord 
of Canterbury and all his bishops have given 
their opinions, and have come in to us, save 
Salisbury, who yet continueth a lewd fool.' 
Cleop. E. V. p. 128." Hist, up supr. vol. 6. p. 381. 
The preceding extract is part of the letter copied 
from the manuscript by the accurate Strype, 
and printed in the Appendix to his Life of Cran- 
mer, No. XXVL though Dr. Lingard has not 
noticed it ; where it is observable that the letter 
is " without any name subscribed,'" which also Dr. 
Lingard has suppressed ; so that instead of being 
written by one of the lords present at the debate, 
it may have been the exaggerated communi- 
cation of any friend to the papal cause, in the 
way of news, as indeed it seems to be; for it ' 
begins, *' And also 72ewes here, I assure you 
never prince shewed himself so wise a man, &c. 
as the King hath done in this parlyment ;" (which 
in Dr. Lingard's extract is omitted ;) and pro- 


bably was gathered from the report of some lord 
who had been present. In relating a publick 
circumstance, whether orally or by letter, whicli 
succeeds according to our wish, nothing is more 
common than to identify ourselves with the 
promoters of it. *' ' Great triumphing," says 
Strype, '* was now on the papists' side as ap- 
pears by this letter." He calls the news in this 
letter, however, *' ' a flying report." The letter 
also, I have observed, is anonymous ; and still 
it conceals the strenuous, the noble opposition 
made to it by Cranmer ; still it affirms, what is 
not true, that the bishop of Salisbury alone per- 
sisted in refusing his assent, and that the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury with the bishops who have 
been already named of his opinion " came in" to 
the opposing party, when the ' bishop of Wor- 
cester, as well as the bishop of Salisbury, rather 
than conform, resigned his bishoprick ; and still 
it coldly talks of the debate, in general terms, 
of having continued only a long time, when as 
Fox has stated the fact, and as Lord Herbert, 
and Burnet, and Strype, and even Collier, 

^ Strype, Life of Cranmer, B. 1. cli. 19. 

• Ibid. 

* Lord Herbert, p. 449. Burnet, i. p. 266. Strype, Life of 
Cranmer, B. 1. ch. 19. and Dr. Lingard himself; " Latimer, 
and Shaxton, the bishops of Worcester and Salisbury, who by 
the intemperance of their language had given offence, resigned 
th^ir sees. The French ambassador says, that both refused 
iheir assent." Hist. vol. 6. p. 381. 


have repeated it, *' " Cranmer for three days to* 
gether in the open assembly opposed these Articles 
boldly ;' and when even the second edition of 
Sanders has admitted the " longam d'lfficilemque 
alter catiomiri' in parliament upon the subject, 
after the first edition (like the anonymous wri- 
ter of the present letter) had conceded only 
" diu multumque dispiitatum." But the Roman- 
ists have ever aimed, in reciting the circum- 
stances of the Six Articles, to fix upon the 
memory of Cranmer the stain of a judgment 
slavishly prostituted to the will of the king. 
" "^ There was no abject compliance," says 
Phillips, " to which he did not let himself 
down, to flatter the passions of Henry VIII. and 
to secure his own credit, &c. In consequence 
of this abandoned turn of mind, he subscribed to 
the six famous Articles, which contain so many 
points in which the Reformers disagree with the 
ancient doctrine, though he disbelieved them 
all." Here the archbishop is introduced assent- 
ing in a manner, which has been invented by 
the slanderer : for ^ subscription to these Articles 

" Lord Herbert, p. 448. 

" Life of Cardinal Pole, vol. ii. p. 211. 

^ And yet Mr. Butler thus expostulates with Dr. Southey : 
" Although Cranmer subscribed, and caused his clergy to sub» 
scribe, the Six Articles, the third and fourth of which enjoined 
celibacy to the' clergy, and the observance of the vow of chas- 
tity, was he not married, and did not he continue to cohabit 


was never enjoined at all. And when after tlie 
second day's debate, (a second day is admitted 
by Dr. Lingard,) and the third day to which the 
question was adjourned had arrived; Cranmer 
" protested against the bill, though the king de- 
sired him to retire, since he could not consent to 
it. Dr. Lingard adds, that " two separate com- 
mittees were appointed,with the same instructions 
to each, to prepare a bill in conformity with the 
royal suggestion. One consisted, and it must 
appear a most singular selection, of three converts 
to the cause, the prelates of Canterbury, Ely, 

with his wife ? was not this dissimulation ?" Book of the Rom. 
Cath. Church, p. 216. Let Strype answer Mr. Butler: " The 
papist writers say, Cranmer opposed the Six Articles, because 
himself was a married man, and so it would touch him close : 
but it is plain that there were other of these Six Articles, which 
he utterly disliked ; and especially he abhorred the rigorous 
penalty of the Act. But hereupon he privately sent away his 
wife into Germany among her friends." Life of Cranmer, b. i. 
eh. 19. Hear also the belief and assertion of Lord Herbert : 
" It appears not what arguments Cranmer used : only I find 
the king sent to him for a copy of them, and misliked not his 
freedom, as knowing all he spake was out of a sincere inten- 
tion, though some thought he had a private interest as being a 
married man ; though, fearing this law, he sent away his wife 
for the present into Germany, &c." Hist. p. 4i8. As to sub- 
scriptions to the Act in question, they are the gratuitous appen- 
dages to it of Mr. Phillips and Mr. Butler. The Clergy were 
enjoined by the Act to read it in their churches once a quarter, 
but they were never required to subscribe to it. 

* ** The king desired the archbishop to go out of the House, 
since he could not give his consent to the Bill ; but he humbly 


and St. David's ; and the other, of their warm- 
est opponents, the bishops of York, Durham, 
and Winchester." Hist. vol. 6. p. 382. Has 
Dr. Lingard, then, never observed that, in com- 
mittees of the lords and commons upon extraor- 
dinary questions, both enemies and friends of the 
point at issue are found ? And can Dr. Lingard 
call Cranmer a convert to a cause, which he waited 
for opportunity only again to oppose 1 Of these very 
six Articles the archbishop himself afterwards 
brought in a bill to mitigate the penalties. For 
what the three converts, as Dr. Lingard calls them, 
had proposed as a committee^, v/as rejected. 
His most impartial biographer shall relate the 
subsequent proceeding. ** ^ This ivas a bold at' 
tempt, and drew on him the whole force of oppo- 
sition. The bishops of Rochester and Hereford, 
who had promised to assist him, gave way, as 
the debate grew warm ; and begged him to fol- 
-"low their example. It was in vain, they told 
him, to persist : he could not benefit his cause ; 
Btit he might ruin himself. The archbishop, 
with that spirit which he always exerted where 
religion vv^as concerned ^ declared himself care- 
less of any consequences. His perseverance had 

excused himself; for he thought he was bound in conscience to 
stay and vote against it." Burnet, vol. i. p. 258. 

^ Gilpin, p. 81. 

'' See Collier, vol. ii. p. 201. 



an effect which he durst not have hoped for. 
The laity were entirely exempted from the pe- 
nalties of the act ; and the clergy were in no 
danger, till after the third conviction. The pri- 
mate obtained also that no offences should be 
cognizable, after they had lain dormant a year. 
It is not improbable, that he was indebted for 
this victory to the ' book, which he had sent to 
the king ; the rigour of whose opinions it might, 
in some degree, have qualified." 

To the charges which have been brought 
against the archbishop for his conduct in the 
condemnations of Joan Bocher or Bourchier, 
and George Van Parris, as hereticks, we proceed 
with sorrow ; as recalling circumstances in our 
history, and in the history of Cranmer, truly 
painful. For the burning of the former, usually 
called Joan of Kent, Cranmer is said to have 
contended with the young king, who argued 
against it: *' the objection was solved by the 
example of Moses, who had condemned blas- 
phemers to be stoned ; and the king with tears 
put his signature to the warrant." Lingard, 
Hist. vol. 7. p. 101. It has been usual to leave 
Cranmer in the present deplorable scene with- 
out any strong effort of defence. Strype, who 
in his Life of the Archbishop retires as it were 

• Burnet, vol. i. p. 265. " Cranmer went about that which 
the king had comwianded, and made a book of the reasons that 
led him to oppose the Six Articles," &-c. 


from the attempt, resolved afterwards, in his 
Ecclesiastical Memorials, not thus to " desert 
the primate in his utmost need." Sir John 
Hay ward, in his Life and Reign of Edward VI. 
had said, " ^ that Cranmer was violent with the 
king by persuasions and entreaties to seal the 
warrant for Joan Bocher ; and by his importu- 
nity prevailed with the king, who told the arch- 
bishop, he would lay the charge of it upon him 
before God :" — and then he adds his conjecture 
upon this, " that it might be Cranmer's impor- 
tunity of blood, by which that woman was burnt, 
that he himself afterwards felt the smart of 
fire." — To these remarks Strype replies : '* ^ This 
passage, whether it be true or no, I cannot tell. 
The king mentions nothing of it in his Journal, 
only that she was burnt for her obstinacy in her 
heresy. And the character is utterly disagree- 
ing from Cranmer's spirit. For none was more 
tender of blood than he ; none more pitiful and 
compassionate. Nor was he a man for rigorous 
methods and violent courses. Indeed Fox men- 
tions, that the Council put Cranmer upon mov- 
ing the king to sign this warrant : which was a 
sign he had no great forwardness to it himself. 
And in obedience to them he did labour with 
the king about it, and obtained it. And though 

Eccl. Memorials, vol. ii. p. 473. 



he did this, it neither argued violence, nor impor- 
tunity for blood. For as he was not present at 
her condemnation, as appears by the Council- 
Book, so he may be concluded to have had no 
desire of her death, though the warrant by his 
means was signed for her execution. His 
thoughts, I am apt to think, were, that this fear 
of death, which she saw so near, might serve to 
reclaim her from her error, when his and other 
learned men's reasonings with her, being both 
ignorant and obstinate, were ineffectual." Dr. 
Lingard notices the next victim, Van Parris, a 
' Dutchman, and a surgeon in London, without 
any aggravation ; unlike the historian, whom he 
sometimes follows, who, in order to heap re- 
doubled shame upon his memory, has intro- 
duced the archbishop as resorting to the king 
with the same importunity for the punishment 
of Van Parris, as he had for Joan Bocher, and as 
if they had both suffered together ; when be- 
tween their respective condemnations there was 

' There were in several parts of England many Anabaptists, 
as this Dutchman is said to have been, who had left their homes 
in Holland, and in Germany, on account of their tenets. Of 
these tenets Burnet has given, in the case of Van Parris, some 
account. Hist. Ref. vol. ii. p. 111. A very full account is to 
be found in the proceedings against Giles Vanbellar, ano- 
ther Dutchman, who abjured them, in the MS. Register of 
Edward (Lee) Archbishop of York, under the year 1534. 
Reg. Prerog. Off. York, 


an interval of two years : "^ Whereas the young 
king," Phillips says, " shewed a reluctance to 
sign the warrant foi^ the execution of these wretches ^ 
one of whom was more a bedlamite than a here- 
tick, Cranmer solved his scruples, and prevailed 
on him to put his hand to it." Of such inter- 
ference by Cranmer, at the time when Van Parris 
really suffered, there is no notice in the Journal 
of Edward ; as of such interference also there is 
none in the case of Bocher. But Dr. Milner 
appeals to B urnet, as testifying the alleged cruelty 
of Cranmer alike to Bocher and Van Parris. 
And indeed Burnet has misled this learned Ro- 
manist, and others, by the inaccuracy of his state- 
ment subjoined to instruments copied from the 
register of Cranmer in the Lambeth library. 
Burnet must have entrusted the labour of copy- 
ing to some ^ unskilful hand. He himself would 
never have printed (as in the Records, No. 35. 
illustrating his second volume of the History of 
the Reformation, it is printed) " Serinof actus regi^ 
&c." when the real words in the Register are 
*' Certijicatorium factum regi, &c." It is in fact, 
the necessary certificate of the sentence passed 
upon Bocher, and again recited in the case of 

e Life of Cardinal Pole, vol. ii. p. 209. 

"* Even the reference to the entries in the Register, and a 
date, here mentioned by Burnet, are not correct. The true 
date is April 7. 1551. The folia in the Register are 74, 75, and 
78, 79. 


Van Parris, in obedience to the Act which had 
been passed at the beginning of this reign, that 
" the courts of Bishops and all their processes 
should be carried on in the King's name, as in 
the other courts of law." And therefore in 
these cases the words are, '* Vestrse Regise sub- 
limitati, &c. dictam Heereticam rel'mquimus, &c." 
and " Vestrse Regise sublimitati, et potentise 
brachii vestri secularis, dictum Hsereticum 7^elm- 
quimus, et tradimus, animadversione vestra Regia 
puniendum, &c." Now, because Burnet, speak- 
ing of the case of Van Parris, says that the pro- 
cess and sentence, '* together with a petition im- 
ploring the ed-ecution thereof, and the assistance of 
the secular power ," are the same as in the case of 
Bocher : therefore the legal form, leaving the 
convict to the disposal of the king, in which there 
is no imploration except that of blessing upon the 
reign of Edward, has been converted into the 
stain of importunity for blood in the character 
of the principal judge. The word petition must 
have been adopted by Burnet, or by him who 
gave him the copy of the instruments, in the 
forensick meaning of the address to one having 
jurisdiction or authority ; for the instruments ex- 
hibit no entreaty whatever, no desire of assistance, 
but simply state the process and the sentence, 
(as was requisite,) and leave the punishment to 
the power and the direction of the king. With- 
out this explanation, the enemy of Cranmer 


might still **have advantage against him;" with 
it, the charge deduced from Burnet, as by Dr. 
Milner, is refuted. 

The intelligence brought to the Archbishop, 
upon the accession of Mary to the throne, that 
the Roman catholick service had been performed 
in his church at Canterbury, has drawn from 
the pen of Dr. Lingard the following statement 
of the consequences. The intelligence added, 
'' that by strangers this innovation was supposed 
to have been made by Cranmer's order, or with 
his consent ; and that a report was circulated of 
his having offered to celebrate mass before the 
queen. Cranmer hastened to refute these charges 
by a publick denial ; and in a declaration which, 
while its boldness does honour to his courage, 
betrays by its asperity the bitterness of his feel- 
ings, asserted that the mass was the device and 
invention of the father of lies, who w^as even 
then persecuting Christ, his holy word, and his 
church ; that it was not he, the Archbishop, but 
a false, flattering, lying, and deceitful monk, 
who had restored the ancient worship at Can- 
terbury ; that he had never offered to say mass 
before the queen, &c. Of this intemperate de- 
claration several copies were dispersed, and 
publickly read to the people in the streets." 
Hist, ut supr. vol. 7. pp. 185, 186. But the 
whole truth is not told. The declaration was 
certainly drawn with a view to pubHck use ; and 


was submitted by Cranmer to Scory, who had 
been bishop of Chichester, for the advantage of 
his private and friendly consideration. Of this 
incomplete paper Scory indiscreetly gave co- 
pies ; one of which was read in Cheapside ; and 
many were subsequently dispersed ; but with- 
out the knowledge or consent, on the contrary 
to the great mortification, of the Archbishop. 
For being summoned before the Council, and 
asked if he was the author of the declaration, 
he answered, that certainly he was ; but that he 
was very sorry to find the paper had gone from 
him in such a manner, as he had resolved to 
enlarge it in many respects, and to aflSx it, with 
his hand and seal to it, to the doors of the 
churches in London. This reply before the Privy 
Council was made on the 8th of Sept. 1553, 
when, Burnet and others say, the Archbishop 
was, contrary to all expectation, dismissed. It 
was on that day, however, that the Council re- 
solved to commit the Archbishop to the Tower 
upon the charge of treason, *' ^ aggravated by 
spreadinge aboute seditious bills movinge tu- 
multes to the disquietnes of the presente state." 
Not a single bill is Cranmer known to have dis- 
persed. To the injudicious zeal of his friend 
the alleged mischief is to be attributed. At the 
close of the Latin version of the declaration, 

' Extracts from the Privy Council Book, Archaeolog. vol. 
xviii. cited by Dr. Lingard. 


published in 1554, it is there said, ** "" Lecta 
public^ Londini in vico mercatorum ab amicOy 
qui clam autogTapkum surripuerat, 5. Sejjt. Anno 
Dom. 1553." Valerandus Pollanus republished 
it, in 1554 ; though Burnet and Strype have 
overpassed the circumstance. The English co- 
pies were probably called in and destroyed. Of 
the reprint in 1557 by the English exiles a copy 
yet exists among Fox's collections in the ° Har- 
leian manuscripts, (No. 417.) to whom it was 
sent by Grindal, afterwards archbishop of Can- 
terbury ; and in that part of the written narra- 
tive, which names it, there is a marginal direc- 
tion by Grindal, " it is goode that the letter it 
selfe be lette in : the copie of it in prynte is 
annexed ;" which is a single duodecimo leaf. In 
it the religion of the former reign is nobly 
owned ; and a vindication both of the Reforma- 
tion, and of Cranmer himself, proposed. And 
what wonder, if in it there be also an " asperity 
which betrays the bitterness of his feelings ?" 
The false, flattering, lying, and dissembling monk, 
who caused the mass to be set up at Canterbury 
without his advice or counsel, was Thornden, 
prebendary of Canterbury and suflragan bishop 
of Dover, who had lived in his family, and with 
whom he used to converse most familiarly ; and 
was one of several dissembling monks whom Cran- 
mer had unfortunately selected, or permitted to 

"* Burnet, ii. Records, p. 250. 


be selected, from the dissolved priory of Christ 
Church, Canterbury, into his cathedral, and 
who were joined with Thornden in a wicked 
confederacy against him. If, upon witnessing 
this new act of baseness by the leading monk, 
Cranmer had shewn no asperity, I should have 
marvelled at the tameness which allowed the 
usurpation of his authority to pass unrepre- 
hended. The recollection, probably, of the ill 
choice which had been made of ^ other worth- 

p Besides Thornden, who had been a monk of Christ Church, 
I am compelled to name Mills, and Parkhurst, and Gardiner, 
who also had been of the same monastick body, and were 
transferred to prebends in the new foundation. Whether Wil- 
loughby and Sentleger, who were also of the first prebendaries, 
had been monks, I know not. These six were all concerned in 
the conspiracy against Cranmer. Indeed Strype has said that 
^^ for the most part, the prebendaries of Canterbury were at that 
time addicted to the pope and the old superstitions." Life of 
Cranmer. B. i. chapters 26, and 27 ; where the above conspi- 
rators and their proceedings are named, and their base ingra- 
titude as well as their false accusations exposed ; together with 
the confessions of their guilt ; their supplications to the arch- 
bishop for pardon, and to the king for release from confine- 
ment ; and the conduct of the Archbishop towards them, " be- 
ing a man that delighted not in revenge." The meanness of 
guilt is also very observable in their confessions and submis- 
sions. Strype's Cranm. Appendix, No. 33. It is apparently 
to this transaction of the late monks of Canterbury that an 
eloquent allusion is made, in a publication not many years after 
the event : " Did ever those papists, whose lives were spared 
by good byshop Cranmer's meanes, who were brought up, who 
were defended, who were advanced, who were sheelded from 


less characters from the monks of Christ Church, 
might also renew the bitterness of his feelings. 
*• Many of the members of the new foundation 
he had himself preferred, and to many of them 
was a kind friend. The expression is too strong 
to be mistaken ; and however Dr. Lingard may 
deny the practice of other '' immoralities, as- 
cribed to the monks of Christ Church by several 
writers ; of the sins of falsehood and ingratitude 
towards the benefactor whom they surrounded 
he will allow some to be guilty. 

But, amongst the many partialities of Dr. Lin- 
gard , none can be more revolting than his pretence, 
by way of contrast to the character of Cranmer, 
of an unpersecuting temper in Gardiner and of 
a mild demeanour in Bonner; men,who have been 
hitherto regarded with national disgust, and of 
whom the mention in the pages of Dr. Lingard 
disclaims as it were the notice of them as per- 
secutors, either in combination, or apart. *' With 
whom the persecution under Mary originated, 
is a matter of uncertainty. By the reformed 

harme and perill by him, once requite hym with one drop of 
kyndnesse? And yet they spake hym faire in hys prospe- 
ritie !" A Warning against Papists, &c. sign. L. 3. b. The 
behaviour of Cranmer, upon the present occasion, " who was 
gentle even to excess," is also recited by Burnet, iii. p. 

•J Strype, Life of Cranm. B. 1. ch. 26. 

■■ Hist, ut supr. vol. 6. p. 346. 


writers the infamy of the measure is usually 
allotted to Gardiner, more, as far as I can judge, 
from conjecture and prejudice, than from real 
information. The charge is not supported by 
any authentic document : it is weakened by the 
general tenor of the chancellor's conduct." Hist, 
ut supr. vol. 7. p. 259. And whom has Dr. 
Lingard introduced to bear him out in the pre- 
tence of Gardiner's innocence ? The Jesuit Per- 
sons, or Parsons, who was one of Cranmer's 
slanderers ; an Englishman who dishonourably 
left his own country, and became a Romanist ; 
and from the pope obtained leave to esta- 
blish a seminary at Rome, in which English 
students might be educated to act as mis- 
sionaries in their native country for the propa- 
gation of the Romish faith. But Dr. Lingard 
requires *' real information," as to the innocence 
or guilt of Gardiner ; which is a demand that 
cannot be too highly praised, and a demand that 
may be answered. Sir John Harington, whose 
literary character is well known, and who has 
repeatedly supplied other information with which 
Dr. Lingard has enriched his pages, has left an 
account in manuscript of the treatment which 
his father experienced, while a prisoner in the 
Tower, from Gardiner, who pretended to be his 
friend ; and of the opinion, expressed by him, 
as to the general chai^acter both of the prelate. 


and of the times. " ' Gardiner and his fellowes 
did condemne to the fyre a number of poore 
harmlesse soules that profest to beleue as they 
were taught but three yeares before : — which 
great extremitye was part the cause of stirring 
vp of Wiat's lysing, for which many Protestants 
were greatly troubled : among others my father 
was committed to the Tower ; and there, among 
other thinges he wrote, he translated TuUie de 
Amicitia, but finding Gardiner as he thought his 
heavie freind and harkning to no reason, he 
wrote a ryme to him, (in which kynde if I were 
not a partiall praiser, I would say he was equall 
to the best of those tymes,) one stanza whereof 
I will here sett downe, that charges the Bishop 
with ingratitude : 

" Your chaunce was once as myne is now, 
To keep this hould against your will ; 
And then you sware you knew well how, 
Though pow you swarve I know how ill. 
But thus the world his course doth passe : 
The Priest forgets that Clark he was : 
And you that then cryde Justice still. 
And now have justice at your will, 
Wrest justice wrong against all skill. 

** This and much more to the like effect he 
wrote, but still lay in the Tower for his labor ; 

• Manuscript in the Library of York Cathedral, No. XVI. 
L. 5. 


which wrong, infecting his Muse with some ran- 
cor, he prosecuted him with his penne after his 
death that persecuted him by his power in his 
life, verefieng the old saieng, Scribit in marmore 
IcBsiis: for this epitaph I found in a book of my 
father's of his owne writing : 

" Here lye the bones of busy Gardiner dead, 

That in fine yeares spoild more good lawes and lore, 
Than two great kings, with all the witts they bred, 
Could stablish sure in forty yeares before : 
The Queen beguild, the Lords like lymehounds led, 
The usurping rule of Rome he did restore, 
Burne, head, and hang, imprison, vex, and spoile 
The worthie sort of this declyning soile. 

*' Thus generallie did all the Protestants com- 
plaine of the great crueltie in Queen Maries 
tyme/' pp. 231, 2, 3. 

Sir John Harington also left an account, which 
has been published in his Catalogue of bishops, 
both of Gardiner and of Bonner ; in which the 
former is certainly exhibited as an object of less 
dread and detestation than the latter. *' * But," 
Sir John observes, ** for his sharp persecuting or 
rather revenging himself on Cranmer and Ridley, 
his too great cruelty cannot be excused. And 
the plots he laid to entrap the lady Elizabeth ; 

' Brief View, or Catalogue, ut supr. under the Bishops of 


his terrible hard usage of all her followers ; I 
cannot yet scarce think of with charity, nor 
write of with patience." Yet Sir John adds, 
that he had heard '* some as partially praise his 
clemency," and others assert " that Bonner was 
more faulty than he ; and that Gardiner would 
rate him for it, and call him ass for using poor 
men so bloodily.'" Others have attempted to clear 
him of being the author of the cruelties in the 
reign of Mary, by laying the blame of them 
upon Cardinal Pole. Of the subtilty of his 
character none appear to have doubted ; and to 
his learning all have yielded their testimony. 
Fox proclaims not his pride, and envy, and 
cruelty, without mentioning also his sharp wit 
and his excellent memory. But the severest 
reflection upon him, among many which remain, 
is, that avarice and cruelty were the chief " or- 
naments of his character. 

** There appears to be reason to think," Mr. 
Butler observes, " that Mary's bishops, in gene- 
ral, did not promote the persecution. Little blame 
seems imputable to "" Cardinal Pole, or bishop Tun- 

* " Avaricia et crudelitas, ejus erant prcecipua ornamenta." 
Account of Gardiner, prefixed to D. Nicolai Ridleii, Episc. 
Lend, de Coena Dominica Assertio, &c. Genev. 1556. Epist. 
p. 6. 

" Very powerfully it has been remarked, that "it ought not 
to create surprise that Pole should have found advocates, when 
such characters as Bonner and Gardiner have had their apolo- 
gists. Of the former it has been said by a Catholick historian 


stal; more is chargeable on Gardiner; the greatest 
part of the odium fell on Bo7iner. Dr. Lingard 

[him, who has prefixed the name of Dodd to his Church His- 
tory,] that he acted according to the statutes ; which is a mani- 
fest untruth : for he began to persecute the Protestants with 
the utmost rigour before the revival of the repealed laws ; and 
even after their re-enactment he exceeded the powers, which 
were vested in him, by taking the execution into his own hands, 
and inflicting cruel and illegal punishments. The same charge 
justly lies against the crafty Gardiner, of whom it is said upon 
the authority of the Jesuit, Robert Parsons, that ' no one great 
man in that government was further off from blood and bloodi- 
ness, or from cruelty and revenge ; and that he was known to 
be a most tender-hearted and mild man in that behalf; inso- 
much that it was sometimes, and by some great personages, 
objected to him for no small fault, to be ever full of compas- 
sion in the office and charge that he bare ; yea, to him espe- 
cially it was imputed, that none of the greatest and most known 
Protestants in queen Mary's reign were ever called to account, 
or put to trouble for religion." Parsons's Answer to Sir Fran- 
cis Hastings, as quoted by Lingard, vol. vii. p. 259. '* Upon 
this testimony of an apostate and traitor, who endeavoured all 
that in him lay to make his native country a province of Spain, 
we are required to believe, contrary to the evidence of Gar- 
diner's contemporaries, that this intriguing and versatile church- 
man was a man of compassion, and adverse to persecution. 
Yet it is a known fact, and the historian who has quoted Par- 
sons as a voucher for Gardiner's character, could not but know 
it, that with this ecclesiastick, and with him alone, originated 
the six bloody Articles, &c. and that the butchery of the two 
prelates, Ridley and Latimer, to say nothing of Cranmer, was 
the joint deed of Gardiner and Pole, &c." The Life of Lati- 
mer, prefixed to his Sermons, by John Watkins, LL.D. 1824, 
p. clxi. 


suggests some observations, which render it very 
•probable, that neither Gardiner nor Bonner were 
'^quite so guilty as they have been represented." 
Book of the Rom. Cath. Church, p. 207. Of 
Gardiner I have spoken. The tyranny of Bon- 
ner, and his exultation over the victims of it, 
are the themes of several publications from 1541 
till long after his death ; exclusively of what 
Fox has at large related of him. Even Phillips, 
the biographer of Pole, conceding that ** ^ a 
number of unhappy persons" (that is, protes- 
tants in the reign of Mary,) '' ^ suffered in the 
diocese of London, of which Bonner was bi- 
shop, who is repr^eseiited as the chief incendiary of 
that flamed even Phillips has offered no contra- 
diction to this especial charge. But it is need- 

y Life of Cardinal Pole, vol. ii. p. 216. 

* I will here advert to Dr. Lingard's account of the Protes- 
tant martyrs in the reign of Mary : " After every allowance it 
will be found, that in the space of four years almost two hundred 
'persons perished in the flames for religious opinion." Hist, ut 
supr. vol. vii. p. 285. An authentick account has been pre- 
served, which Strype has printed, (Eccl. Mem. vol. iii. Orig. 
Papers, p. 291,) of the number of those who were burned, in 
the time of Mary, for religion ; and of the places where they 
suffered. The gentle relation of only " almost two hundred," 
which the pen of Dr. Lingard concedes, miserable to relate, is 
augmented in the ^^ four years," of which he speaks, to " two 
hundred and eighty -eight, besides those that dyed of famine in 
sondry prisons :" but with this number of those who perished 
at the stake, and with any mention of those who perished by 
famine, thp pages of Dr. Lingard are not stained. 


less to cite further evidence. When Bonner is 
named, '* who knows not of his story?" Who 
has not read, that from him Elizabeth, at her 
accession to the throne, '* ^ turned aside, as from 
a man polluted with blood, who was a just ob- 
ject of horror to every heart susceptible of huma- 
nity ?" His successor, bishop Grindal, has left 
another exhibition of the *' real information^ 
which Dr. Lingard demands, in the last tribute 
which was paid to this miserable prelate. Bon- 
ner had been excommunicated : By the law 
therefore, Grindal says, '* '' Christian sepulture 
might have been denyed him. But we thought 
nott goode to deale so rigorouslye, and therfore 
permitted him to be buried in St. George's 
church-yarde ; and the same to be done nott in 
the daye solemnely, butt in the nighte privilye : 
which I, and some other with whome I con- 
ferred, thought requisite in that person for two 
causes. One was, I hearde that diverse his po- 
pishe cousins and frendes in London assembled 
themselves, entendynge to honor his funeralle so 
moche as they coude : of which honor such a per- 
secutor was nott ivorthy^ and speciallye in these 
dayes. Another was, for that I feared that the 
people of the cittie, (to whom Bo?mer in his life was 
odious,) if they had scene flockynge of Papistes 

* Hume, Hist, of Eng. and Burnet, vol. ii. 374. 
" Ellis's Original Letters, ii. p. 25 S. 


aboute his coffin, they would have been moved 
with indignation." 

But in relating the persecution under Mary, 
Dr. Lingard observes, that " fortunately for the 
professors of the ancient faith, Edward died 
before the code of ecclesiastical laws, supplied 
by Cranmer, had obtained the sanction of the 
legislature : by the accession of Mary the power 
of the sword passed from the hands of one reli- 
gious party to those of the other ; and within a 
short time Cranmer and his associates perished 
in the flames which they had prepared to kindle 
for their opponents." Hist. vol. 7. p. 258. We 
might, at the first reading of this melancholy 
passage, imagine that the persons who prepared 
and digested the body of laws, entitled Kefor^ 
matio Legum Ecclesiasticarum, (which is the code 
in question,) had all perished in like manner with 
the primate ; and that to these merciless pre- 
lates, divines, and lawyers, in all thirty-two, 
was meted out the punishment which they only 
had enacted. In this company there were indeed 
four or five, who were associates in martyrdom 
with Cranmer. And as to the persecuting code, 
it is called by Strype " a very noble enterprise ;" 
and by Burnet, *' that noble design, so near be- 
ing 'perfected in king Edward's days." It was 
not perfected ; that is, perhaps some hesitation 
still existed among the framers of the code as to 
the penalties recited in it, which in the mind of 



the king, or of Cranmer, is very likely to have 
prevailed ; but certainly it failed of being com- 
pleted or ratified, in consequence of the death 
of the king. As to an establishment of it, which 
indeed had been intended in the former reign, it 
cannot be said that ** the feet" of these associates 
of Cranmer " were swift to shed blood ;" for 
the design, when it was revived in 1549 by act 
of parliament, directed indeed the examination 
of the old and a compilation of new ecclesias- 
tical laws, but not absolutely the establishment 
of the altered code exactly at the end of the 
time prescribed for the important labour ; which 
was the term oi three years . And were Cranmer 
and his associates as active in exercising '' the 
power of the sword" in the reign of Edward, as 
by others it was exercised in the reign of Mary ? 
But they '^ intended it, as Dr. Lingard evidently 
insinuates ; and it may be sufficient in his esti- 
mation, perhaps, to condemn a Protestant for 
the supposed intention, and acquit the Ro- 
manist for the real act ; or it may be his hope 
to persuade the reader, that persecution was 
equally busy on both sides ; that even the as- 
sociates of Cranmer led the way to the atroci- 
ties of Mary's agents ; and that, in the present 

•^ Mr. Butler charitably says, that Cranmer and his asso- 
ciates nished Mary and her associates to be exposed to their 
projected persecutioHs. See the Bock of the Rom. Cath. 
Church, p. 205. 


case, the accomplished scholars and divines of 
the reign of Edward, of whose names the nation 
is proud, are to be dragged before the publick, 
exclaiming as it were, 

" * we but teach 

" Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return 
" To plague the inventor." 

But these learned men were not the inventors 
of such measures, nor the persecutors of hundreds 
of persons, or of tens. By their means severe 
laws of the former reign were repealed. From 
the school, in which they had been taught the 
lesson of persecution, they gathered indeed so 
much of the papal laws as pronounced the ty- 
ranny of putting men to death for their opi- 
nions ; and to the civil magistrate assigned the 
power, which had long been exercised by the 
pope, of punishing those who maintained here- 
tical opinions. It was by the decisions and 
practice of the Church of Rome for above six 
centuries, by the revived laws against hereticks, 
that the agents of Mary directed their pro- 
ceedings in regard to such persons. And hence 
originated '* the ^ foulest blot, on the character 
of the queen, her long and cruel persecution of 
the reformers;" the sacrifice of nearly three 

• Shakspeare, Macbeth. 

' Dr. LingarcFs own confession, Hist. vol. 7. p. 330. 


hundred persons at the stake, the death of others 
in prison and by famine, for not yielding their 
religious opinions ; and most of them for deny- 
ing transubstantiation. 

This brings us at once to the last days and 
hour of Cranmer, who " perished in the flames 
which" the Church of Rome in earlier times 
** had kindled," and which in the reign of Mary 
raged with redoubled fury. With no concession 
to the ^ weakness of human nature, with no ac- 
knowledgment of the fallen prelate's self-con- 
viction. Dr. Lingard thus introduces him. " He 
had not the fortitude to look death in the face. 
To save his life, he feigned himself a convert to 
the established creed ; openly condemned his 
past delinquency ; and, stifling the remorse of 
his conscience, in seven successive instruments 
abjured the faith which he had taught, and 
approved of that which he had opposed." Hist. 
vol. 7. p. 274. Not a syllable follows of the 
subtilty, with which the fortitude of the Arch- 
bishop had been assailed and subdued ; nor of 
the manner by which the instruments of abjura- 
tion were procured, and in which they appeared. 
Dr. Lingard would not willingly, I am per- 
suaded, augment the degradation of Cranmer: 
but to the six instruments of the Archbishop's 

^ ** We may admire inflexible constancy; but it becomes 
very few of us to insult over such weakness." Dr. Sturges, 
Answ. to Dr. Milner, 2nd edit. p. 1B2, 


abjuration, published by Bonner, he has for the 
first time in the page of history mistakenly 
added a seventh. It is necessary here to copy at 
length what the indefatigable and accurate 
Strype has recorded. 

** •* Other historians speak of the Archbishop's 
recantation, which he made upon the incessant 
solicitations and temptations of the popish zea- 
lots at Oxford. Which unworthy compliance 
he was at last prevailed with to submit to, partly 
by the flattery and terror suggested to him, and 
partly by the hardship of his own straight im- 
prisonment. Our writers mention only one re- 
cantation ; and that Fox hath set down ; wherein 
they follow him. But this is but an imperfect 
relation of this good man's frailty. I shall there- 
fore endeavour to set down this piece of his his- 
tory more distinctly. There were several re- 
canting writings to which he had subscribed one 
after another : for after the unhappy prelate by 
over persuasion wrote one paper with his sub- 
scription set to it, which he thought to pen so 
favourably and dexterously for himself, that he 
might evade both the danger from the state, and 
the danger of his conscience too ; that would not 
serve, but another was required as explanatory 
of that. And when he had complied with that, 
yet either because writ too briefly or too ambi- 

■• Eccl. Mem. vol. iii. p. 232. 


guously, neither would that serve, but drew on 
a third, fuller and more expressive than the for- 
mer. Nor could he escape so : but still o. fourth 
diXidi Jifth paper of recantation were demanded of 
him to be more large and particular. Nay, and 
lastly a sivth, which was very prolix, containing 
an acknowledgment of all the forsaken and de- 
tested errors and superstitions of Rome, an ab- 
horrence of his own books, and a vilifying of 
himself as a persecutor, a blasphemer, and a 
mischief-maker ; nay, and as the wickedest 
wretch that lived. And this was not all ; but 
after they had thus humbled and mortified the 
miserable man with recantations, subscriptions, 
submissions, and abjurations, putting luords into 
his mouth which his heai^t abhorred; by all this 
drudgery they would not permit him to redeem 
his unhappy life; but prepared him a renunciatory 
oration to pronounce publickly in St. Marys Church, 
(Oxford,) immediately before he was led forth to 
burning. But here he gave his enemies, insatia- 
ble in their reproaches of him, a notable disap- 
pointment. They verily thought that when they 
had brought him thus far, he would still have 
said as they would have him. But herein their 
politicks failed them ; and by this last stretch of 
the cord all was undone, which they with so 
much art and labour had effected before. For 
the reverend man began indeed his speech ac- 
cording to their appointment and pleasure ; but 


in the process of^it, at that very cue when he 
was to own the Pope and his superstitions, and 
to revoke his own book and doctrine of the Sa- 
crament, (which was to be brought in by this 
preface, that one th'mg above all the rest troubled 
his co7iscience beyond all that ever he did in his life,) 
he, on the contrary, to their great astonishment 
and vexation, made that preface serve to his re- 
vocation and abhorrence of his former e.vtorted sub- 
scriptions, and to his free owning and standing to his 
book ivrote against Transubstantiatioji, and the 
avowing the evangelical doctrines he had before 

To the preceding passage Dr. Wordsworth 
has subjoined his own acute observation, that 
** ' notwithstanding all the researches of the his- 
torians, it cannot, I think, be denied, that this 
part of Cranmer's story is involved in great ob- 
scurity and uncertainty. That he made a sub- 
mission and recantation, cannot be doubted : 
but I own, I know not how to reconcile si.v seve- 
ral submissions, and the nature of them, their 
dates, &c. with other circumstances of the nar- 
rative. We are not told the precise period at 
which he was removed to the lodgings of the 
dean of Christ Church, and plied with the seve- 
ral ^ topicks, and arts of seduction, enumerated 

' Eccl. Biography, vol. ili. p. 591. 

'' Especially with the promise of his life being spared, and 
with suggestions that yet he might live many years, and yet 


by Fox. But let it be observed, that the 14th 
of February was the day of his degradation, at 
which time, surely, the Archbishop's behaviour 
gave no warnings of his lamentable fall : and yet 
the fourth submission, as published by Bonner, 
(and it should seem that they are ranged chro- 
nologically,) is dated on the 16th of the same 
month, only two days after. There are other 
very suspicious circumstances accompanying 
Bonner's publication. But the above remark, I 
think, is alone sufficient to shew, that this part 
of the narrative requires further elucidation." 

Indeed there are very ^ suspicious circum- 
stances attending the publication of the six ab- 
jurations. Dr. Lingard says, " there is an entry 
in the Council- Book of March 13, ordering the 
printers, Rydall and Copland, to give up the 
printed copies of Cranmer's recantation to be 
burned. (Burnet, vol. iii. p. 179.) Perhaps it 
was incorrectly printed: perhaps they waited 

enjoy dignity or ease, or both. This was no new artifice of the 
Romanists of that period, when a Protestant was to be reco- 
vered to their church. To the martyr, Dr. Rowland Taylor, 
it was accordingly urged, though in vain, as to producing any 
recantation, just as it had been successfully urged to Cranmer : 
" You are a man of goodly personage, in your best strength, 
and by nature like to live many years ; and, without doubt, 
you should in time come to be in as good reputation as ever 
you were, or rather better," &c. Fox, Acts ^nd Mon. 

' Camerarius, in his Life of Melancthon, seems to suspect 
the subscriptions. Vita P. Mel. 1655, p. 340. 


for that whifh, he said, God would inspire him 
to make." Hist. vol. 7. p. 276. The date of 
the order, in this extract, is the eighth day pre- 
ceding the martyrdom of Cranmer. But the 
order which I will copy, appears to have been 
dated three days later. I shall premise, what 
Burnet has fairly told, and Dr. Lingard unfairly 
concealed, ** "" that the Privy Council ivere con- 
cerned, when they heard that Cranmefs paper of 
recantatio7i was published.'''' This is the entry in 
the Council Book : ** ** A recognisance entred 
into by one Ryddall and Coplande prynters, that 
they will deliver forthwith to Mr. Cawood the 
queen's Majesties printer all such bookes as 
they of late printed concerning Cranmer's re- 
cantation to be by the said Cawoode burnt, 
dat. xvi March, 1555." The sneer and the con- 
jectures of Dr. Lingard, in regard to this order, 
we have seen. Let us now observe what the 
learned Whiston, in defending the Archbishop, 
has said ; that " ° if the Privy Council had been 
satisfied that this recantation was genuine, their 
procedure seems not a little absurd and incredi- 
ble. It is much more likely that the Council 
ordered it to be burnt as a known forgery, and as 

■» Burnet, vol. iii. p. 179. 

" From the Orig. MS. by Bishop Kennet. Lansdowne MSS. 
Brit. Mus. No. 980, p. 189. 

° An Enquiry into the Evidence of Archbishop Cranmer's 
Recantation, &c, 1736, p. IC, 



capable of raising a groundless corffpassion and 
indignation in the people, when they should be- 
lieve Cranmer was become a thorough Roman 
Catholick, and yet was to be burnt as an obsti- 
nate Protestant heretick." However, after a 
few days, the recantations, certainly with some 
palpable fabrications in them, were entrusted to 
the press of Cawood, and appeared with the 
sanction both of royal and episcopal authority. 
Bonner, bishop of London, is said in the title- 
page to have e.vamined it; and it was printed 
cum privikgio, that is^ with Mary's express per- 

Now to the words in this authorized publica- 
tion, jjretemUng to be those of the Archbishop, is 
prefixed this direction, " ^ Here to declare the 
Queues just title to the crowne ;" at once betraying 

P From the publication of Bonner, entitled, " All the Sub- 
myssyons and Recantations of Thomas Cranmer, late Arche- 
byshop of Canterburye, iruely set forth both in Latyn and 
Englysh, agreable to the originalles, wrytten and subscribed 
with his owne hande. Visum et examinatum per reverendum 
patrem et dominum, Edmundum, Episcopum London. Anno 
MDLVI. Excusum Lond. in sedibus J. Cawodi, Typogr. 
Regiae Majest. cum privilegio." Sign. B. i. b. This publica- 
tion in its original form is very rarely to be met with ; as though 
not called in by authority to be burnt, it is supposed to have 
been by the Romanists, in after times, for obvious reasons, sup- 
pressed as much as possible. From an original copy I have 
made my extracts. Strype has printed the whole, interspersed 
with his remarks. Eccl. Mem. vol. iii. p. 233, et seq. 


a part of what had been '^ prepared for the martyr 
by others, not what he uttered himself. The 
words are as follow. *"^ And now I come to the 
great thing that so much troubleth my consci- 
ence, more than any other thing that ever I did ; 
and that is, setting abroad untrue books and wri- 
tings contrary to the truth of God's Word, which 

•J Dr. Lingard observes, that on the morning of his execution 
Cranmer transcribed and signed a paper ; and giving to Gar- 
cina, the Spanish friar, who was directed to attend him, " one 
copy of it, retained the other for his own use. But when the 
friar was gone, he appears to have made a second copy, in 
which, entirely omitting the fourth article, the assertion of the 
queen's right, he substituted, in lieu of the confession contained 
in the fifth, a disavowal of the six retractations which he had 
already made." Hist. vol. 7, p. 278. Dr. Lingard then must 
suppose, what is irreconcilable with all the circumstances, that 
though Cranmer gave the friar a copy of his paper in which the 
assertion of the queen's right was made, and which, as he ob- 
serves, the Archbishop entirely omitted, Bonner would be so 
moderate as not to have printed it ! This egregious super- 
intendant of the publication of Cranmer's recantations, having 
the effrontery to publish to the world the very contrary to 
what Cranmer professed as if it had been approved and pro- 
nounced by him, here forgot to fabricate the fourth article, or 
assertion of the queen's right ; and, relying on the deluded 
primate's complete submission, prepared for him only the hint 
on which he was to speak: " Here to declare the quenes just 
title to the crowne." Dr. Milner, strange to tell, refers to 
these recantations in Strype, as if taken from the Lambeth Re- 
cords ! Strict, on Southey, p. 61. Not a syllable on the sub-, 
ject is in the Lambeth Records ; nor indeed has Strype named 

' From the Submjssyons, &c. sign. B. i. b. B. ii. a. 


now I renounce and condemn, and infuse them utterly 
as erro7ieous and none of mine. But you must know 
also what books they were, that you may beware of 
them ; or else my conscience is not discharged. For 
they be the books which I wrote against the Sacra- 
7nent of the Altar, since the death of King Henry 
the Eighth. But whatsoever I wrote then, now is 
time and place to say truth. Wherefore renouncing 
all those books, and whatsoever is in them contained, 
I say and believe, that our Saviour Christ Jesus is 
really and substantially contained in the blessed Sa- 
crament of the Altar, under the forms of bread and 

Now the real words of Cranmer (those which 
are printed in the preceding extract, in Italick 
letters, not being his,) have been 'preserved by 
Fox, in his Acts and Monuments ; and agree 
minutely with the speech, taken ut the time by 

^ Fox thus abridges the narration : " the Archbishop revokes 
his former recantations, and repents the same; stands to his 
book ; deceives the expectation of the Papists ; and throws 
them into great rage." Burnet, in his History of the Refor- 
mation, says, that the Archbishop, after their last extortion of 
subscriptions from him, " still conceiving some jealousy that 
they might burn him, wrote secretly a paper, containing a sin- 
cere confession of his faith, such as flowed from his conscience, 
and not from his fears ; and being brought out, he carried that 
along with him." The historian then gives the substance of 
this paper, precisely corresponding with what is found in Fox, 
and what is related by the Papist who attended the last moments 
of the martyr. 


a papist, who was an eye and ear witness to the 
last moments of the martyr. 

From the honest, plain, and uncontradicted 
testimony, therefore of the papist, an adversary 
of the Archbishop, the genuine speech here fol- 
lows ; such testimony convincing us, that when 
death approached, Cranmer had *' the fortitude 
to look it in the face ;" convincing us also of the 
baseness practised by those who, to the act of 
martyring him, scrupled not to join the fabrica- 
tion we have just seen. 

These, then, are the true words : *' ' And now 
I come to the great thing that troubleth my con- 
science more than any other thing that ever I 
said or did in my life ; and that is, the setting 
abroad things contrary to the truth ; which here 
I now renounce and refuse, as things written 
with my hand, contrary to the truth which I 
thought in my heart, and writ for fear of death, 
and to save my life, if it might be ; and that is, 
all such bills, which I have written or signed 
with mine own hand since my degradation ; 
wherein I have written many things untrue. 
And forasmuch as my hand offended in writing 
contrary to my heart, therefore my hand shall 
first be punished ; for if I may come to the fire, 

' This account of Cranmer's end, related by a Papist to his 
friend in a letter from Oxford, which is of considerable length 
and very circumstantial, is given by Strype in his Life of Cran- 
mer, b. iii. ch. 21. 


it shall be first burned. And as for the Pope, I 
refuse him, as Christ's enemy and antichrist, 
with all his false doctrine. And here, being ad- 
monished of his recantation and dissembling, he 
said, Alas, my lord, I have been a man that all 
my life loved plainness, and never dissembled 
till now against the truth ; which I am most 
sorry for. He added hereunto, that, for the Sa- 
crament, he believed as he had taught in his 
" book against the bishop of Winchester. And 
here he was " suffered to speak no more. Com- 
ing to the stake with a cheerful countenance 
and willing mind, he put off his garments with 
haste. Fire being now put to him, he stretched 
out his right hand, and thrust it into the flame ; 
and held it there a good space before the fire 
came to any other part of his body, where his 

" See the account of this book in the present Introduction, 
p. xi. et seq. 

" In his disputation with the Papists on Transubstantiation 
and the Mass, he had in like manner not been suffered to speak 
all he wished. " Such haste was made, that no answer could 
be suffered to be taken fully to any argument, before another 
brought a new argument, &c." And Ridley, who was con- 
cerned with him in the same disputation, has recorded that he 
" never saw or heard any thing done or handled more vainly, 
or tumultuously," than this disputation was by their papistical 
opponents, who compelled them, after every kind of outrage 
and insult, to leave oir the reading their arguments and their 
proofs. Fox, in his Acts and Monuments, has preserved at 
large these memorials of literary as well as religious cruelty. 


hand was seen of every man sensibly burning ; 
crying with a loud voice, ** ^ This hand hath 

Such was the end of Archbishop Cranmer, 
over whose weakness, as well as strength, the 
Romanists triumphed ; but of whom it may be 
also said, in the history of his abjuration, that 
** ^ out of weakness he was made strong, and 
waxed valiant;" regardless of the base denial 
of their promised pardon, and punishing as far 
as he could his own unworthy submission to the 
treacherous conditions of it. 

Whoever attentively considers the character 
of Cranmer, will agree with * one of his biogra- 
phers, that the light in which he appears to most 
advantage, is in that of a reformer, conducting 
the great work of a religious establishment. 
That work for near three centuries has " " stood 
like a tower." And is it now to be assailed, with 
the hope of shaking it, by the revived enginery of 
early and of midway opponents ? Is it possible 
that the misrepresentations of former days, the 
distortions of ancient facts, supported by in- 
sinuating diction and ingenious arrangement, 
should lead us to believe that the labours of 
Cranmer were ill-directed, and that his great 

5 ** His eyes were lifted up to heaven," says Fox, " and often- 
times he repeated his unworthy right hand, so long as his voice 
would suffer him." 

' Heb. xi. 34. * Gilpin. '' Milton, P. L-. 



work is not worth defence ? Forbid it, truth ; 
forbid it, honour ; forbid it, liberty. And to 
the '^ doubts or queries whether happiness, 
and wisdom, and improvement in morals, and 
the revival of letters, have been promoted by 
this great work, the Reformation, the sublime 
words of one of its noblest children might be a 
sufficient answer, if a passage of very animated 
eloquence upon the subject, from a production 
honoured by the University of Oxford, did not 
also present itself as worthy to be generally 
known and admired ; with which I shall finish 
what I have collected, and what I urge, in be- 
half of Archbishop Cranmer, and of the Refor- 
mation in England. 

And first, in the words of Milton ; '' "^ When 
I recall to mind at last, after so many dark 
ages, wherein the huge overshadowing train of 
error had almost swept all the stars out of the 
firmament of the church ; how the bright and 
blissful Reformatio??., by Divine Power, struck 
through the black and settled night of ignorance 
and antichristian tyranny, methinks a sovereign 

" They are expressed by Mr. Butler in his Book of the Ro- 
inan Cath. Church, p. 1G7, et seq. Need I refer Mr. Butler 
also for an answer to the fine observations of Blackstone upon 
the Reformation, at the close of his excellent Commentaries on 
the laws of England ? The learned members of Mr. Butler's 
communion will hardly be obliged by his queries. 

'' Of Reformation in England, B. 1. 


and reviving joy must needs rush into the bosom 
of him that reads, or hears ; and the sweet odour 
of the returning Gospel imbathe his soul with 
the fragrancy of heaven. Then was the sacred 
Bible sought out of the dusty corners where 
profane falsehood and neglect had thrown it ; 
the schools opened ; divine and human learning- 
raked out of the embers of forgotten tongues ; 
the princes and cities trooping apace to the new- 
erected banner of salvation ; the martyrs, with 
the unresistible might of weakness, shaking the 
powers of darkness, and scorning the fiery rage 
of the old red dragon." 

Lastly, let us mark the observation made 
in our own times. ** "" The Reformation, that 
great spring-time of English literature ; the 
nativity, as it were, and very cradle of our 
national genius. For the children of the Re- 
formation are, indeed, the great supporters 
and pedestals of our national fame. To the 
Reformation we are indebted for Hooker, and 
Hall, and Chillingworth, and even for the flower 
of our countrymen, Milton. Nor can it be 
doubted, but that those agitations and con- 
vulsions of the publick mind, which ever accom- 
pany any great change in publick opinion, es- 
pecially on matters of such eternal importance, 

* A Comparative Estimate of the English Literature of tlie 
seventeenth and eighteenth Centuries, by Richard Burden of 
Oriel College ; a prize Essay, recited in the Theatre at Oxford, 
in the year 1814. p. 2U. et seq. 


are highly favourable to the excitation of dor- 
mant genius, the evolution of latent powers. 
They say to the sluggard, arise; and to the 
secret one, come forth. They speak with a voice 
which not even the obstinacy of inveterate indo- 
lence can resist, which penetrated even to the 
dark cells of superstition. At the Reformation 
the mind first again recovered its liberty, and 
resulted back to its native independence of 
thinking. This was that universal and truly 
Catholick emancipation, that Egyptian deliver- 
ance, that enlargement and liberation of the 
soul, that manumission of the spirit, whereby it 
was rescued from the subtleties of the school- 
men, the vanities of a fearful ignorance; and 
having escaped as a bird out of the snare of the 
fowler, it took its flight from earth, to bring 
down fire from heaven. But what was more 
than all this, the writers of that day had their 
imaginations warmed, and their conceptions 
elevated, by that constant conversation with the 
Scriptures, which the Reformation excited ; the 
Scriptures, those abundant repertories of all that 
is vast in thought, stupendous in imagery, and 
magnificent in language. To these fountains of 
sublime truth they made their daily pilgrimage, 
and their nightly visitations. Here it is that we 
must look for the reason, why there are passages 
in Hooker, which might have done honour to 
Shakspeare ; passages, such as we now search 
for in vain either in poetry, or in prose." 

















The first is of the True and Catholick Doctrine and 
Use of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of 
our Saviour Christ ------ 9 

The second is against the Error of Transubstantia- 
tion 43 

The third teacheth the Manner how Christ is pre- 
sent in his Holy Supper - - - - -101 

The fourth is of the Eating and Drinking of the 
Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ - - 198 

The fifth Book is of the Oblation and Sacrifice of 
our Saviour Christ 229 







The abuse of the Lord's Supper - - -9 

The eating of the body of Christ - - - 10 

The eating of the sacrament of his body -■ - 12 

Christ calleth the material bread his body - -15 

Evil men do eat the sacrament but not the body of Christ 1 G 
Things sufficient for a Christian man's faith, concerning 

this sacrament - - - - - 1 7 
The sacrament which was ordained to make love and con- 
cord, is turned into the occasion of variance and discord 17 
The spiritual hunger and thirstiness of the soul - 19 
The spiritual food of the soul - - - 22 
Christ far excelleth all corporeal food - - - 25 
The sacraments were ordained to confirm our faith - 25 
Wherefore this sacrament was ordained in bread and wine 2& 
The unity of Christ's mystical body - - - 29 
This sacrament moveth all men to love and friendship - 30 
The doctrine oFTransubstantiation doth clean subvert our 

faith in Christ - - - - - 31 

The spiritual eating is with the heart, not with the teeth 32 

The principal errors of the Papists - - - 36 

The first is of Transubstantiation - - - Sd 

The second is of the Prenence of Christ in Uiis sacrauient SfJ 



The third is, that evil men eat and drink the very body 

and blood of f!hrist - - - - 41 

[And a fourth error is, that Christ is offered every day for 

remission of sins] - - - - - 41 


The confutation of the error of Transubstantiation - 43 

The Papistical doctrine is contrary to God's word - 44 

The Papistical doctrine is against reason - - 50 

The Papistical doctrine is also against our senses •• 52 
The Papistical doctrine is contrary to the faith of the old 

authors of Christ's church - - - - 54 
Transubstantiation came from Rome - - - 69. 
The first reason of the Papists to prove their Transubstan- 
tiation - • - - - - 71 
The second argument for Transubstantiation - -75 
Authors wrested by the Papists for their Transubstantiation 78 
Negatives by comparison - - - - 82 
Absurdities that follow of Transubstantiation - - 97 


The presence of Christ in the sacrament - - 101 
Christ corporally is ascended into heaven - - 102 
The difference between the true and the Papistical doc- 
trine concerning the presence of Christ's body - 103 
The proof whereof by our profession in our common creed 107 
Another proof by the holy Scripture - - - 108 
Also another proof by ancient authors - - - 109 
One body cannot be in divers places at one time - 116 
An answer to the Papists, alleging for them these words, 

*' This is my body " - - - - 124 

The argument of the Papists - - - - 124 

The interpretation of these words, " This is my body" - 124 

Christ called bread his body, and wine his blood - 120 

Bread is my body, wine is my blood, be figurative speeches 131 



To eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood, be figurative 
speeches - - - -. - -132 

This is my body, this is my blood, be figurative speeches 1 38 
The bread representeth Christ's body, and the wine his 

blood - - - - - - 138 

Signs and figures have the names of the things which they 
signify - - - - - -111 

Five principal things to be noted in Theodoretus - 155 

Figurative speeches be not strange - - - 158 

Christ himself used figurative speeches - - 158 

The Paschal Lamb - - - - - 160 

The Lord's Supper - - - - -161 

What figurative speeches were used at Christ's last supper 163 

Answers to the authorities and arguments of the Papists 164 

One brief answer to all - - - - 164 

The answers to all the doctors - - - 166 


Whether evil men do eat and drink Christ - - 198 

The godly only eat Christ - - - - 198 
What is the eating of Christ's flesh, and drinking of his 

blood --...- 200 

Christ is not eaten with teeth, but with faith - - 201 

The good only eat Christ _ _ _ . 202 
The answer to the Papists that do aflfirm that the evil do 

eat Christ's body, &c. - - - - 215 
The answer to the Papists' authors, which, at the first shew, 

seem to make for them - - - - 216 
Figures be called by the names of the things which they 

signify ------ 219 

The adoration of the sacrament - - - 221 

The simple people be deceived - - - 221 

They be the Papists that have deceived the people - 227 
An exhortation to the true honouring of Christ in the 

sacrament ------ 228 



The sacrifice of the mass > _ . . 229 
The difference between tlie sacrifice of Christ, and of the 

priests of the old law ... - 230 

Two kinds of sacrifices - - - - 232 

Tlie sacrifice of Christ - - - - 232 

A more plain declaration of the sacrifice of Christ - 234 
The sacrifices of the old law _ - - - 235 
The mass is not a sacrifice propitiatory - - 237 
A confutation of the Papists' cavillation - - 238 
The true sacrifice of all Christian people - - 239 
The Popish mass is detestable idolatry, utterly to be ba- 
nished from all Christian congregations - - 241 
Every man ought to receive the sacrament himself, and 
not one for another - - - - 242 

The difference between the priest and the layman - 243 
The answer to the Papists, concerning the sacrifice pro- 
pitiatory - - - - - -244 

An answer tu the authors - - - - 246 

The lay persons make a sacrifice as well as the priest - 248 
The Papistical mass is neither a sacrifice propitiatory, nor 

of thanksgiving - - - - - 249 

There were no Papistical masses in the primitive church - 249 
The causes and means how Papistical masses entered into 

the church - - - - - 252 

The abuses of the Papistical masses . - - 252 

Which church is to be followed - - - 253 

A short instruction to the holy communion - - 254 



Our Saviour Christ Jesus, according to the 
will of his Eternal Father, when the time thereto 
was fully accomplished, taking our nature upon 
him, came into this world, from the high throne 
of his Father, to declare unto miserable sinners 
good news ; to heal them that were sick ; to 
make the blind to see ; the deaf to hear; and the 
dumb to speak ; to set prisoners at liberty ; to 
shew that the time of grace and mercy was 
come ; to give light to them that were in dark- 
ness and in the shadow of death; and to preach 
and give pardon and full remission of sin to all 
his elected. And to perform the same, he made 
a sacrifice and oblation of his own body upon the 
cross, which was a full redemption, satisfaction, 
and propitiation, for the sins of the whole world. 
And to commend this his sacrifice unto all his 
faithful people, and to confirm their faith and 
hope of eternal salvation in the same, he hath 
ordained a perpetual memory of his said sacri 



fice, daily to be used in the church to his perpe- 
tual laud and praise, and to our singular comfort 
and consolation ; that is to say, the celebration 
of his holy supper, wherein he doth not cease to 
give himself, with all his benefits, to all those that 
duly receive the same supper, according* to his 
blessed ordinance. But the Romish Antichrist, 
to deface this great benefit of Christ, hath taught 
that his sacrifice upon the cross is not sufficient 
hereunto, without another sacrifice devised by 
him, and made by the priest, or else without in- 
dulgences, beads, pardons, pilgrimages, and such 
other pelfry, to supply Christ's imperfection. 
And that Christian people cannot apply to them- 
selves the benefits of Christ's passion, but that 
the same is in the distribution of the bishop of 
Rome, or else that by Christ we have no full re- 
mission, but be delivered only from sin, and yet 
remaineth temporal pain in purgatory due for 
the same, to be remitted after this life by the 
Romish Antichrist and his ministers, who take 
upon them to do for us that thing, which Christ 
either would not or could not do. O heinous 
blasphemy and most detestable injury against 
Christ ; O wicked abomination in the temple of 
God ; O pride intolerable of Antichrist, and most 
manifest token of the son of perdition, extolling 
himself above God, and with Lucifer exalting 
his seat and power above the throne of God ! 
For he that taketh upon him to supply that 


thing, which he pretendeth to be imperfect in 
Christ, must needs make himself above Christ, 
and so very Antichrist. For what is this else, 
but to be against Christ, and to bring him into 
contempt as one that either for lack of charity 
would not, or for lack of power he could not, 
with all his blood- shedding and death, clearly 
deliver his faithful, and give them full remission 
of their sins, but that the full perfection thereof 
must be had at the hands of Antichrist of Rome 
and his ministers ? What man of knowledge and 
zeal to God's honour can with dry eyes see this 
injury to Christ, and look upon the state of reli- 
gion brought in by the Papists, perceiving the 
true sense of God's word subverted by false 
glosses of man's devising, the true Christian re- 
ligion turned into certain hypocritical and super- 
stitious sects, the people praying with their 
mouths and hearing with their ears they wist not 
what, and so ignorant in God's word, that they 
could not discern hypocrisy and superstition 
from true and sincere religion ? This was of late 
years the face of religion within this realm of 
England, and yet remaineth in divers realms. 
But (thanks be to Almighty God and to the 
king's majesty, with his father, a prince of most 
famous memory,) the superstitious sects of monks 
and friars, that were in this realm, be clean 
taken away; the Scripture is restored unto the 
proper and true understanding; the people may 


daily read and hear God's heavenly word, and 
pray in their own language which they under- 
stand, so that their hearts and mouths may go 
together, and be none of those people of whom 
Christ complained, saying, ** These people ho- 
nour me with their lips, but their hearts be far 
from me ^." Thanks be to God, many corrupt 
weeds be plucked up, which were wont to rot 
the flock of Christ, and to let the growing of the 
Lord's harvest. 

But what availeth it to take away beads, par- 
dons, pilgrimages, and such other like Popery, 
so long as the chief roots remain unpulled up ? 
whereof, so long as they remain, will spring 
again all former impediments of the Lord's har- 
vest, and corruption of his flock. The rest is 
but branches and leaves, the cutting away 
whereof is but like topping and lopping of a 
tree, or cutting down of weeds, leaving the body 
standing, and the roots in the ground ; but the 
very body of the tree, or rather the roots of the 
weeds, is the Popish doctrine of Transubstantia- 
tion, of the real presence of Christ's flesh and 
blood in the sacrament of the altar, (as they call 
it,) and of the sacrifice and oblation of Christ 
made by the priest for the salvation of the quick 
and the dead. Which roots, if they be suffered 
to grow in the Lord's vineyard, they will over- 

* Matt. XV. 


Spread all the ground again with the old errors 
and superstitions. These injuries to Christ be 
so intolerable, that no Christian heart can wil- 
lingly bear them. Wherefore seeing that many 
have set to their hands, and whetted their tools, 
to pluck up the weeds, and to cut down the tree 
of error, I, not knowing otherwise how to excuse 
myself at the last day, have in this book set to 
my hand and axe with the rest to cut down this 
tree, and to pluck up the weeds and plants by 
the roots, which our heavenly Father never 
planted, but were grafted and sown in his vine- 
yard by his adversary the devil, and Antichrist, 
his minister. The Lord grant, that this my tra- 
vail and labour in his vineyard be not in vain, 
but that it may prosper and bring forth good 
fruits to his honour and glory. For when I see 
his vineyard overgrown with thorns, brambleSj 
and weeds, I know that everlasting woe apper- 
taineth unto me, if I hold my peace, and put not 
to my hands and tongue to labour in purging 
his vineyard. God I take to witness, (who seeth 
the hearts of all men thoroughly unto the bot- 
tom,) that I take this labour for none other con- 
sideration, but for the glory of his name, and the 
discharge of my duty, and the zeal that I bear 
toward the flock of Christ. I know in what 
office God hath placed me, and to what purpose ; 
that is to say, to set forth his word truly unto his 
people, to the uttermost of my power, without 


respect of person, or regard of thing in the 
world, but of Him alone. I know what account 
I shall make to Him hereof at the last day, when 
every man shall answer for his vocation, and re- 
ceive for the same, good or ill, according as he 
hath done. I know how Antichrist hath ob- 
scured the glory of God, and the true knowledge 
of his word, overcasting the same with mists 
and clouds of error and ignorance, through false 
glosses and interpretations. It pitieth me to 
see the simple and hungry flock of Christ led 
into corrupt pastures, to be carried blindfold, 
they know not whither, and to be fed with poi- 
son in the stead of wholesome meats. 

And moved by the duty, office, and place, 
whereunto it hath pleased God to call me, I give 
warning in his name unto all that profess Christy 
that they flee far from Babylon, if they will save 
their souls, and to beware of that great harlot, 
that is to say, the pestiferous see of Rome, that 
she make you not drunk with her pleasant wine. 
Trust not her sweet promises, nor banquet 
with her ; for instead of wine she will give you 
sour dregs, and for meat she will feed you with 
rank poison. But come to our Redeemer and 
Saviour Christ, who refresheth all that truly 
come unto him, be their anguish and heaviness 
never so great. Give credit unto him, in whose 
mouth was never found guile, nor untruth. By 
him you shall be clearly delivered from all your 


diseases, of him you shall have full remission, 
a poena et a culpa. He it is that feedeth continu- 
ally, all that belong unto him, with his own flesh 
that hanged upon the cross ; and giveth them 
drink of the blood flowing out of his own side, 
and maketh to spring within them water that 
floweth unto everlasting life. Listen not to the 
false incantations, sweet whisperings, and crafty 
jugglings of the subtle Papists, wherewith they 
have this many years deluded and bewitched 
the world, but hearken to Christ, give ear unto 
his words; which shall lead you the right way 
unto everlasting life, there with him to live ever 
as heirs of his kingdom. Amen^ 






The Supper of the Lord, otherwise called the chap. 
Holy Communion, or Sacrament of the Body 

and Blood of our Saviour Christ, hath been of oftheLod's 
many men, and by sundry ways, very much ^^^^^' 
abused ; but especially within these four or five 
hundred years. Of some it hath been used as a 
sacrifice propitiatory for sin, and otherwise su- 
perstitiously, far from the intent that Christ did 
first ordain the same at the beginning ; doing 
therein great wrong and injury to his death and 
passion. And of other some it hath been very 
lightly esteemed, or rather condemned and de- 


spised, as a thing of small or none effect. And 
thus between both the parties hath been much 
variance and contention in divers places of 
Christendom. Therefore to the intent that this 
holy Sacrament, or Lord's Supper, may hereafter 
neither of the one party be contemned or lightly 
esteemed, nor of the other party be abused to 
any other purpose than Christ himself did first 
appoint and ordain the same ; and that, so, the 
contention on both parties may be quieted and 
ended ; the most sure and plain way is, to cleave 
unto holy Scripture. Wherein whatsoever is 
found, must be taken for a most sure ground and 
an infallible truth ; and whatsoever cannot b6 
grounded upon the same (touching our faith) is 
man's device, changeable and uncertain. And 
therefore here are set forth the very words that 
Christ himself and his apostle St. Paul spake, 
both of the eating and drinking of Christ's body 
and blood, and also of the eating and drinking of 
the sacrament of the same. 
CHAP. First, as concerning the eating of the body 

^^ and drinking of the blood of our Saviour Christ, 

'^HhTboiy ^^^ speaketh himself, in the sixth chapter of St. 

of Christ. JqIih^ JH ^{^18 ^Jgg . 

*' Verily, verily I say unto you, except you 
eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his 
blood, you have no life in you. Whoso eateth 
my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal 
life^ and I will raise him up at the last day. For 

OF THE lord's SUPPER. I! 

my flesh is very meat, and my blood is very 
drink. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh 
my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him. As the 
living Father hath sent me, and I live by the 
Father, even so he that eateth me, shall live by 
me. This is the bread which came down from 
heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, 
and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall 
live for ever^" 

Of these words of Christ % it is plain and ma- 
nifest, that the eating of Christ's flesh, and drink- 
ing of his blood, is not like to the eating and 
drinking of other meats and drinks. For al- 
though without meat and drink man cannot live, 
yet it followeth not, that he that eateth, and 
drinketh, shall live for ever. 

But as touching this meat and drink of the 
body and blood of Christ, it is true, both he 
that eateth and drinketh them, hath everlasting 
life ; and also he that eateth and drinketh them 
not, hath not everlasting life. For to eat that 
meat and drink that drink, is to dwell in Christ, 
and to have Christ dwelling in him ^. 

And therefore no man can say or think % that 
he eateth the body of Christ or drinketh his 
blood, except he dwelleth in Christ, and hath 
Christ dwelling in him. Thus have ye heard of 

'' John vi. «; Augustin. in Joan. Tractat. 26. 

'* Eodem tract. « Aug. de Civitate, lib. 21. cap. 25, 


the eating and drinking of the very flesh and 
blood of our Saviour Christ. 
CHAP. Now as touching the sacraments of the same, 
* — our Saviour Christ did institute them in bread 

ofthesacfa- and wiuc, at his last supper, which he had with 
body. his apostles the night before his death, at which 
time, (as St. Matthew saith,) 

" When they were eating, Jesus took breads 
and when he had given thanks, he brake it^ gave 
it to his disciples, and said. Take, eat, this is my 
body. And he took the cup, and when he had 
given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink 
ye all of this, for this is my blood of the New Tes- 
tament, that is shed for many, for the remission 
of sins. But^l say unto you, I will not drink 
henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that 
day, when I shall drink it new with you in my 
Father's kingdom ^" 

This thing is rehearsed also of St. Mark, in 
these words : 

** As they did eat, Jesus took bread, and 
when he had blessed, he brake it, and gave it 
to them, and said, Take, eat, this is my body : 
and taking the cup, when he had given thanks, 
he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. 
And he said to them, This is my blood of the 
New Testament, which is shed for many. Ve- 
rily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the 

' Matt. xxvi. 

OF THE lord's SUPPEU. 13 

fruit of the vine, until that day that 1 drink it 
new in the kingdom of God ^." 

The Evangelist St. Luke uttereth this matter 
on this wise. 

*' When the hour was come, he sat down, and 
the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto 
them, I have greatly desired to eat this pascha 
with you before I suffer. For I say unto you, 
Henceforth I will not eat of it any more, until it 
be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he 
took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take 
this, and divide it among you. For I say unto 
you, 1 will not drink of the fruit of the vine, 
until the kingdom of God come. And he took 
bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake 
it, and gave it unto them, saying, This is my 
body, which is given for you. This do in re- 
membrance of me. Likewise also when he had 
supped, he took the cup, saying, This cup is the 
New Testament in my blood, which is shed for 

Hitherto you have heard all that the Evange- 
lists declare, that Christ spake or did at his last 
supper, concerning the institution of the com- 
munion and sacrament of his body and blood. 
Now you shall hear what St. Paul saith concern- 
ing the same, in the tenth chapter of the First to 
the Corinthians, where he writeth thus : 

' Mark xiv. ■' Luke xxii. 


" Is not the cup of blessing, which we bless; 
a communion of the blood of Christ ? Is not the 
bread, which we break, a communion of the body 
of Christ ? We being many, are one bread and 
one body. For we all are partakers of one 
bread and of one cup '." 

And in the eleventh he speaketh on this manner. 

*' That which I delivered unto you, I received 
of the Lord. For the Lord Jesus, the same night 
in the which he was betrayed, took bread, and 
when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said. 
Take, eat, this is my body, which is broken for 
you. Do this in remembrance of me. Likewise 
also he took the cup, when supper was done, 
saying, This cup is the New Testament in my 
blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in re- 
membrance of me. For as often as you shall 
eat this bread and drink this cup, shew forth the 
Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whoso- 
ever shall eat of this bread or drink of this cup 
unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood 
of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, 
and so eat of the bread, and drink of the cup. 
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eat- 
eth and drinketh his own damnation, because 
he maketh no difference of the Lord's body. 
For this cause many are weak and sick among 
you, and many do sleep \" 

* 1 Cor. X. '' Ibid. xi. 

OF THE lord's SUPPER, 15 

By these words of Christ rehearsed by the 
Evangelists, and by the doctrine also of St. Paul, 
(which he confesseth that he received of Christ,) 
two things specially are to be noted. 

First, that our Saviour Christ called the ma- chap. 
terial bread which he brake, his body, and the 


,,, , r • r ^ 'Ni'ii i Christ call- 

wine (which was the iruit oi the vnie) his blood, ed the mate. 

. rial bread 

And yet he spake not this to the intent that men I'is body. 
should think that material bread is his very 
body, or that his very body is material bread : 
neither that wine made of grapes is his very 
blood, or that his very blood is wine made of 
grapes, but to signify unto us (as St. Paul saith) 
that the cup is a communion of Christ's blood 
that was shed for us, and the bread is a commu- 
nion of his flesh that was crucified for us. So 
that although, in the truth of his human nature, 
Christ be in heaven, and sitteth on the right 
hand of God the Father, yet whosoever eateth 
of that bread in the supper of the Lord, accord- 
ing to Christ's institution and ordinance, is as-^ 
sured by Christ's own promise and testament, 
that he is a member of his body, and receiveth 
the benefits of his passion, which he suflfered for 
us upon the cross. And likewise he that drink- 
eth of that holy cup in that supper of the Lord, 
according to Christ's institution, is certified by 
Christ's legacy and testament, that he is made 
partaker of the blood of Christ, which was shed 
for us. And this meant St. Paul, when he saith. 


" Is not the cup of blessing which we bless, a 
communion of the blood of Christ ? Is not the 
bread which we break, a communion of the body 
of Christ?" So that no man can contemn or 
lightly esteem this holy communion, except he 
contemn also Christ's body and blood, and pass 
not whether he have any fellowship with him or 
no. And of those men St. Paul saith, " That 
they eat and drink their own damnation, because 
they esteem not the body of Christ.'' 
CHAP. The second thing which may be learned of 
^' the foresaid words of Christ and St. Paul is this. 

fafthTs"a-'*'* that although none eateth the body of Christ, 
™he*body and drinketh his blood, but they have eternal 
of Christ, j-^g^ ^^^ appeareth by the words before recited of 
St. John,) yet both the good and the bad do eat 
and drink the bread and wine, which be the sa- 
craments of the same : but, beside the sacra- 
ments, the good eateth everlasting life; the evil, 
everlasting death. Therefore St. Paul saith, 
** Whosoever shall eat of the bread or drink 
of the cup of the Lord unworthily, he shall 
be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." 
Here St. Paul saith not, that he that eateth the 
bread and drinketh the cup of the Lord unwor- 
thily, eateth and drinketh the body and blood 
of the Lord, but is guilty of the body and blood 
of the Lord. But what he eateth and drinketh 
St. Paul declareth, saying, "He that eateth and 
drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh his 

OF THE lord's SUPPER. 17 

own damnation." Thus is declared the sum of 
all that Scripture speaketh of the eating and 
drinking, both of the body and blood of Christ, 
and also of the sacrament of the same. 

And as these things be most certainly true, be- chaf. 
cause they be spoken of by Christ himself, the 


author of all truth, and by his holy apostle St. suffice fori 
Paul, as he received them of Christ, so all doc- mans faith, 


trmes contrary to the same be most certamlv ti>is sacra- 

'' •' ment. 

false and untrue, and of all Christian men to be 
eschewedj because they be contrary to God's word. 
And all doctrine concerning this matter, that is 
more than this, which is not grounded upon 
God's word, is of no necessity, neither ought the 
people's heads to be busied, or their consciences 
troubled with the same. So that things spoken 
and done by Christ, and written by the holy 
Evangelists and St. Paul, ought to suffice the 
faith of Christian people, as touching the doc- 
trine of the Lord's Supper, and holy communion 
or sacrament of his body and blood ; which, being 
well considered and weighed, shall be a just oc- 
casion to pacify and agree both parties, as well 
them that hitherto have contemned or lightly 
esteemed it, as also them which have hitherto, 
for lack of knowledge or otherwise, ungodly 
abused it. 

Christ ordained the sacrament to move arid chap; 
stir all men to friendship, love, and concord. 


and to put away all hatred, variance, and dis^ m^t whichr 


ed'to^mie cord, and to testify a brotherly and unfeigned 
concoTd! is love between all them that be the members of 
ibe oc^casion ChHst ; but the devil, the enemy of Christ and 
anddi'^oTd.of all his members, hath so craftily juggled 
herein, that of nothing riseth so much conten- 
tion as of this holy sacrament. God grant that 
all contention set aside, both the parties may 
come to this holy communion with such a lively 
faith in Christ, and such an unfeigned love to all 
Christ's members, that as they carnally eat with 
their mouth this sacramental bread and drink 
the wine, so spiritually they may eat and drink 
the very flesh and blood of Christ, which is in 
heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of his Fa- 
ther. And that finally by his means they may 
enjoy with him the glory and kingdom of hea- 
ven. Amen. 
CHAP. Whereas in the first part of this treaty of the 
_I!!!l_ sacrament of the body and blood of our Saviour 
Christ, was briefly declared the institution and 
meaning of the same, according to the very 
words of the Gospel and of St. Paul, yet it shall 
not be in vain somewhat more at large to de- 
clare the same, according to the mind, as well 
of holy Scripture, as of old ancient authors; and 
that so sincerely and plainly, without doubts, 
ambiguities, or vain questions, that the very 
simple and unlearned people may easily under- 
stand the same, and be edified thereby ; which 
by God's grace is mine only intent and desire. 

OF THE lord's SUPPER. 19 

that the flock of Christ dispersed in this realm 
(among whom I am appointed a special pastor) 
may no longer lack the commodity, and fruit, 
which springeth of this heavenly knowledge. 
For the more clearly it is understood, the more 
sweetness, fruit, comfort, and edification it bring- 
eth to the godly receivers thereof. And to the 
clear understanding of this sacrament, divers 
things must be considered. 

First, that as all men of themselves be sinners, chap. 
and through sin be in God's wrath, banished far 


away from him, condemned to hell and everlast- Sd hunger 
ing damnation, and none is clearly innocent, but ness Jfthe 
Christ alone : so every soul, inspired by God, is 
desirous to be delivered from sin and hell, and 
to obtain at God's hands mercy, favour, righte- 
ousness, and everlasting salvation. And this 
earnest and great desire is called in Scripture, 
the hunger and thirst of the soul ; with which 
kind of hunger David was taken, when he said: 
** As an hart longeth for springs of water, so doth 
my soul long for thee, O God '." — *' My soul 
hath thirsted after God, who is the well of life. 
My soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh wisheth for 
thee""." And this hujiger the silly, poor, sinful 
soul is drawn into, by means of the law, which 
sheweth unto her the horribleness of sin, the 
terror of God's indignation, and the horror of 

' P^jalm xlii. '" Ibid. Ixiii- 

C 2 


death and everlasting damnation. And when 
she seeth nothing but damnation for her offences, 
by justice and accusation of the law, and this 
damnation is ever before her eyes; then, in this 
great distress, the soul being pressed with hea- 
viness and sorrow seeketh for some comfort, 
and dcsireth some remedy for her miserable and 
sorrowful estate. And this feeling of her damn- 
able condition, and greedy desire of refreshing, 
is the spiritual hunger of the soul. And whoso- 
ever hath this godly hunger, is blessed of God, 
and shall have meat and drink enough, as Christ 
himself said : '' Blessed be they that hunger 
and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be 
filled full "." And on the other side, they that 
see not their own sinful and damnable estate, 
but think themselves holy enough, and in good 
case and condition enough, as they have no spi- 
ritual hunger, so shall they not be fed of God 
with any spiritual food. For as Almighty God 
feedeth them that be hungry, so doth he send 
away empty all that be not hungry. But this 
hunger and thirst is not easily perceived of the 
carnal man : for when he heareth the Holy Ghost 
speak of meat and drink, his mind is by and by 
in the kitchen and buttery, and he thinketh 
upon his dishes and pots, his mouth and his 
belly. But the Scripture in sundry places useth 

" Matt. V. 

OF THE lord's SUPPER. 21 

special words, whereby to draw our gross minds 
from the fancying of our teeth and belly, and 
from this carnal and fleshly imagination. For 
the apostles and disciples of Christ, when they 
were yet carnal, knew not what was meant by 
this kind of hunger and meat, and therefore 
when they desired him to eat, to withdraw their 
minds from carnal meat, he said unto them : 
" I have other meat to eat, which you know 
not°." And why knew they it not? Forsooth 
because their minds were gross as yet, and had 
not received the fulness of the Spirit. And 
therefore our Saviour Christ, minding to draw 
them from this grossness, told them of another 
kind of meat than they fancied, (as it were,) re- 
buking them, for that they perceived not that 
there was any other kind of eating and drinking, 
besides that eating and drinking which is with 
the mouth and the throat. Likewise when he 
said to the woman of Samaria : " Whosoever 
shall drink of that water that I shall give him, 
shall never be thirsty again p." They that heard 
him speak those words, might well perceive that 
he went about to make them well acquainted 
with another kind of drinking, than is the drink- 
ing with the mouth and throat. For there is no 
such kind of drink, that with one's drinking, can 
quench the thirst of a man's body for ever. 

• Johniv. " Ibid. 


Wherefore, in saying, he shall never be thirsty 
again, he did draw their minds from drinking 
with the mouth unto another kind of drinking 
whereof they knew not, and unto another kind 
of thirsting wherewith as yet they were not ac- 
quainted. And when our Saviour Christ said, 
** He that cometh to me shall not hunger; and 
he that believeth on me shall never be thirsty'';" 
he gave them a plain watch- word, that there was 
another kind of meat and drink than that where- 
with he fed them at the other side of the water, 
and another kind of hungering and thirsting 
than was the hungering and thirsting of the 
body. By these words therefore he drove the 
people to understand another kind of eating and 
drinking, of hungering and thirsting, than that 
which belongeth only for the preservation of 
temporal life. Now then as the thing that com- 
forteth the body, is called meat and drink ; of a 
like sort the Scripture calleth the same thing 
that comforteth the soul, meat and drink. 
CHAP. Wherefore as here before in the first note is de- 
._ clared the hunger and drought of the soul, so is 


The spiri- . n , . , 

tuai food of it now secondly to be noted, what is the meat, 

the soul. 1 . 7 in -, n ■, 

drink, and food of the soul. The meat, drink, 
food and refreshing of the soul, is our Saviour 
Christ, as he said himself. " Come unto me 
all you that travail and be laden, and I will 

*• John vi. 

OF THE lord's .SUPPER. 23 

refresh you'." — " And if any man be dry," 
saith he, *' let him come to me and drink. He 
that believeth in me, floods of water of life 
shall flow out of his belly'." — ** And I am the 
bread of life," saith Christ; " he that cometh 
to me, shall not be hungry ; and he that believ- 
eth in me, shall never be dry '." For as meat 
and drink do comfort the hungry body, so doth 
the death of Christ's body, and the shedding of 
his blood, comfort the soul, when she is after 
her sort hungry. What thing is it that comfort- 
eth and nourisheth the body ? Forsooth, meat 
and drink. By what names then shall we call 
the body and blood of our Saviour Christ (which 
do comfort and nourish the hungry soul) but by 
the names of meat and drink ? And this simili- 
tude caused our Saviour to say, *' My flesh is 
very meat, and my blood is very drink "." For 
there is no kind of meat that is comfortable to 
the soul, but only the death of Christ's blessed 
body ; nor no kind of drink that can quench her 
thirst, but only the blood-shedding of our Savi- 
our Christ, which was shed for her offences. 
For as there is a carnal generation, and a carnal 
feeding and nourishment, so is there also a spi- 
ritual generation, and a spiritual feeding. And 
as every man, by carnal generation of father and 

■^ Matt. xi. ' John vii. ' John vi. " Ibid. 


mother, is carnally begotten and born unto this 
mortal life, so is every good Christian spiritually 
born by Christ unto eternal life. And as every 
man is carnally fed and nourished in his body by 
meat and drink, even so is every good Christian 
man spiritually fed and nourished in his soul by 
the flesh and blood of our Saviour Christ. And 
as the body liveth by meat and drink, and there- 
by increaseth and grov^^eth from a young babe 
unto a perfect man, (v^^hich thing experience 
teacheth us,) so the soul liveth by Christ himself, 
by pure faith eating his flesh and drinking his 
blood. And this Christ himself teacheth us in 
the sixth of John, saying, *' Verily, verily I say 
unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of 
Man, and drink his blood, you have no life in 
you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my 
blood, hath eternal life, and I will raise him up 
at the last day : for my flesh is very meat, and 
my blood is very drink. He that eateth my 
flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me, 
and I in him. As the living Father hath sent 
me, and I live by the Father, even so he that 
eateth me, shall live by me\" And this St. 
Paul confessed of himself, saying, ^' That I have 
life, I have it by faith in the Son of God. And 
now it is not I that live, but Christ liveth in 

V '> 

" John vi, ^ Gal. ii. 

OF THE lord's SUPPER. 25 

The third thing to be noted is this, that al- chap. 

though our Saviour Christ resembleth his flesh ' 

and blood to meat and drink, yet he far passeth exceiietraii 
and excelleth all corporal meats and drinks, food. 
For although corporal meats and drinks do 
nourish and continue our life here in this world, 
yet they begin not our life. For the beginning 
of our life we have of our fathers and mothers ; 
and the meat, after we be begotten, doth feed 
and nourish us, and so preserveth us for a time. 
But our Saviour Christ is both the first begin- 
ner of our spiritual life, (who first begetteth us 
unto God his Father,) and also afterward he is 
our lively food and nourishment. 

Moreover, meat and drink doth feed and nou- 
rish only our bodies ; but Christ is the true and 
perfect nourishment both of bodj'^ and soul. And 
besides that, bodily food preserveth the life but 
for a time, but Christ is such a spiritual and per- 
fect food, that he preserveth both body and soul 
for ever. As he said unto Martha, *' I am resur- 
rection and life. He that believeth in me, al- 
though he die, yet shall he live. And he that 
liveth and believeth in me, shall not die for 

Fourthly, it is to be noted, that the true know- chap. 
ledge of these things is the true knowledge of 


rf-11 • 1 It 1 • • 1 "^''^ sacra- 

Christ; and to teach these thmgs, is to teach ments were 

ordained to 

Christ ; and the believing and feeling of these co'ijirm our 
things, is the believing and feeling of Christ in 


our hearts. And the more clearly we see, un- 
derstand, and believe these things, the more 
clearly we see and understand Christ, and have 
more fully our faith and comfort in him. And 
although our carnal generation and our carnal 
nourishment be known to all men by daily ex- 
perience, and by our common senses ; yet this 
our spiritual generation and our spiritual nutri- 
tion be so obscure and hid unto us, that we 
cannot attain to the true and perfect knowledge 
and feeling of them, but only by faith, which 
must be grounded upon God's most holy word 
and sacraments. And for this consideration our 
Saviour Christ hath not only set forth these 
things most plainly in his holy word, that we 
may hear them with our ears ; but he hath also 
ordained one visible sacrament of spiritual rege- 
neration in water, and another visible sacra- 
ment of spiritual nourishment in bread and wine, 
to the intent, that as much as is possible for man, 
we may see Christ with our eyes, smell him at 
our nose, taste him with our mouths, grope him 
with our hands, and perceive him with all our 
senses. For as the word of God, preached, put- 
teth Christ into our ears ; so likewise these ele- 
ments of water, bread, and wine, joined to God's 
word, do, after a sacramental manner, put Christ 
into our eyes, mouths, hands, and all our senses. 
And for this cause Christ ordained baptism in 
water, that as surely as we see, feel, and touch 


water with our bodies, and be washed with wa- 
ter; so assuredly ought we to believe, when we 
be baptized, that Christ is verily present with 
us, and that by him we be newly born again 
spiritually, and washed from our sins, and 
grafted in the stock of Christ's own body, and 
be apparelled, clothed, and harnessed with him, 
in such wise, that as the devil hath no power 
against Christ, so hath he none against us, so 
long as we remain grafted in that stock, and be 
clothed with that apparel, and harnessed with 
that armour. So that the washing in water of 
baptism, is, as it were, a shewing of Christ be- 
fore our eyes, and a sensible touching, feeling, 
and groping of him, to the confirmation of the 
inward faith, which we have in him. And in 
like manner Christ ordained the sacrament of 
his body and blood in bread and wine, to preach 
unto us, that as our bodies be fed, nourished, 
and preserved with meat and drink, so (as touch- 
ing our spiritual life towards God) we be fed, 
nourished, and preserved by the body and blood 
of our Saviour Christ ; and also that he is such 
a preservation unto us, that neither the devils of 
hell, nor eternal death, nor sin, can be able to 
prevail against us, so long as, by true and con- 
stant faith, we be fed and nourished with that 
meat and drink. And for this cause Christ or- 
dained this sacrament in bread and wine, (which 
we eat and drink, and be chief nutriments of our 


body,) to the intent that as surely as we see the 
bread and wine with our eyes, smell them with 
our noses, touch them with our hands, and taste 
them with our mouths; so assuredly ought we to 
believe, that Christ is our spiritual life and sus- 
tenance of our souls, like as the said bread and 
wine is the food and sustenance of our bodies. 
And no less ought we to doubt, that our souls be 
fed and live by Christ, than that our bodies be 
fed and live by meat and drink. Thus our Sa- 
viour Christ knowing us to be in this world, as 
it were, but babes and weaklings in faith, hath 
ordained sensible signs and tokens, whereby to 
allure and draw us to more strength and more 
constant faith in him. So that the eating and 
drinking of this sacramental bread and wine, is, 
as it were, a shewing of Christ before our eyes, 
a smelling of him with our noses, a feeling and 
groping of him with our hands, and an eating, 
chawing, digesting, and feeding upon him to our 
spiritual strength and perfection. 
CHAP. Fifthly, it is to be noted, that although there 
be many kinds of meats and drinks, which feed 


Where forc 

this sacra- thc body, yct our Saviour Christ (as many an- 

ment was . • \ i • i i • n 

ordained in cicut autliors writc) ordauicd this sacrament of 

bread and 

wine. our spiritual feeding in bread and wine, rather 
than in other meats and drinks, because that 
bread and wine do most truly represent unto us 
the spiritual union and knot of all faithful people, 
as well unto Christ, as also amongst themselves. 

OF THE lord's SUPPER. 29 

For like as bread is made of a great number of 
grains of corn, ground, baken, and so joined to- 
gether, that thereof is made one loaf; and an 
infinite number of grapes be pressed together in 
one vessel, and thereof is made wine ; likewise 
is the whole multitude of true Christian people 
spiritually joined, first to Christ, and then among 
themselves together, in one faith, one baptism, 
one holy spirit, one knot and bond of love. 

Sixthly, it is to be noted, that as the bread <^"ap 
and wine, which we do eat, be turned into our 


flesh and blood, and be made our very flesh andcbris"L^" 


very blood, and be so jomed and mixed with our i»«dj. 
flesh and blood, that they be made one whole 
body together, even so be all faithful Christians 
spiritually turned into the body of Christ, and be 
so joined unto Christ, and also together among 
themselves, that they do make but one mystical 
body of Christ, as St. Paul saith : *' We be one 
bread and one body, as many as be partakers of 
one bread and one cup y." And as one loaf is 
given among many men, so that every one is 
partaker of the same loaf, and likewise one cup 
of wine is distributed unto many persons, where- 
of every one is partaker ; even so our Saviour 
Christ (whose flesh and blood is represented by 
the mystical bread and wine in the Lord's Sup- 
per) doth give himself unto all his true members, 

" 1 Cor. X. 


spiritually to feed them, nourish them, and to 
give them continual life by him ^ And as the 
branches of a tree, or member of a body, if they 
be dead or cut off, they neither live, nor receive 
any nourishment or sustenance of the body or 
tree; so likewise ungodly and wicked people, 
(which be cut off from Christ's mystical body, 
or be dead members of the same,) do not spiri- 
tually feed upon Christ's body and blood, nor 
have any life, strength, or sustenance thereby. 
CHAP. Seventhly, it is to be noted, that whereas no- 
thing in this life is more acceptable before God, 


melumoveth or morc plcasaut unto man, than Christian peo- 
loye and plc to llve togcthcr quictly in love and peace, 


unity and concord : this sacrament doth most 
aptly and effectually move us thereunto. For 
when we be made all partakers of this one table, 
what ought we to think, but that we be all 
members of one spiritual body, (whereof Christ 
is the head,) that we be joined together in one 
Christ, as a great number of grains of corn be 
joined together in one loaf. Surely they have 
very hard and stony hearts, which with these 
things be not moved. And more cruel and un- 
reasonable be they than brute beasts, that can- 
not be persuaded to be good to their Christian 
brethren and neighbours (for whom Christ suf- 
fered death) when in this sacrament they be put 

' Dionysius, 

OF THE lord's SUPPER. 31 

in remembrance, that the Son of God bestowed 
his life for his enemies. For we see by daily 
experience, that eating and drinking together 
maketh friends, and continueth friendship. Much 
more then ought the table of Christ to move us 
so to do. Wild beasts and birds be made gen- 
tle by giving them meat and drink ; why then 
should not Christian men wax meek and gentle 
with this heavenly meat of Christ ? Hereunto 
we be stirred and moved as well by the bread 
and wine in this holy supper, as by the words of 
holy Scripture recited in the same. Wherefore 
whose heart soever this holy sacrament, com- 
munion, and supper of Christ, will not kindle 
with love unto his neighbours, and cause him to 
put out of his heart all envy, hatred, and malice, 
and to grow in tha same all amity, friendship, 
and concord, he deceiveth himself if he think 
that he hath the spirit of Christ dwelling within 
him. But all these foresaid godly admonitions, 
exhortations, and comforts, do the Papists (as 
much as lieth in them) take away from all Chris- 
tian people, by their Transubstantiation. 

For if we receive no bread nor wine in the The doctrine 


holy communion, then all those lessons and stantiaUon 

'' _ doth clean 

comforts be Rone, which we should learn and *">vert our 

<-• ' faith in 

receive by eating of the bread and drinking of Christ, 
the wine. And that fantastical imagination giv- 
eth an occasion utterly to subvert our whole 
faith in Christ. For if this sacrament be or- 



dained in bread and wine (which be food for the 
body) to signify and declare unto us our spiri- 
tual food by Christ, then if our corporal feed- 
ing upon the bread and wine be but fantastical, 
(so that there is no bread nor wine there indeed 
to feed upon, although there appear there to be,) 
then it doth us to understand, that our spiritual 
feeding in Christ is also fantastical, and that in- 
deed we feed not of him. Which sophistry is 
so devilish and wicked, and so much injurious 
to Christ, that it could not come from any other 
person but only from the devil himself, and from 
his special minister. Antichrist. 
CHAP. The eighth thing that is to be noted is, that 
this spiritual meat of Christ's body and blood, 


The spiri- . 'i-i it t • i 

tuai eating is not rcccivcd HI thc mouth, and digested m the 

is with the 
lieart, not 
with the 

stomach, (as corporal meats and drinks com- 
monly be,) but it is received with a pure heart, 
and a sincere faith. And the true eating and 
drinking of the said body and blood of Christ, is 
with a constant and a lively faith to believe that 
Christ gave his body, and shed his blood upon 
the cross for us, and that he doth so join and in- 
corporate himself to us, that he is our head, and 
we his members, and flesh of his flesh, and bone 
of his bones, having him dwelling in us, and we 
in him. And herein standeth the whole effect 
and strength of this sacrament. And this faith 
God worketh inwardly in our hearts by his holy 
Spirit, and confirmeth the same outwardly to 

OF THE lord's SUPPER* 33 

our ears by hearing of his word, and to our 
other senses, by eating and drinking of the sa- 
cramental bread and wine in his holy supper. 
What thing then can be more comfortable to us, 
than to eat this meat and drink this drink? 
Whereby Christ certifieth us, that we be spiri- 
tually and truly fed and nourished by him, and 
that we dwell in him, and he in us. Can this 
be shewed unto us more plainly, than when he 
saith himself, " He that eateth me, shall live by 
me^?" Wherefore whosoever doth not contemn 
the everlasting life, how can he but highly esteem 
this sacrament? How can he but embrace it, 
as a sure pledge of his salvation ? And when he 
seeth godly people devoutly receive the same^ 
how can he but be desirous oftentimes to re- 
ceive it with them ? Surely no man, that well 
Understandeth and diligently weigheth these 
things, can be without a great desire to come 
to this holy supper. All men desire to have 
God's favour; and when they know the contrary^ 
that they be in his indignation, and cast out of 
his favour, what thing can comfort them ? How 
be their minds vexed ! What trouble is in their 
consciences ! All God's creatures seem to be 
against them, and do make them afraid, as things 
being ministers of God's wrath and indignation 
towards them. And rest and comfort can they 

• John vi. 


find none, neither within them nor without them. 
And in this case they do hate as well God as the 
devil ; God as an unmerciful and extreme judge, 
and the devil as a most malicious and cruel tor- 
mentor. But in this sorrowful heaviness, holy- 
Scripture teacheth them, that our heavenly Fa- 
ther can by no means be pleased with them 
again, but by the sacrifice and death of his only- 
begotten Son, whereby God hath made a per- 
petual amity and peace with us, doth pardon 
the sins of them that believe in him, maketh 
them his children, and giveth them to his first- 
begotten Son Christ, to be incorporate into him, 
to be saved by him, and to be made heirs of 
heaven with him. And in the receiving of the 
holy supper of our Lord, we be put in remem- 
brance of this his death, and of the whole mys- 
tery of our redemption. In the which supper 
is made mention of his testament, and of the 
foresaid communion of us with Christ, and of 
the remission of our sins by his sacrifice upon 
the cross. Wherefore in this sacrament (if it be 
rightly received with a true faith) we be assured 
that our sins be forgiven, and the league of 
peace and the testament of God is confirmed 
between him and us, so that whosoever by a 
true faith doth eat Christ's flesh, and drink his 
blood, hath everlasting life by him. Which 
thing when we feel in our hearts, at the receiv- 
ing of the Lord's Supper, what thing can be 

OF THE lord's supper. 35 

more joyful, more pleasant, or more comfortable 
unto us ? All this to be true, is most certain by 
the words of Christ himself, when he did first 
institute his holy supper, the night before his 
death, as it appeareth, as well by the words of 
the Evangelists, as of St. Paul. *' Do this," 
saith Christ, ''as often as you drink it in remem- 
brance of me." And St. Paul saith, ** As often 
as you eat this bread, and drink this cup, you 
shall shew the Lord's death until he come." 
And again, Christ said, *' This cup is a new tes- 
tament, in my own blood, which shall be shed 
for the remission of sins." This doctrine, here 
recited, may suffice for all that be humble and 
godly, and seek nothing that is superfluous, but 
that is necessary and profitable. Ahd therefore 
unto such persons may be made here an end of 
this book. But unto them that be contentious 
Papists, and idolaters, nothing is enough. And 
yet because they shall not glory in their subtle 
inventions and deceivable doctrine, (as though 
no man were able to answer them,) I shall de- 
sire the readers, of patience, to suffer me a little 
while to spend some time in vain to confute 
their most vain vanities. And yet the time shall 
not be altogether spent in vain, for thereby shall 
more clearly appear the light from the darkness, 
the truth from false sophistical subtleties, and 
the certain word of God from men's dreams and 
fantastical inventions. 

D 2 


CHAP. But these things cannot manifestly appear to 
the reader, except the principal points be first 


The princi- 

pal errors of set out, wherein the Papists vary from the truth 
The first is' of God's word, which be chiefly four. 

ofTransub- • -r» • 

stantiation. First, the Papists say, that in the Supper of 
the Lord, after the words of consecration (as 
they call it) there is none other substance re- 
maining, but the substance of Christ's flesh and 
blood, so that there remaineth neither bread to 
be eaten, nor wine to be drunken. And although 
there be the colour of bread and wine, the sa- 
vour, the smell, the bigness, the fashion, and all 
other (as they call them) accidents or qualities 
and quantities of bread and wine, yet (say they) 
there is no very bread nor wine, but they be 
turned into the flesh and blood of Christ. And 
this conversion they call Transubstantiation, that 
is to say, turning of one substance into another 
substance. And although all the accidents, both 
of the bread and wine, remain still, yet (say 
they) the same accidents be in no manner of 
thing; but hang alone in the air, without any 
thing to stay them upon. For in the body and 
blood of Christ (say they) these accidents can- 
not be, nor yet in the air for the body and blood 
of Christ, and the air, be neither of that bigness, 
fashion, smell, nor colour, that the bread and 
wine be. Nor in the bread and wine (say they) 
these accidents cannot be ; for the substance of 

OF THE lord's SUPPER. 37 

bread and wine (as they affirm) be clean gone. 
And so there remaineth whiteness, but nothing- 
is white : there remaineth colours, but nothing- 
is coloured therewith : there remaineth round- 
ness, but nothing is round : and there is bigness, 
and yet nothing is big: there is sweetness, with- 
out any sweet thing : softness, without any soft 
thing : breaking, without any thing broken : di- 
vision, without any thing divided : and so other 
qualities and quantities, without any thing to 
receive them. And this doctrine they teach as 
a necessary article of our faith. But it is not the 
doctrine of Christ, but the subtle invention of 
Antichrist, first decreed by Innocent the Third ^ 
and after more at large set forth by school au- 
thors, whose study was ever to defend and set 
abroad to the world all such matters, as the bi- 
shops of Rome had once decreed. And the devil, 
by his minister Antichrist, had so dazzled the 
eyes of a great multitude of Christian people in 
these latter days, that they sought not for their 
faith at the clear light of God's word, but at the 
Romish Antichrist, believing whatsoever he pre- 
scribed unto them, yea though it were against all 
reason, all senses, and God's most holy word 
also. For else he could not have been very Anti- 
christ indeed, except he had been so repugnant 

'' De stunma Trini. et fide Catholica. 


unto Christ, whose doctrine is clean contrary to 
this doctrine of Antichrist. For Christ teach- 
eth, that we receive very bread and wine in the 
most blessed Supper of the Lord, as sacraments 
to admonish us, that as bodily we be fed with 
bread and wine bodily, so we be fed with the 
body and blood of our Saviour Christ spiritually. 
As in our baptism we receive very water, to sig- 
nify unto us, that as water is an element to wash 
the body outwardly, so be our souls washed by 
the Holy Ghost inwardly. 

The second Thc sccond principal thing, wherein the Pa- 
is of the pre- ^ n r-i li 1 ' t ' 
senceof pists varv from the truth of God s word, is this. 

Christ in * -^ 

this sacra- Tlicy say, that the very natural flesh and blood 
of Christ, which suffered for us upon the cross, 
and sitteth at the right hand of the Father in 
heaven, is also really, substantially, corporeally 
and naturally, in or under the accidents of the 
sacramental bread and wine, which they call the 
forms of bread and wine. And yet here they 
vary not a little among themselves. For some 
say, that the very natural body of Christ is there, 
but not naturally nor sensibly. And others say, 
that it is there naturally and sensibly, and of the 
same bigness and fashion that it is in heaven, 
and as the same was born of the blessed virgin 
Mary, and that it is there broken and torn in 
pieces with our teeth. And this appeareth 
partly by the school authors, and partly by the 

OF THE L(^RD's supper. 39 

confession of Berengarius % which Nicholas the 
Second constrained him to make, which was this. 
That of the sacraments of the Lord's table, the 
said Berengarius should promise to hold that 
faith, which the said Pope Nicholas and his 
counsel held ; which was, that not only the sa- 
craments of bread and wine, but also the very- 
flesh and blood of our Lord Jesu Christ, are sen- 
sibly handled of the priest in the altar, broken, 
and torn with the teeth of the faithful people. 
But the true Catholick faith, grounded upon 
God's most infallible word, teacheth us, that our 
Saviour Christ (as concerning his man's nature 
and bodily presence) is gone up into heaven, 
and sitteth at the right hand of his Father, and 
there shall he tarry until the world's end, at what 
time he shall come again, to judge both the 
quick and the dead, as he saith himself in many 
Scriptures. '* I forsake the world," saith he, 
" and go to my Father'^." And in another place 
he saith, *' You shall have ever poor men among 
you, but me you shall not ever have *." And 
again he saith, " Many hereafter shall come and 
say, look, here is Christ, or, look, there he is, 
but believe them not^" And St. Peter saith in 
the Acts, " That heaven must receive Christ, 

•= De consecrati. Distin. 2. Ego Berengarius. 
^ John vi. * Matt. xxvi. ' Ibid. xxiv. 


until the time that all things shall be restored ^" 
And St. Paul, writing to the Colossians, agreeth 
hereto, saying, ** Seek for things that be above, 
where Christ is sitting at the right hand of the 
Father ''." And St. Paul, speaking of the very 
sacrament, saith, '* As often as you shall eat 
this bread, and drink this cup, shew forth the 
Lord's death until he come '." Till he come, 
saith St. Paul, signifying, that he is not there 
corporeally present. For what speech were this, 
or who useth of him that is already present, to 
say, until he come ? For until he come, signi- 
fieth that he is not yet present. This is the Ca- 
tholick faith, which we learn from our youth in 
our common Creed, and which Christ taught, 
the apostles followed, and the martyrs confirmed 
with their blood. And although Christ in his 
human nature substantially, really, corporeally, 
naturally and sensibly, be present with his Fa- 
ther in heaven, yet sacramentally and spiritually 
he is here present in water, bread, and wine, as 
in signs and sacraments, but he is indeed spirit 
tually in the faithful Christian people, which 
according to Christ's ordinance be baptized, or 
receive the holy communion, or unfeignedly be- 
lieve in him. Thus have you heard the second 
principal article, wherein the Papists vary from 

«" Acts iii. ■> Coloas.-iii. * 1 Cor. xi. 


OF THE lord's SUPPER. 41 

the truth of God's word, and from the Catholick 
faith. Now the third thing, wherein they vary, 
is this. 

The Papists say, that evil and uneodlv men The third is. 

. , "^ O J thatevilmen 

receive in this sacrament the very body and ^at and drink 

•^ ♦' the very bo- 

blood of Christ, and eat and drink the self-same *^J?°'''''°°*^ 

' 01 

thing that the good and godly men do. But 
the truth of God's word is contrary, that all 
those that be godly members of Christ, as they 
corporally eat the bread and drink the wine, so 
spiritually they eat and drink Christ's very flesh 
and blood ; and as for the wicked members of 
the devil, they eat the sacramental bread, and 
drink the sacramental wine, but they do not 
spiritually eat Christ's flesh, nor drink his 
blood, but they eat and drink their own damna- 

The fourth thing, wherein the Popish priests 
dissent from the manifest word of God, is this. 
They say, that they offer Christ every day for 
remission of sin, and distribute by their masses 
the merits of Christ's passion. But the pro- 
phets, apostles, and evangelists do say^ that 
Christ himself in his own person made a sacri- 
fice for our sins upon the cross, by whose wounds 
all our diseases were healed, and our sins par- 
doned; and so did never no priest, man, nor 
creature but he, nor he did the same never more 
than once. And the benefit hereof is in no 


man's power to give unto any other, but every 
man must receive it at Christ's hands himself, 
by his own faith and belief, as the prophet 
saith ". 

'' Habakkuk ii. 






Thus have you heard declared four things, chap. 
wherein chiefly the Papistical doctrine varieth ^- 
from the true word of God, and from the oldJJ-J^"/-, 
Catholick Christian faith, in this matter of the f^Zsli- 

-r 1 J o stantiation. 

Lord s Supper. 

Now, lest any man should think that I feign 
any thing of mine own head, without any other 
ground or authority, you shall hear, by God's 
grace, as well the errors of the Papists confuted, 
as the Catholick truth defended, both by God's 
most certain word, and also by the most old 
approved authors and martyrs of Christ's 


CHAP, And first, that bread and wine remain after 


the words of consecration, and be eaten and 
ticaidoc- drunken in the Lord's Supper, is most manifest 

trine is con- 
trary to by the plain words of Christ himself, when he 

God's word. . . ^ 

ministered the same supper unto his disciples. 
For as the Evangelists write, " Christ took 
bread, and brake it, and gave it to his disciples, 
and said. Take, eat, this is my body '." 

Here the Papists triumph of these words, when 
Christ said, *' This is my body ""," which they 
call the words of consecration. For (say they) 
as soon as these words be fully ended, there is 
no bread left, nor none other substance, but only 
Christ's body. When Christ said " this," the 
bread (say they) remained. And when he said 
*' is," yet the bread remained. Also when he 
added ** my," the bread remained still. And 
when he said " bo-," yet the bread was there 
still. But when he had finished the whole sen- 
tence, " This is my body," then (say they) the 
bread was gone, and there remained no sub- 
stance but Christ's body, as though the bread 
could not remain, when it is made a sacrament. 
But this negative, that there is no bread, they 
make of their own brains, by their unwritten 

Oh, good Lord, how would they have bragged 
if Christ had said, this is no bread ! But Christ 

' Matt. xxvi. Mark xiv. *" Luke xxii. 


spake not that negative, this is no bread, but 
said affirmingly, " This is my body," not deny- 
ing the bread, but affirming that his body was 
eaten (meaning spiritually) as the bread was 
eaten corporally. And that this was the mean- 
ing of Christ, appeareth plainly by St. Paul, in 
the tenth chapter to the Corinthians, the first 
Epistle, where he (speaking of the same matter) 
saith, ** Is not the bread, which we break, the 
communion of the body of Christ"?" Who un- 
derstood the mind of Christ better than St. Paul, 
to whom Christ shewed his most secret counsels? 
And St. Paul is not afraid, for our better under- 
standing of Christ's words, somewhat to alter 
the same, lest we might stand stiffly in the letters 
and syllables, and err in mistaking of Christ's 
words. For whereas our Saviour Christ brake 
the bread and said. This is my body, St. Paul 
saith, that the bread which we break is the 
communion of Christ's body. Christ said, his 
body: and St. Paul said, the communion of his 
body : meaning, nevertheless, both one thing, 
that they, which eat the bread worthily, do eat 
spiritually Christ's very body. And so Christ 
calleth the bread his body, (as the old authors 
report,) because it representeth his body, and 
signifieth unto them which eat that bread ac- 
cording to Christ's ordinance, that they do spi- 

" 1 Cor, X. 


ritually eat his body, and be spiritually fed and 
nourished by him, and yet the bread remaineth 
still there, as a sacrament to signify the same. 
But of these words of consecration shall be 
spoken hereafter more at large. Therefore to 
return to the purpose, that the bread remaineth, 
and is eaten in this sacrament, appeareth by the 
words which go before the consecration. For 
that Christ " took bread, and brake it, and gave 
it to his disciples, and said. Take, eat^:" all this 
was done and spoken before the words of conse- 
cration. Wherefore they must needs be under- 
stood of the very bread, that Christ took bread, 
brake bread, gave bread to his disciples, com- 
manding them to take bread, and eat bread. 
But the same is more plain and evident of the 
wine, that it remaineth, and is drunken at the 
Lord's Supper, as well by the words that go be- 
fore, as by the words that follow after the con- 
secration. For before the words of consecration, 
Christ took the cup of wine, and gave it unto 
his disciples, and said, " Drink you allof this''." 
And after the words of consecration followeth, 
" they drank all of it'." Now I ask all the Pa- 
pists, what thing it was that Christ commanded 
his disciples to drink, when he said. Drink ye all 
of this ? The blood of Christ was not yet there, 
by their own confession, for it was spoken be- 

" Matt. xxvi. '' Ibid, ' Mark xiv. 


fore the consecration : therefore it could be no- 
thing else but wine that he commanded them to 
drink. Then I ask the Papists once again, whe- 
ther the disciples drank wine or not ? If they 
say, yea, then let them recant their error, that 
there was no wine remaining after the consecra- 
tion. If they say, nay, then they condemn the 
apostles of disobedience to Christ's command- 
ment, which drank not wine as he commanded 
them. Or rather they reprove Christ as a jug- 
gler, which commanded his apostles to drink 
wine, and when they came to the drinking there- 
of, he himself had conveyed it away. Moreover, 
before Christ delivered the cup of wine to his 
disciples, he said unto them, "Divide this among 
you'." Here would I ask the Papists another 
question, what thing it was that Christ com- 
manded his disciples to divide among them ? I 
am sure they will not say, it was the cup, except 
they be disposed to make men laugh at them. 
Nor I think they will not say, it was the blood 
of Christ, as well because the words were spoken 
before the consecration, as because the blood of 
Christ is not divided, but spiritually given whole 
in the sacrament. Then could it be understood 
of nothing else but of wine, which they should 
divide among them, and drink all together. And 
when the communion was ended, Christ said 

* Luke xxii. 


unto his apostles, *' Verily I say unto you, that 
I will drink no more henceforth of this fruit of 
the vine, until that day, that I shall drink it new 
with you, in my Father's kingdom*." By these 
words it is clear, that it was very wine that the 
apostles drank at that godly supper. For the 
blood of Christ is not the fruit of the vine, nor 
the accidents of wine ; nor none other thing is 
the fruit of the vine, but very wine only. How 
could Christ have expressed more plainly, that 
bread and wine remain, than by taking the bread 
in his hands, and breaking it himself, and giving 
it unto his disciples, commanding them to eat it? 
And by taking the cup of wine in his hands, and 
delivering it unto them, commanding them to 
divide it among them, and to drink it, and call^ 
ing it the fruit of the vine? These words of 
Christ be so plain, that if an angel of heaven 
would tell us the contrary, he ought not to be 
believed. And then much less may we believe 
the subtle lying Papists. If Christ would have 
had us to believe (as a necessary article of our 
faith) that there remaineth neither bread nor 
wine, would he have spoken after this sort, using' 
all such terms and circumstances as should make 
us believe, that still there remaineth bread and 
wine ? What manner of teacher make they of 
Christ, that say he meant one thing, when his 

' Matti xxvi, Mark xiv, 


words be clean contrary ? What Christian heart 
can patiently suffer this contumely of Christ ? 
But what crafty teachers be these Papists, who 
devise fantasies of their own heads, directly con- 
trary to Christ's teaching, and then set the same 
abroad to Christian people, to be most assuredly 
believed as God's own most holy word ! St. 
Paul did not so, but followed herein the manner 
of Christ's speaking, in calling of bread, bread, 
and wine, wine, and never altering Christ's words 
herein. *' The bread which we break," saith he, 
" is it not the communion of Christ's body"?" 
Now I ask again of the Papists, whether he 
spake this of the bread consecrated or not con- 
secrated ? They cannot say that he spake it of 
the bread unconsecrated, for that is not the com- 
munion of Christ's body by their own doctrine. 
And if St. Paul spake it of bread consecrated, 
then they must needs confess, that after conse- 
cration such bread remaineth, as is broken bread, 
which can be none other than very true material 
bread. And straightways after St. Paul saith, 
in the same place, *' that we be partakers of 
one bread and one cup \" And in the next 
chapter, speaking more fully of the same matter, 
four times he nameth the bread and the cup, 
never making mention of any transubstantiation, 
or remaining of accidents without any sub- ^ 

" 1 Cor. X. '' Ibid. 


stance; which things he would have made some 
mention of, if it had been a necessary article of 
our faith to believe that there remaineth no 
bread nor wine. Thus it is evident and plain, 
by the words of the Scripture, that after conse- 
cration remaineth bread and wine, and that the 
Papistical doctrine of Transubstantiation is di- 
rectly contrary to God's word. 
CHAP. Let us now consider also, how the same is 
[^; against natural reason and natural operation. 

ciS'^dStrf ' which although they prevail not against God's 
leafon^' vi^ord, yct wlicu they be joined with God's word, 
they be of great moment to confirm any truth. 
Natural reason abhorreth vacuum, that is to say, 
that there should be any empty place, wherein 
no substance should be. But if there remain no 
bread nor wine, the place where they were be- 
fore, and where their accidents be, is filled with 
no substance, but remaineth vacuum, clean con- 
trary to the order of nature. We see also that 
the wine, though it be consecrated, yet will it 
turn to vinegar, and the bread will mould, which 
then be nothing else but sour wine and moulded 
bread, which could not wax sour nor mouldy, 
if there were no bread nor wine there at all , 
And if the sacraments were now burnt, (as in the 
old church they burned all that remained un- 
eaten,) let the Papists tell what is burnt. They 
must needs say, that it is either bread, or the 
body of Christ. But bread (say they) is none 


there. Then must they needs burn the body of 
Christ, and be called Christ-burners, (as hereto- 
fore they have burned many of his members,) 
except they will say, that accidents burn alone 
without any substance, contrary to all the course 
of nature. The sacramental bread and wine also 
will nourish, which nourishment naturally com- 
eth of the substance of the meats and drinks, and 
not of the accidents. The wine also will poison, 
(as divers bishops of Rome have had experi- 
ences, both in poisoning of others, and being 
poisoned themselves,) which poisoning they 
cannot ascribe to the most wholesome blood of 
our Saviour Christ, but only to the poisoned 
wine. And most of all it is against the nature of 
accidents, to be in nothing. For the definition 
of accidents is to be in some substance, so that 
if they be, they must needs be in something. 
And if they be in nothing, then they be not. 
And a thousand things more of like foolishness 
do the Papists affirm by their Transubstantiation, 
contrary to all nature and reason ; as that two 
bodies be in one place, and one body in many 
places at one time, and that substances be gen- 
dered of accidents only, and accidents converted 
into substances, and a body to be in a place 
and occupy no room, and generation to be with- 
out corruption, and corruption without genera- 
tion, with many such like things, against all 
order and principles of nature and reason. 

E 2 


CHAP. The Papistical doctrine is also against all our 
outward senses, called our five wits. For our 


Ja'id^cfrTne" eyes say, they see there bread and wine, our 
against all noscs suicll bread and wine, our mouths taste, 
and our hands feel bread and wine. And al- 
though the article of our faith be above all our 
outward senses, so that we believe things which 
we can neither see, feel, hear, smell, nor taste, 
yet they be not contrary to our senses, at the 
least so contrary, that in such things which we 
from time to time do see, smell, feel, hear, and 
taste, we shall not trust our senses, but believe 
clean contrary. Christ never made no such ar- 
ticle of our faith. Our faith teacheth us to be- 
lieve things that we see not; but it doth not bid 
us, that we shall not believe that we see daily 
with our eyes, and hear with our ears, and grope 
with our hands. For although our senses can- 
not reach so far as our faith doth, yet so far as 
the compass of our senses doth usually reach, 
our faith is not contrary to the same, but rather 
our senses do confirm our faith. Or else what 
availeth it to St. Thomas, for the confirmation of 
Christ's resurrection, that he did put his hand 
into Christ's side, and felt his wounds, if he 
might not trust his senses, nor give no credit 
thereto ? And what a wide door is here opened 
to Valentinus, Marcion, and other hereticks, 
which said that Christ was not crucified, but 
that Simon Cvrenaeus was crucified for him, al- 


though to the sight of the people it seemed that 
Christ was crucified ? Or to such hereticks as 
said, that Christ was no man, although to men's 
sights he appeared in the form of man, and 
seemed to be hungry, dry, weary ; to weep, 
sleep, eat, drink, yea and to die like as other 
men do ? For if we once admit this doctrine, 
then no credit is to be given to our senses, we 
open a large field, and give a great occasion unto 
an innumerable rabblement of most heinous he- 
resies. And if there be no trust to be given to 
our senses in this matter of the sacrament, why 
then do the Papists so stoutly affirm, that the 
accidents remain after the consecration, which 
cannot be judged but by the senses? For the 
Scripture speaketh no word of the accidents of 
bread and wine, but of the bread and wine 
themselves. And it is against the nature and 
definition of accidents to be alone without any 
substance. Wherefore if we may not trust our 
senses in this matter of the sacrament, then if 
the substance of the bread and wine be gone, 
why may we not then, say, that the accidents be 
gone also ? And if we must needs believe our 
senses, as concerning the accidents of bread and 
wine, why may we not do the like of the sub- 
stance, and that rather than of the accidents ? 
Forasmuch as after the consecration, the Scrip- 
ture saith in no place, that there is no substance 
of bread nor of wine, but calleth them still by 


such names, as signify the substances, and not 
the accidents. And finally, if our senses be 
daily deceived in this matter, then is the sensible 
sacrament nothing else, but an illusion of our 
senses. And so we make much for their pur- 
pose, that said that Christ was a crafty juggler, 
that made things to appear to men's sights, that 
indeed were no such things, but forms only, 
figures and appearances of them. But to con- 
clude in few words this process of our senses, 
let all the Papists lay their heads together, and 
they shall never be able to shew one article of 
our faith, so directly contrary to our senses, that 
all our senses by daily experience shall affirm a 
thing to be, and yet our faith shall teach us the 
contrary thereunto. 
CHAP. Now forasmuch as it is declared, how this Pa- 
^- pistical opinion of Transubstantiation is against 

Ja'iSS' ^^^ word of God, against nature, against reason, 
to theSii ^^d against all our senses, we shall shew fur- 
autVorsof thcrmorc, that it is against the faith and doc- 
church. trme of the old authors of Christ's church, be- 
ginning at those authors, which were nearest 
unto Christ's time, and therefore might best 
justinus. know the truth herein. First, Justinus, a great 
learned man, and an holy martyr, the oldest au- 
thor that this day is known to write any treatise 
upon the sacraments, and wrote not much 
above one hundred years after Christ's ascen- 


He writeth in his second Apology, " That the 
bread, water, and wine in this sacrament, are 
not to be taken as other common meats and 
drinks be, but they be meats ordained purposely 
to give thanks to God, and therefore be called 
Eucharistia, and be called also the body and 
blood of Christ. And that it is lawful for none 
to eat or drink of them, but that profess Christ, 
and live according to the same. And yet the 
same meat and drink," saith he, *' is changed 
into our flesh and blood, and nourisheth our bo- 
dies." By which saying it is evident, that Jus- 
tinus thought, that the bread and wine remained 
still, for else it could not have been turned into 
our flesh and blood, to nourish our bodies. 
Next to him was Ireneeus ^, above one hundred 
and fifty years after Christ, who (as it is to be 
supposed) could not be deceived in the neces- 
sary points of our faith, for he was a disciple of 
Polycarpus, which was disciple to St. John the 
Evangelist. This Ireneeus followeth the sense 
of Justinus wholly in this matter, and almost 
also his words, saying, *' That the bread wherein 
we give thanks unto God, although it be of the 
earth, yet when the name of God is called upon ■ 
it, it is not then common bread, but the bread 
of thanksgiving, having two things in it, one 
earthly and the other heavenly. What meant 

^ Irenaeus contra Valentin, li. 4. cap. ^4. 


he by the heavenly thing, but the sanctification 
which Cometh by the invocation of the name of 
God ? And w^hat by the earthly thing, but the 
very bread, which (as he said before) is of the 
earth, and which also (he saith) doth nourish 
our bodies, as other bread doth which we do 

Shortly after Irenaeus was Origen, about two 
hundred years after Christ's ascension ; who 
also affirmeth, that the material bread remain- 
eth, saying, "That the nature of the bread avail- 
eth nothing, but goeth down into the belly, and 
is voided downward ; but the word of God, 
spoken upon the bread, is it that availeth^" 
After Origen came Cyprian the holy martyr, 
about the year of our Lord 250, who writeth 
against them that ministered this sacrament with 
water only, and without wine. " Forasmuch," 
saith he, " as Christ said, I am a true vine, 
therefore the blood of Christ is not water, but 
wine ; nor it cannot be thought that his blood 
(whereby we be redeemed and have life) is in 
the cup, when wine is not in the cup, whereby 
the blood of Christ is shewed \" 

What words could Cyprian have spoken more 
plainly, to shew that the wine doth remain, than 
to say thus : " If there be no wine, there is no 

^ Origenes in Math. cap. 15. 

* Cyprian, ad Csecilium, li. 2. Epistola 3. 


blood of Christ." And yet he speaketh shortly 
after, as plainly, in the same Epistle : ** Christ," 
saith he, '* taking the cup, blessed it, and gave 
it to his disciples, saying, * Drink you all of this, 
for this is the blood of the New Testament, which 
shall be shed for many, for the remission of sins. 
I say unto you, that from henceforth I will not 
drink of this creature of the vine, until I shall 
drink with you new wine in the kingdom of my 
Father.' By these words of Christ," says St. 
Cyprian, ** we perceive, that the cup which the 
Lord offered, was not only water, but also wine ; 
and that it was wine, that Christ called his 
blood ; whereby it is clear, that Christ's blood is 
not offered, if there be no wine in the chalice." 
And after it followeth : '' How shall we drink 
with Christ new wine of the creature of the vine, 
if in the sacrifice of God the Father and of Christ 
we do not offer wine ?" In these words of St. 
Cyprian appeareth most manifestly, that in this 
sacrament is not only offered very wine, that is 
made of grapes that come of the vine, but also 
that we drink the same. And yet the same giv- 
eth us to understand, that if we drink that wine 
worthily, we drink also spiritually the very blood 
of Christ, which was shed for our sins. 

Eusebius Emissenus, a man of singular fame Eusebius 

^ Emissenus. 

in learning, about three hundred years after 
Christ's ascension, did in few words set out this 
matter so plainly, (both how the bread and wine 


be converted into the body and blood of Christ, 
and yet remain still in their nature, and also 
how, besides the outward receiving of bread and 
wine, Christ is inwardly by faith received in our 
hearts,) all this, I say, he doth so plainly set 
out, that more plainness cannot be reasonably 
desired in this matter. For he saith, that the 
conversion of the visible creatures of bread and 
wine, into the body and blood of Christ, is like 
unto our conversion in baptism, where out- 
wardly nothing is chafnged, but remaineth the 
same that was before, but all the alteration is 
inwardly and spiritually. '* If thou wilt know," 
saith he ^ ** how it ought not to seem to thee a 
new thing, and impossible, that earthly and cor- 
ruptible things be turned into the substance of 
Christ, look upon thyself, which art made new 
in baptism, when thou wast far from life, and 
banished as a stranger from mercy, and from the 
way of salvation, and inwardly wast dead, yet 
suddenly thou beganst another life in Christ, 
and wast made new by wholesome mysteries, 
and wast turned into the body of the church, not 
by seeing, but by believing ; and of the child of 
damnation, by a secret pureness, thou wast made 
the chosen son of God. Thou visibly didst re- 
main in the same measure, that thou hadst be- 
fore, but invisibly thou wast made greater, with- 

'' De Consecr. Distinct. 2. 


out any increase of thy body. Thou wast the 
self-same person, and yet by increase of faith 
thou wast made another man. Outwardly no- 
thing was added, but all the change was in- 
wardly. And so was man made the son of 
Christ, and Christ formed in the mind of man. 
Therefore as thou (putting away thy former vile- 
ness) didst receive a new dignity, not feeling 
any change in thy body ; and as the curing of 
thy disease, the putting away of thine infection, 
the wiping away of thy filthiness, be not seen 
with thine eyes, but believed in thy mind : so 
likewise, when thou dost go up to the reverend 
altar, to feed upon spiritual meat, in thy faith 
look upon the body and blood of him that is thy 
God, honour him, touch him with thy mind, 
tak^ him in the hand of thy heart, and chiefly 
drink him with the draught of thy inward man." 
Hitherto have I rehearsed the sayings of Euse- 
bius, which be so plain, that no man can wish 
more plainly to be declared, that this mutation 
of the bread and wine into the body and blood 
of Christ, is a spiritual mutation, and that out- 
wardly nothing is changed. But as outwardly 
we eat the bread and drink the wine with our 
mouths, so inwardly by faith we spiritually eat 
the very flesh, and drink the very blood, of 

Hilarius also, in few words, saith the same. nuaiiu». 
" There is a figure," saith he ; '* for bread and 


wine be outwardly seen. And there is also a 
truth of that figure ; for the body and blood of 
Christ be of a truth inwardly believed." And 
this Hilarius was within less than three hundred 
and fifty years after Christ. 

And Epiphanius, shortly after the same time, 
saith% that the bread is meat, but the virtue that 
is in it, is it that giveth life. But if there were 
no bread at all, how could it be meat ? 

About the same time, or shortly after, about 
the year of our Lord 400, St. John Chrysos- 
tome writeth thus, against them that used only 
water in the sacrament. ** Christ," saith he, 
" minding to pluck up that heresy by the roots, 
used wine, as well before his resurrection, when 
he gave the mysteries, as after at his table with- 
out mysteries. For he saith, of the fruit of the 
vine ; which surely bringeth forth no water, but 
wine**." These words of Chrysostome declare 
plainly, that Christ in his holy table both drank 
wine, and gave wine to drink, which had not 
been true, if no wine had remained after the con- 
secration, as the Papists feign. And yet more 
plainly St. Chrysostome ' declareth this matter 
in another place, saying, '* The bread before it 
be sanctified, is called bread, but when it is 

' Epiphanius contra haereses, lib. 3. 10. 2. Et in Anace- 

^ Chrysost. in Mat. ca. 26. horn. 83. 

I Ad Ceesarium monachum. / 


sanctified by the means of the priest, it is deli- 
vered from the name of bread, and is exalted to 
the name of the Lord's body, although the na- 
ture of bread doth still remain." The nature of 
bread (saith he) doth still remain, to the utter 
and manifest confutation of the Papists, which 
say, that the accidents of bread do remain, but 
not the nature and substance. At the same 
time was St. Ambrose, who declareth the alter- Ambrosius. 
ation of bread and wine into the body and blood 
of Christ, not to be such, that the nature and 
substance of bread and wine be gone, but that 
through grace there is a spiritual mutation by 
the mighty power of God, so that he that wor- 
thily eateth of that bread doth spiritually eat 
Christ, and dwelleth in Christ, and Christ in 
him. " For," saith St. Ambrose^, speaking of 
this change of bread into the body of Christ, 
" if the word of God be of that force that it can 
make things of nought, and those things to be 
which never were before, much more it can 
make things that were before still to be, and 
also to be changed into other things." And he 
bringeth, for example hereof, the change of us 
in baptism, wherein a man is so changed, (as is 
before declared in the words of Eusebius,) that 
he is made a new creature, and yet his substance 

' De iis qui mysteriis initiantur, cap. ultim. et de sacramentis, 
li. 4. ca. 4. 


remaineth the same that was before. And St. 
Aiigustimis. Augustine % about the same time, wrote thus : 
** That which you see in the altar, is the bread 
and the cup, which also your eyes do shew you. 
But faith sheweth further, that bread is the body 
of Christ, and the cup his blood." Here he de- 
clareth four things to be in the sacrament : two 
that we see, which be bread and wine; and 
other two, which we see not, but by faith only, 
which be the body and blood of Christ. And 
the same thing he declareth also as plainly in 
another place '', saying, " The sacrifice of the 
church consisteth of two things ; of the visible 
kind of the element, and of the invisible flesh 
and blood of our Lord Jesu Christ, both of the 
sacrament, and of the thing signified by the sa- 
crament : even as the person of Christ consist- 
eth of God and man, forasmuch as he is very 
God and very man. For every thing containeth 
in it the very nature of those things, whereof it 
consisteth. Now the sacrifice of the church 
consisteth of two things ; of the sacrament, and 
of the thing thereby signified, that is to say, the 
body of Christ. Therefore there is both the 
sacrament, and the thing of the sacrament, which 
is Christ's body." What can be devised to be 
spoken more plainly against the error of the Pa- 

^ Auguatinus in sermone ad infantes, 
'' In lib. sententiarum Prosperi. 


pists, which say that no bread nor wine remain- 
eth in the sacrament ? For as the person of 
Christ consisteth of two natures, that is to say, 
of his manhood, and of his Godhead, (and there- 
fore both those natures remain in Christ,) even 
so (saith St. Augustine) the sacrament consist- 
eth of two natures ; of the elements of bread and 
wine, and of the body and blood of Christ ; and 
therefore both these natures must needs remain 
in the sacrament. 

For the more plain understanding hereof, it is 
to be noted, that there were certain hereticks, as 
Simon, Menander, Marcion, Valentinus, Basi- 
lides, Cerdon, Manes, Eutyches Manichaeus, 
Apollinaris, and divers other of like sorts, which 
said, that Christ was very God, but not a very 
man, although in eating, drinking, sleeping, and 
all other operations of man, to men's judgments 
he appeared like unto a man. Others there 
were, as Artemon, Theodorus, Sabellius, Paulus 
Samosathenus, Marcellus, Photinus, Nestorius, 
and many others of the same sects, which said, 
that he was a very natural man, but not very 
God, although in giving the blind their sight, 
the dumb their speech, the deaf their hearing, 
in healing suddenly with his word all diseases, 
in raising to life them that were dead, and in all 
other works of God, he shewed himself as he 
had been God. Yet other there were which, 
seeing the Scripture so plain in those two mat- 


ters, confessed that he was both God and man, 
but not both at one time. For before his incar- 
nation (said they) . he was God only, and not 
man ; and after his incarnation he ceased from 
his Godhead, and became a man only, and not 
God, until his resurrection or ascension, and 
then (said they) he left his manhood, and was 
only God again, as he was before his incarnation. 
So that when he was man, he was not God, and 
when he was God, he was not man. But against 
these vain heresies, the Catholick faith, by the 
express word of God, holdeth and believeth, 
that Christ after his incarnation left not his di- 
vine nature, but remained still God, as he was 
before, being together at one time (as he is still) 
both perfect God and perfect man. And for a 
plain declaration hereof, the old ancient authors 
give two examples ; one is of man, which is made 
of two parts, of a soul and of a body, and each 
of these two parts remain in man at one time ; 
so that when the soul, by the almighty power 
of God, is put into the body, neither the body 
nor soul perisheth thereby, but thereof is made 
a perfect man, having a perfect soul and a per- 
fect body remaining in him both at one time. 
The other example, which the old authors do 
bring in for this purpose, is of the holy supper 
of our Lord, which consisteth (say they) of two 
parts ; of the sacrament, or visible element of 
bread and wine, and of the bodv and blood of 


Christ. And as in them that duly receive the 
sacrament the very natures of bread and wine 
cease not to be there, but remain there still, and 
be eaten corporally, as the body and blood of 
Christ be eaten spiritually : so likewise doth the 
divine nature of Christ remain still with his hu- 
manity. Let now the Papists avaunt themselves 
of their Transubstantiation, that there remaineth 
no bread nor wine in the ministration of the sa- 
crament, if they will defend the wicked heresies 
before rehearsed, that Christ is not God and 
man both together. But to prove that this was 
the mind of the old authors, beside the saying of 
St. Augustine here recited, I shall also rehearse 
divers other. 

St. John Chrysostome' writeth against the 
pestilent error of Apollinaris, which affirmed 
that the godhead and manhood in Christ were 
so mixed and confounded together, that they 
both made but one nature. Against whom St. 
John Chrysostome writeth thus : ** When thou 
spcakest of God, thou must consider a thing 
that in nature is single, without composition, 
without conversion, that is invisible, immortal, 
incircumscriptible, incomprehensible, with such 
like. And when thou speakest of man, thou 
meanest a nature that is weak, subject to hun- 
ger, thirst, weeping, fear, sweating, and such 

; Chrysost, ad Cacsuiium Monaclmm, 


like passions, which cannot be in the divine na= 
ture. And when thou speakest of Christ, thou 
joinest two natures together in one person, who 
is both passible and impassible : passible, as 
concerning his flesh, and impassible in his 
deity." And after, he concludeth, saying, 
'-' Wherefore Christ is both God and man. God 
by his impassible nature, and man because he 
suffered. He himself being one person, one son, 
one lord, hath the dominion and power of two 
natures joined together, which be not of one sub- 
stance, but each of them hath his properties dis- 
tinct from the other. And therefore remaineth 
there two natures, distinct, and not confounded. 
For as before the consecration of the bread, we 
call it bread, but when God's grace hath sancti- 
fied it by the priest, it is delivered from the name 
of bread, and is exalted to the name of the body 
of the Lord, although the nature of the bread 
remain still in it, and it is not called two bodies, 
but one body of God's son; so likewise here, the 
divine nature resteth in the body of Christ, and 
these two make one son, and one person." 
These words of St. John Chrysostome declare, 
and that not in obscure terms, but in plain 
words, that after the consecration the nature of 
bread remaineth still, although it have an higher 
name, and be called the body of Christ ; to sig- 
nify unto the godly eaters of that bread, that they 
spiritually eat the supernatural bread of the body 


of Christ, who spiritually is there present, and 
dwelleth in them, and they in him, although 
corporeally he sitteth in heaven, at the right 
hand of his Father. 

Hereunto accordeth also Gelasius^ writing 
against Eutyches and Nestorius, of whom the 
one said, that Christ was a perfect man, but not 
God, and the other affirmed clean contrary, that 
he was very God, but not man. But against 
these two heinous heresies Gelasius proveth, by 
most manifest Scriptures, that Christ is both 
God and man, and that after his incarnation 
remained in him [[as well]] the nature of his 
Godhead, [[as the nature of his manhood;]] so 
that he hath in him two natures with their na- 
tural properties, and yet he is but one Christ. 
And for the more evident declaration hereof, he 
bringeth two examples ; the one is of man, who 
being but one, yet he is made of two parts, and 
hath in him two natures, remaining both toge- 
ther in him, that is to say, the body and the soul 
with their natural properties. The other exam- 
ple is of the sacrament of the body and blood of 
Christ; *' which," saith he, *' is a godly thing, 
and yet the substance or nature of bread and 
wine do not cease to be there still." Note well 
these words against all the Papists of our time, 
that Gelasius (which was bishop of Rome more 
than a thousand years past) writeth of this sa- 

^ Gelasius contra Eutychcn ct Neytorium. 
F 2 

68 AGAtNST TH£ error OF 

tt-ament, that the bread and wine cease not to 
be there still, as Christ ceased not to be God 
after his incarnation, but remained still perfect 
God as he was before. 

Theodoretus ' also affirmeth the same, both in 
his first and in his second dialogue. In the first 
he saith thus : " He that called his natural body 
wheat and bread, and also called himself a vine, 
the self-same called bread and wine his body 
and blood> and yet changed not their natures." 
And in his second dialogue he saith more plainly. 
" For," saith he, *' as the bread and wine after 
the consecration lose not their proper nature, 
but keep their former substance, form, and figure, 
which they had before, even so the body of 
Christ, after his ascension, was changed into the 
godly substance." Now let the Papists choose 
which of these two they will grant, (for one of 
them they must needs grant,) either that the na- 
ture and substance of bread and wine remain 
still in the sacrament after the consecration, 
(and then must they recant their doctrine of 
Transubstantiation,) or else that they be of the 
error of Nestorius and others, which did say, 
that the nature of the Godhead remained not in 
Christ after his incarnation. For all these old 
authors agree, that it is in the one, as it is in 
the other. 

' Theodoretuy in Dialogis. 


Now forasmuch as it is proved sufficiently, ^hap. 


(as well by the holy Scripture, as by natural . 


operation, by natural reason, by all our senses, stantiaHqn 

■"■ came fioiu 

and by the most old and best learned authors, Rome- 
and holy martyrs of Christ's church,) that the 
substaace of bread and wine do remain, and be 
received of faithful people in the blessed sacra- 
ment, or supper of the Lord ; it is a thing wor- 
thy to be considered and well weighed, what 
moved the school authors of late years to defend 
the contrary opinion, not only so far from all ex- 
perience of our senses, and so far from all reason, 
but also clean contrary :;to the old church of 
Christ, and to God's most holy word. 

Surely nothing moved them thereto so much, 
as did the vain faith which they had in the 
church and see of Rome. For Johannes Scotus"*, 
otherwise called Duns, (the subtlest of all the 
school authors,) in treating of this matter of 
Transubstantiation, sheweth plainly the cause 
thereof. " For," saith he, " the words of the 
Scripture might be expounded more easily and 
more plainly without Transubstantiation; but 
the church did choose this sense, (which is more 
hard,) being moved thereto, as it seemeth, chiefly 
because that of the sacraments men ought to 
hold, as the holy church of Rome holdeth. But 
it holdeth, that bread is transubstantiate, oi 

f Scotus, sup. i, sen. distinct. 11. 


turned into the body, and wine into the blood, 
as it is shewed De summa Trinitate, etjide Catho- 
Uca, fir miter credimus . ' ' 
Gabriel. And Gabriel CBiel]] also, (who of all others 

wrote most largely upon the canon of the Mass,) 
saith thus : *' It is to be noted, that although it be 
taught in the Scripture, that the body of Christ 
is truly contained and received of Christian peo- 
ple under the kinds of bread and wine, yet how 
the body of Christ is there, whether by conver- 
sion of any thing into it, or without conversion 
the body is there with the bread, both the sub- 
stance and accidents lof bread remaining there 
still, it is not found expressed in the Bible. Yet 
forasmuch as of the sacraments men must hold 
as the holy church of Rome holdeth, as it is 
written, De hcei^eticis, ad abolendam ; and that 
church holdeth, and hath determined, that the 
bread is transubstantiated into the body of 
Christ, and the wine into his blood ; therefore is 
this opinion received of all them that be catho- 
lick, that the substance of bread remaineth not, 
but really and truly is turned, transubstantiated, 
and changed into the substance of the body of 
CHAP. Thus you have heard the cause, wherefore this 
opinion of Transubstantiation at this present is 
holden and defended among Christian people, 
that is to say, because the church of Rome hath 
so determined, although the contrary, by the 



Papists' own confession, appear to be more easy, 
more true, and more according to the Scripture. 
But because our English Papists (who speak 
more grossly herein than the Pope himself, 
affirming that the natural body of Christ is natu- 
rally in the bread and wine,) cannot, nor dare 
not, ground their faith, concerning Transub- 
stantiation, upon the church of Rome ; which 
although in name it may be called most holy, 
yet indeed it is the most stinking dunghill of all 
wickedness that is under heaven, and the very 
synagogue of the devil, which whosoever follow- 
eth, cannot but stumble, and fall into a pit full 
of errors ; because, I say, the English Papists 
dare not now establish their faith upon that 
foundation of Rome, therefore they seek fig- 
leaves, that is to say, vain reasons, gathered of 
their own brains, and authorities wrested from 
the intent mid mind of the authors, wherewith 
to cover and hide their shameful errors. Where- 
fore I thought it good somewhat to travel herein, 
to take away those fig-leaves, that their shame- 
ful errors may plainly to every man appear. 

The greatest reason and of most importance, chap. 
and of such strength, as they think, or at the 


least as they pretend, that all the world cannot reason o» the 

. . Papists to 

answer thereto, is this : Our Saviour Christ tak- prove their 

, . , . . Transub- 

ing the bread, brake it, and gave it to his disci- stantiation. 
pies, saying, This is my body: Now (say they) 
as soon as Christ had spoken these words, the 


bread was straightway altered and changed, 
and the substance thereof was converted into 
the substance of his precious body. But what 
The answer. Christian cars can patiently hear this doctrine, 
that Christ is every day made anew, and made 
of another substance than he was made of in his 
mother's womb ? For whereas, at his incarna- 
tion, he was made of the nature and substance 
of his blessed mother ; now, by these Papists' 
opinion, he is made every day of the nature and 
substance of bread and wine, which (as they 
say) be turned into the substance of his body 
and blood. O, what a marvellous metamorpho- 
sis and abominable heresy is this; to say that 
Christ is daily made anew, and of a new matter : 
whereof it foUoweth necessarily, that they make 
us every day a new Christ, and not the same that 
was born of the Virgin Mary, nor that was cru- 
cified upon the cross, as it shall be plainly proved 
by these arguments following. 

First, thus : if Christ's body that was cruci- 
fied was not made of bread, but the body that 
was eaten in the supper was made of bread, (as 
the Papists say,) then Christ's body that was 
eaten was not the same that was crucified. 

And again : if Christ's body that was cruci- 
fied, was not made of bread, and Christ's body 
that was crucified was the same that was eaten 
at his last supper, then Christ's body that was 
eaten was not made of thread. 


And moreover, if Christ's body that was eaten 
at the last supper was the same that was cruci- 
fied, and Christ's body that was eaten at the 
supper was made of bread, (as the Papists 
feign,) then Christ's body that was crucified was 
made of bread. 

And in like manner it followeth, if the body of 
Christ in the sacrament, be made of the sub- 
stance of bread and wine, and the same body 
was conceived in the Virgin's womb, then the 
body of Christ in the Virgin's womb was made 
of bread and wine. Or else turn the argument 
thus : the body of Christ in the Virgin's womb 
was not made of bread and wine, but this body 
of Christ in the sacrament is made of bread and 
wine ; then this body of Christ is not the same 
that was conceived in the Virgin's womb. 

Another argument. Christ that was born in 
the Virgin's womb, as concerning his body, was 
made of none other substance but of the sub- 
stance of his blessed mother ; but Christ in the 
sacrament is made of another substance ; then 
he is another Christ. And so the Antichrist of 
Rome, the chief author of all idolatry, would 
bring faithful Christian people from the true 
worshipping of Christ, that was made and born 
of the blessed Virgin Mary, through the opera- 
tion of the Holy Ghost, and suifered for us upon 
the cross, to worship another Christ made of 
bread and wine, through the consecration of a 


Popish priest. And thus the Popish priests 
make themselves the makers of God. For (say 
they) the priest by the words of consecration 
maketh that thing which is eaten and drunken 
in the Lord's Supper; and that (say they) is 
Christ himself both God and man, and so they 
take upon them to make both God and man. 
But let all true worshippers worship one God, 
one Christ, once corporeally made, of one only 
corporeal substance, that is to say, of the blessed 
Virgin Mary, that once died, and rose once 
again, once ascended into heaven, and there sit- 
teth and shall sit at the right hand of his Father 
evermore, although spiritually he be every day 
amongst us, and whosoever come together in his 
name, he is in the midst among them. And he 
is the spiritual pasture and food of our souls, as 
meat and drink is of our bodies, which he signi- 
fieth unto us by the institution of his most holy 
supper in bread and wine, declaring that as the 
bread and wine corporally comfort and feed our 
bodies, so doth he with his flesh and blood spiri- 
tually comfort and feed our souls. Ajid now 
may be easily answered the Papists' argument, 
whereof they do so much boast. For brag they 
never so much of the conversion of bread and 
wine into the body and blood of Christ, yet that 
conversion is spiritual, and putteth not away the 
corporal presence of the material bread and wine. 
But forasmuch as the same is a most holy sa- 


crament of our spiritual nourishment, (which we 
have by the body and blood of our Saviour 
Christ,) there must needs remain the sensible 
element, that is to say, bread and wine, without 
the which there can be no sacrament : as in our 
spiritual regeneration there can be no sacrament 
of baptism, if there be no water. For as bap- 
tism is no perfect sacrament of spiritual regene- 
ration, without there be as well the element of 
water, as the Holy Ghost, spiritually regene- 
rating the person that is baptized, (which is sig- 
nified by the said water,) even so the supper of 
our Lord can be no perfect sacrament of spiritual 
food, except there be as well bread and wine, as 
the body and blood of our Saviour Christ, spiri- 
tually feeding us, which by the said bread and 
wine is signified. And howsoever the body and 
blood of our Saviour Christ be there present, 
they may as well be present there with the sub- 
stance of bread and wine, as with the accidents 
of the same, as the school authors do confess 
themselves ; and it shall be well proved if the 
adversaries will deny it. 

Thus you see the strongest argument of the 
Papists answered unto ; and the chief foundation, 
whereupon they build their error of Transub- 
stantiation, utterly subverted and overthrown. 

Another reason have they of like strength. If chap. 
the bread should remain (say they) then should 


follow many absurdities, and chiefly, that Christ argumeutfor 


Transub- hath taken the nature of bread, as he took the 


nature of man, and so joined it to his substance. 
And then as we have God verily incarnate for 
our redemption, so should we have him impa- 
The answer. Thou mayst cousidcr, good reader, that the 
rest of their reasons be very weak and feeble, 
when these be the chief and strongest. Truth 
it is indeed, that Christ should have been impa- 
nate, if he had joined the bread unto his sub- 
stance in unity of person, that is to say, if he had 
joined the bread unto him in such sort, that he 
had made the bread one person with himself. 
But forasmuch as he is joined to the bread but 
sacramentally, there foUoweth no impanation 
thereof, no more than the Holy Ghost is ina- 
quate, that is to say, made water, being sacra- 
mentally joined to the water in baptism. Nor 
he was not made a dove, when he took upon him 
the form of a dove, to signify that he, whom St. 
John did baptize, was very Christ. But rather 
of the error of the Papists themselves, (as one 
error draweth another after it,) should follow the 
great absurdity, which they speak upon, that is 
to say, that Christ should be impanate and invi- 
nate. For if Christ do use the bread in such 
wise, that he doth not annihilate and make no- 
thing of it, (as the Papists say,) but maketh of 
it his own body, then is the bread joined to his 
body in a greater unity, than is his humanity to 


his Godhead. For his Godhead is adjoined unto 
his humanity in unity of person, and not of na- 
ture : but our Saviour Christ (by their saying) 
adjoineth bread unto his body in unity both of 
nature and person. So that the bread and the 
body of Christ be but one thing, both in nature 
and person. And so is there a more entire 
union between Christ and bread, than between 
his Godhead and manhood, or between his soul 
and his body. And thus these arguments of the 
Papists return (like rivetted nails) upon their 
own heads. 

Yet a third reason they have, which they ga^ chap. 
ther out of the sixth of John, where Christ saith, 

" I am lively bread, which came from heaven, reason'."^* 
If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for 
ever. And the bread which I will give is my 
flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." 
Then they reason after this fashion. If the bread 
which Christ gave, be his flesh, then it cannot 
also be material bread ; and so it must needs 
follow, that the material bread is gone, and that 
none other substance remaineth, but the flesh 
of Christ only. 

To this is soon made answer, that Christ, in The answe 
that place of John, spake not of the material 
and sacramental bread, nor of the sacramental 
eating, (for that was spoken two or three years 
before the sacrament was first ordained,) but he 
spake of spiritual bread (many times repeating, 


" I am the bread of life, which came from hea- 
ven,") and of spiritual eating by faith, after which 
sort he was at the same present time eaten of 
as many as believed on him, although the sacra- 
ment was not at that time made and instituted. 
And therefore he said, " Your fathers did eat 
manna in the desert, and died ; but he that eat- 
eth this brea^ shall live for ever." Therefore 
this place of St. John can in no wise be under- 
stood of the sacramental bread, which neither 
came from heaven, neither giveth life to all that 
eat it. Nor of such bread Christ could have 
then presently said. This is my flesh, except 
they will say that Christ did then consecrate; 
so many years before the institution of his Holy 
CHAP. Now that I have made a full, direct, and plain 
answer to the vain reasons and caviilations of 



wrested by thc Papists ; ordcT requireth to make likewise 
for their"'' auswcT uuto thcir sophistical allegations and 

Transub- • r t i • /• 

stantiation. wrcstmg ot authors unto their fantastical pur- 
poses. There be chiefly three places, which at 
the first shew seem much to make for their in- 
tent, but when they shall be thoroughly weigh- 
ed, they make nothing for them at all. 

The first is a place of Cyprian ", in his sermon 
of the Lord's Supper, where he saith, as is al- 
leged in the detection of the devil's sophistry, 

• Cyprianus de Coena Domini. 


'* This bread, which our Lord gave to his disci- 
ples, changed in nature, but not in outward 
form, is, by the omnipotency of God's word, 
made flesh." Here the Papists stick tooth and 
nail to these words, ** changed in nature." Ergo 
(say they) the nature of the bread is changed. 
Here is one chief point of the devil's sophistry The answer. 
used, who in allegation of Scripture useth ever, 
either to add thereto, or to take away from it, or 
to alter the sense thereof. And so have they, in 
this author, left out those words which would 
open plainly all the whole matter. For next the 
words, which be here before of them recited, do 
follow these words : " As in the person of Christ 
the humanity was seen, and the divinity was hid, 
even so did the divinity ineffably put itself into 
the visible sacrament." Which words of Cy- 
prian do manifestly shew, that the sacrament 
doth still remain with the divinity; and that, sa- 
cramentally, the divinity is poured into the bread 
and wine, the same bread and wine still remain- 
ing : like as the same divinity, by unity of per- 
son, was in the humanity of Christ, the same 
humanity still remaining with the divinity. And 
yet the bread is changed, not in shape, nor sub- 
stance, but in nature, (as Cyprian truly saith,) 
not meaning that the natural substance of bread 
is clean gone, but that, by God's word, there is 
added thereto another higher property, nature, 
and condition, far passing the nature and condi • 


tion of common bread, that is to say> that the 
bread doth shew unto us, (as the same Cyprian 
saith,) that we be partakers of the Spirit of God, 
and most purely joined unto Christ, and spiri- 
tually fed with his flesh and blood ; so that now 
the said mystical bread is both a corporal food 
for the body, and a spiritual food for the soul. 
And likewise is the nature of the water changed 
in baptism ; forasmuch as beside his common 
nature^ (which is to wash and make clean the 
body,) it declareth unto us, that our souls be 
also washed and made clean by the Holy Ghost. 
And thus is answered the chief authority of the 
doctors, which the Papists take for the principal 
defence of their error. But for further declara- 
tion of St. Cyprian's mind herein, read the place 
of him before recited, fol. 78. 
ciiAr. Another authority they have of St.JohnChry- 
_ sostome, which they boast also to be invincible. 


chrysosto- Chrysostomc (say they) writeth us, in a certain 
homely De Eucharistia: " Dost thou see bread? 
Dost thou see wine ? Do they void beneath, as 
other meats do ? God forbid ; think not so. For 
as wax, if it be put into the fire, it is made like 
the fire, no substance remaineth, nothing is left : 
so here also think thou that the mysteries be 
consumed by the substance of the body." At 
these words of Chrysostome the Papists do tri- 
iimph, as though they had won the field. Lo, 
(say they,) doth not Chrysostomus, the great 


clerk, say most plainly, that we see neither bread 
nor wine ? but that, as wax in the fire, they be 
consumed to nothing, so that no substance re- 
maineth ? But if they had rehearsed no more The answer. 
but the very next sentence that followeth in 
Chrysostome, (which craftily and maliciously 
they leave out,) the meaning of St. John Chry- 
sostome would easily have appeared, and yet 
will make them blush, if they be not utterly past 
shame. For after the foresaid words of Chry- 
sostome, immediately follow these words : 
" Wherefore," saith he, " when ye come to 
these mysteries, do not think that you receive 
by a man the body of God, but that with 
tongues you receive fire by the angels sera- 
phim." And straight after it followeth thus : 
" Think that the blood of salvation floweth out 
of the pure and godly side of Christ, and so 
coming to it receive it with pure lips. Where- 
fore, brethren, I pray you and beseech you, let 
us not be from the church, nor let us not be oc- 
cupied there with vain communication, but let 
us stand fearful and trembling, casting down our 
eyes, lifting up our minds, mourning privily 
without speech, and rejoicing in our hearts." 
These words of Chrysostome do follow immedi- 
ately after the other words, which the Papists 
before rehearsed. Therefore if the Papists will 
gather of the words by them recited, that there 
is neither bread nor wine in the sacrament, J 



may as well gather of the words that follow, that 
there is neither priest nor Christ's body. For 
as in the former sentence Chrysostome saith, 
that we may not think that we see bread and 
wine : so in the second sentence he saith, that 
we may not think that we receive the body of 
Christ of the priest's hands. Wherefore if upon 
the second sentence, (as the Papists themselves 
will say,) it cannot be truly gathered, that in 
the holy communion there is not the body of 
Christ ministered by the priest : then must they 
confess also, that it cannot be well and truly ga- 
thered upon the first sentence, that there is no 
bread nor wine. But there be all these things 
together in the holy communion : Christ himself 
spiritually eaten and drunken, and nourishing 
the right believers ; the bread and wine as a sa- 
crament declaring the same ; and the priest as a 
minister thereof. Wherefore St. John Chrysos- 
tome meant not absolutely to deny that there is 
bread and wine, or to deny utterly the priest 
and the body of Christ to be there; but he useth 
Negatives a spccch wliicli is no pure nes^ative, but a ne^a- 

by coinpa- . . 

lison. tivc by comparison: which fashion of speech is 
commonly used, not only in the Scripture, and 
among all good authors, but also in all manner 
of languages. For when two things be compared 
together, in the extolling of the more excell-ent, 
or abasing of the more vile, is many times used 
a negative by comparison, which nevertheless is 


no pure negative, but only in the respect of the 
more excellent, or the more base. As by exam- 
ple : when the people, rejecting the prophet Sa- 
muel, desired to have a king, Almighty God said 
to Samuel, " They have not rejected thee, but 
me "." Not meaning by this negative absolutely 
that they had not rejected Samuel, (in whose 
place they desired to have a king,) but by that 
one negative by comparison he understood two 
affirmatives, that is to say, that they had reject- 
ed Samuel, and not him alone, but also that they 
had chiefly rejected God. And when the pro- 
phet David said in the person of Christ, ''I am 
a worm, and not a man"";" by this negative he 
denied not utterly that Christ was a man, but 
(the more vehemently to express the great humi- 
liation of Christ) he said, that he was not abased 
only to the nature of man, but was brought so 
low, that he might rather be called a worm than 
a man. This manner of speech was familiar and 
usual to St. Paul, as when he said, " It is not I 
that do it, but it is the sin that dwelleth in me''." 
And in another place he saith, " Christ sent me 
not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel '." 
And again he saith, " My speech and preaching 
was not in words of man's persuasion, but in ma- 
nifest declaration of the spirit and power'." 
And he saith also, " Neither he that grafteth, 

• 1 Sam. viii. •' Psal, xxii. "* Rom, vii. '' 1 Cor, i. ' Ibicl, 

G 2 


nor he that watereth, is any thing ; but God that 
giveth the increase*." And he saith moreover, 
" It is not I that live, but Christ liveth within 
me"." — And " God forbid that I should rejoice 
in any thing, but in the cross of our Lord Jesu 
Christ"." And further, " We do not wrestle 
against flesh and blood, but against the spirits 
of darkness ^."' In all these sentences, and many 
other like, although they be negatives, never- 
theless St. Paul meant not clearly to deny that 
he did that evil whereof he spake, or utterly to 
say that he was not sent to baptize, (who indeed 
did baptize at certain times, and was sent to do 
all things that pertained to salvation,) or that in 
his office of setting forth God's word he used no 
witty persuasions, (which indeed he used most 
discreetly,) or that the grafter and waterer be 
nothing, (which be God's creatures made to his 
similitude, and without whose work there should 
be no increase,) or to say that he was not alive, 
(who both lived and ran through all countries, to 
set forth God's glory,) or clearly to affirm that he 
gloried and rejoiced in no other thing than in 
Christ's cross, (who rejoiced with all men that 
were in joy, and sorrowed with all that were in 
sorrow,) or to deny utterly that we wrestle 
against flesh and blood, which cease not daily 
to wrestle and war against our enemies, the 
world, the flesh, and the devil. 

' 1 Cor. lii. " Gal. ii. " Gal. vi. > Eplies. vi. 


In all these sentences, St. Paul (as I said) 
meant not clearly to deny these things, which 
undoubtedly were all true, but he meant, that 
in comparison of other greater things, these 
smaller were not much to be esteemed ; but 
that the greater things w^ere the chief things 
to be considered : as that sin, committed by his 
mfirmity, was rather to be imputed to original 
sin, or corruption of nature, which lay lurking 
within him, than to his own will and consent. 
And that although he was sent to baptize, yet 
he was chiefly sent to preach God's word. And 
that although he used wise and discreet persua- 
sions therein, yet the success thereof came prin- 
cipally of the power of God, and of the working 
of the Holy Spirit. And that although the 
grafter and waterer of the garden be some things, 
and do not a little in their offices, yet it is God 
chiefly that giveth the increase. And that al- 
though he lived in this world, yet his chief life, 
concerning God, was by Christ, whom he had 
living within him. And that although he gloried 
in many other things, yea, in his own infirmities, 
yet his greatest joy was in the redemption by 
the cross of Christ. And that although our spi- 
rit daily fighteth against our flesh, yet our chief 
and principal fight is against our ghostly ene- 
mies, the subtle and puissant wicked spirits and 

The same manner of speech used also St. 


Peter, in his first Epistle, saying, *' That the 
apparel of vromen should not be outwardly, with 
braided hair, and setting on of gold, nor in put- 
ting on of gorgeous apparel, but that the inward 
man of the heart should be without corrup- 
tion\" In which manner of speech he intended 
not utterly to forbid all braiding of hair, all gold 
and costly apparel, to all women ; for every one 
must be apparelled according to their condition, 
state, and degree ; but he meant hereby clearly 
to condemn all pride and excess in apparel, and 
to move all women that they should study to 
deck their souls inwardly with all virtues, and 
not to be curious outwardly to deck and adorn 
their bodies with sumptuous apparel. And our 
Saviour Christ himself was full of such manner 
of sj^eeches. " Gather not unto you," saith he, 
** treasure upon earth "" :" willing us thereby ra- 
ther to set our minds upon heavenly treasure, 
which ever endureth, than upon earthly trea- 
sure, which, by many sundry occasions, perish- 
eth, and is taken away from us. And yet 
worldly treasure must needs be had, and pos- 
sessed of some men, as the person, time, and 
occasion doth serve. Likewise he said, " When 
you be brought before kings and princes, think 
not what and how you shall answer'':" not will- 
ing us by this negative, that we should negli- 

' 1 Pet. iii. * Matt. vi. * Matt. x. 

tuansucstantiation; 87^ 

gently and unadvisedly answer we care not what, 
but that we should depend on our Heavenly Fa- 
ther, trusting that by his Holy Spirit He will 
sufficiently instruct us of answer, rather than to 
trust to any answer to be devised by our wit and 
study. And in the same manner he spake, when 
he said, " It is not you that speak, but it is the 
Spirit of God that speaketh within you'." For 
the Spirit of God is he, that principally putteth 
godly words into our mouths, and yet neverthe- 
less we do speak according to his moving. And 
to be short, in all these sentences following, that 
is to say, ** Call no man your father upon 
earth '^." — " Let no man call you lord or mas- 
ter '." — " Fear not them that kill the body ^" — 
" I came not to send peace upon earth ^" — " It 
is not in me to set you at my right hand or left 
hand**." — *' You shall not worship the Father 
neither in this mount, nor in Jerusalem '." — ** I 
take no witness at no man^" — *' My doctrine is 
not mine ^" — " I seek not my glory ""." In all 
these negatives, our Saviour Christ spake not 
precisely and utterly to deny all the foresaid 
things, but in comparison of them to prefer other 
things : as to prefer our Father and Lord in hea- 
ven, above any worldly father, lord, or master 
in earth, and his fear above the fear of any crea- 
ture, and his word and gospel above all worldly 

'^Matt.x. ''Matt.xxiii. -^Ibid. 'Matt.x. ^ Ibid. 
" Matt. XX. * John iv. ^ John v. ' John vii. '" John viii. 


peace ; also to prefer spiritual and inward ho- 
nouring of God in pure heart and mind, above 
local, corporal, and outward honour, and that 
Christ preferred his Father's glory above his 

Now forasmuch as I have declared at length 
the nature and kind of these negative speeches, 
(which be no pure negatives but by comparison,) 
it is easy hereby to make answer to St. John 
Chrysostome, who used this phrase of speech 
most of any author. For his meaning in his 
foresaid homily, was not that in the celebration 
of the Lord's Supper is neither bread nor wine, 
neither priest, nor the body of Christ, (which 
the Papists themselves must needs confess,) but 
his intent was, to draw our minds upwards to 
heaven, that we should not consider so much the 
bread, wine, priest, and body of Christ, as we 
should consider his divinity and Holy Spirit 
given unto us to our eternal salvation. And 
therefore in the same place he useth so many 
times these words, "Think, and think not;" 
willing us by those words, that we should not 
fix our thoughts and minds upon the bread, wine, 
priest, nor Christ's body ; but to lift up our 
hearts higher unto his spirit and divinity, with- 
out the which his body availeth nothing, as he 
said himself: *' It is the spirit that giveth life, 
the flesh availeth nothing"." And as the same 

" John vi. 


Chrysostome in many places movetli us not to 
consider the water in baptism, but rather to 
have respect to the Holy Ghost, received in bap- 
tism, and represented by the water; even so 
doth he in this homily of the holy communion 
move us to lift up our minds, from all visible and 
corporal things, to things invisible and spiritual. 
Insomuch, that although Christ was but once 
crucified, yet would Chrysostome have us to 
think that we see him daily whipped and scourg- 
ed before our eyes, and his body hanging upon 
the cross, and the spear thrust into his side, and 
the most holy blood to flow out of his side into 
our mouths. After which manner St. Paul wrote 
to the Galatians ", that Christ was painted and 
crucified before their eyes. Therefore, saith 
Chrysostome, in the same homily, a little before chrysosto- 
the place rehearsed, " What dost thou, O man ? ™"'' 
didst not thou promise to the priest, which said, 
Lift up your minds and hearts ; and thou didst 
answer. We lift them up unto the Lord? Art 
not thou ashamed and afraid, being at that same 
hour found a liar ? A wonderful thing : the table 
is set forth furnished with God's mysteries, the 
Lamb of God is offered for them, the priest is 
careful for them, spiritual fire cometh out of that 
heavenly table, the angels seraphim be there 
present, covering their faces with six wings. All 
the angelical powers, with the priest, be means 

" Galat. iii. 


and intercessors for you, a spiritual fire cometh 
down from heaven, blood in the cup is drunk 
out of the most pure side unto thy purification. 
And art not thou ashamed, afraid, and abashed, 
not endeavouring thyself to purchase God's 
mercy? O man, doth not thine own conscience 
condemn thee ? There be in the week one hun- 
dred and sixty-eight hours, and God asketh but 
one of them to be given wholly unto him, and 
thou consumest that in worldly business, in tri- 
fling and talking; with what boldness then shalt 
thou come to these holy mysteries, O corrupt 
conscience?" Hitherto I have rehearsed St. 
John Chrysostome's words, which do shew how 
our minds should be occupied at this holy table 
of our Lord, that is to say, withdrawn from the 
consideration of sensible things, unto the con- 
templation of most heavenly and godly things. 
And thus is answered this place of Chrysostome, 
which the Papists took for an insoluble, and a 
place that no man was able to answer. But for 
a further declaration of Chrysostome's mind in 
this matter, read the place of him before re- 
hearsed, fol. 60 and 65. 
CHAP. Yet there is another place of St. Ambrose p, 
XIII. which the Papists think maketh much for their 
purpose ; but, after due examination, it shall 
plainly appear how much they be deceived. 
They allege these words of St. Ambrose, in a 

P Ambros. de iis qui mysteriis initiantur. 


book entitled Dc iis qui mitiautur myslcrm: 
'* Let us prove that there is not that thing which 
nature formed, but which benediction did con- 
secrate, and that benediction is of more strength 
than nature. For by the blessing, nature itself 
is also changed. ' Moses held a rod, he cast it 
from him, and it was made a serpent. Again 
he took the serpent by the tail, and it was turn- 
ed again into the nature of a rod '\' Wherefore 
thou seest, that by the grace of the prophet, the 
nature of the serpent and rod was twice chang- 
ed. * The floods of Egypt ran pure water, and 
suddenly blood began to burst out of the veins 
of the springs, so that men could not drink of 
the flood ; but, at the prayer of the prophet, the 
blood of the flood went away, and the nature of 
water came again ''.' — * The people of the He- 
brews were compassed about, on the one side 
with the Egyptians, and on the other side with 
the sea. Moses lifted up his rod, the water di- 
vided itself, and stood up like a wall, and be- 
tween the waters was left a way for them to pass 
on foot. And Jordan, against nature, turned 
back to the head of his spring ^' Doth it not 
appear now that the nature of the sea floods, or 
of the course of fresh water, was changed ? 
* The people was dry, Moses touched a stone, 
and water came out of the stone'.' Did not 

P Exod. vii. 1 Ibid. '' Exod. xiv. ' Exod. xvii. • 


grace here work above nature, to make the 
stone to bring forth water, which it had not of 
nature ? ' Marath was a most bitter flood, so 
that the people being dry, could not drink 
thereof'.' Moses put wood into the water, and 
the nature of the water lost his bitterness, which 
grace infused did so suddenly moderate. * In 
the time of Elisha the prophet, an axe had fallen 
from one of the prophet's servants into the wa- 
ter ; he that lost the iron, desired the prophet 
Elisha's help, who put the helve into the water, 
and the iron swam above ".' Which thing we 
know was done above nature, for iron is heavier 
than the liquor of water. Thus we perceive that 
grace is of more force than nature, and yet hi- 
therto we have rehearsed but the grace of the 
blessing of the prophets. Now if the blessing 
of a man be of such value, that it may change 
nature, what do we say of the consecration of 
God, wherein is the operation of the words of 
our Saviour Christ ? For this sacrament which 
thou receivest, is done by the word of Christ. 
Then if the word of Elijah was of such power 
that it could bring fire down from heaven, shall 
not the word of Christ be of that power to 
change the kinds of the elements ? Of the mak- 
ing of the whole world thou hast read, ' That 
God spake, and the things were done; he com- 

' Exod. XV. " 2 Kings vi. 


manded, and they were created \' The word 
then- of Christ, that could of nothing make 
things that were not, can it not change those 
things that be into that thing which before they 
were not ? For it is no less matter to give to 
things new natures, than to alter natures." 
Thus far have I rehearsed the words of St. Am- 
brose, if the said book be his, (which they that 
be of greatest learning and judgment do not 
think,) by which words the Papists would prove 
that in the supper of the Lord, after the words 
of consecration, as they be commonly called, 
there remaineth neither bread nor wine, because 
that St. Ambrose saith in this place, that the 
nature of the bread and wine is changed. 

But to satisfy their minds, let us grant, for The answer. 
their pleasure, that the foresaid book was St. 
Ambrose's own work ; yet the same book maketh 
nothing for their purpose, but quite against them. 
For he saith not that the substance of bread and 
wine is gone, but he saith that their nature is 
changed, that is to say, that in the holy commu- 
nion we ought not to receive the bread and wine 
as other common meats and drinks, but as things 
clean changed into a higher estate, nature, and 
condition, to be taken as holy meats and drinks, 
whereby we receive spiritual feeding and super- 
natural nourishment from heaven, of the very 

" Psal. cxlviii. 


true body and blood of our Saviour Christ, 
through the omnipotent power of God and the 
wonderful working of the Holy Ghost. Which 
so well agreeth with the substance of bread and 
wine still remaining, that if they were gone away, 
and not there, this our spiritual feeding could 
not be taught unto us by them. 

And therefore in the most part of the examples 
which St. Ambrose allegeth for the wonderful 
alteration of natures, the substances did still re- 
main, after the natures and properties were 
changed. As when the water of Jordan, con- 
trary to his nature, stood still like a wall, or 
flowed against the stream towards the head and 
spring, yet the substance of the water remained 
the same that it was before. Likewise the stone, 
that above his nature and kind flowed water, 
was the self-same stone that it was before. And 
the flood of Marath, that changed his nature of 
, bitterness, changed, for all that, no part of his 
substance. No more did that iron, which, con- 
trary to his nature, swam upon the water, lose 
thereby any part of the substance thereof. 
Therefore as in these alterations of natures, the 
substances nevertheless remained the same that 
they v/ere before the alterations : even so doth 
the substance of bread and wine remain in the 
Lord's Supper, and be naturally received and 
digested into the body, notwithstanding the sa- 
cramental mutation of the same into the body 



and blood of Christ. Which sacramental muta- 
tion declareth the supernatural, spiritual, and 
inexplicable eating and drinking, feeding and 
digesting, of the same body and blood of Christ, 
in all them that godly, and according to their 
duty, do receive the said sacramental bread and 
wine. And that St. Ambrose thus meant, that 
the substance of bread and wine remain still after 
the consecration, it is most clear by three other 
examples of the same matter, following in the 
same chapter. 

One is of them that be regenerated, in whom 
after their regeneration doth still remain their 
former natural substance. Another is of the 
incarnation of our Saviour Christ, in the which 
perished no substance, but remaineth as well the 
substance of his godhead, as the substance which 
he took of the blessed Virgin Mary. The third 
example is of the water in baptism, where the 
water still remaineth water, although the Holy 
Ghost come upon the water, or rather upon him 
that is baptized therein. 

And although the same St. Ambrose, in ano- 
ther book, entitled De Sacramentis, doth say, 
** That the bread is bread before the words of 
consecration; but when the consecration is done, 
of bread is made the body of Christ^:" yet in 
the same book, and in the same chapter, he tell- 

'' In libro 4. De Sacramentis, cap. 4, 


etli in what manner and form the same is done 
by the words of Christ : not by taking away the 
substance of the bread, but adding to the bread 
the grace of Christ's body, and so calling it the 
body of Christ. And hereof he bringeth four 
examples ; the first, of the regeneration of a 
man ; the second is of the standing of the water 
of the Red Sea ; the third is of the bitter water 
of Marath ; and the fourth is of the iron that 
swam above the water. In every of the which 
examples, the former substance remained still, 
notwithstanding alteration of the natures. And 
he concludeth the whole matter in these few 
words : " If there be so much strength in the 
words of the Lord Jesu, that things had their 
beginning which never were before, how much 
more be they able to work, that those things that 
were before should remain, and also be changed 
into other things !" Which words do shew ma- 
nifestly, that notwithstanding this wonderful, 
sacramental, and spiritual changing of the bread 
into the body of Christ, yet the substance of the 
bread remaineth the same that it was before. 
Thus is a sufficient answer made unto three 
principal authorities, which the Papists use to 
allege, to establish their error of Transubstan- 
tiation : the first of Cyprian, the second of St. 
John Chrysostome, and the third of St. Am- 
brose. Other authorities and reasons some of 
them do bring for the same purpose ; but foras- 


much as they be of small moment and weight, 
and easy to be answered unto, I will pass them 
over at this time, and not trouble the reader 
with them, but leave them to be weighed by his 

And now I will rehearse divers difficulties, ab- chap. 
surdities, and inconveniences, which must needs 


P ■,-, I . p m 1 • • Absunlitiea 

lollow upon this error ot Iransubstantiation j tiiatibiiow 


whereof not one doth follow of the true and right stautiaiion. 
faith, which is according to God's word. 

First, if the Papists be demanded, what thing- 
it is that is broken, what is eaten, what is 
drunken, and what is chewed with the teeth, 
lips, and mouth in this sacrament, they have no- 
thing to answer, but the accidents. For (as 
they say) bread and wine be not the visible ele- 
ments in this sacrament, but only their accidents ; 
and so they be forced to say, that accidents be 
broken, eaten, drunken, chewed, and swallowed, 
without any substance at all : which is not only 
against all reason, but also against the doctrine 
of all ancient authors. 

Secondly, these transubstantiators do say, 
(contrary to all learning,) that the accidents of 
bread and wine do hang alone in the air without 
any substance, wherein they may be stayed. 
And what can be said more foolishly ? 

Thirdly, that the substance of Christ's body 
is there really, corporally, and naturally present, 
without any accidents of the same. And so the- 


Papists make accidents to be without substances, 
and substances to be without accidents. 

Fourthly, they say, that the place where the 
bread and wine be, hath no substance there to 
fill that place, and so must they needs be granted 
vacuum, which nature utterly abhorreth. 

Fifthly, they are not ashamed to say the sub- 
stance is made of accidents, when the bread 
mouldeth, or is turned into worms, or when the 
wine soureth. 

Sixthly, that substance is nourished without 
substance by accidents only, if it chance any 
cat, mouse, dog, or any other thing, to eat the 
sacramental bread, or drink the sacramental wine. 

These inconveniences and absurdities do fol- 
low of the fond Papistical Transubstantiation, 
with a number of other errors as evil or worse 
than these, whereunto they be never able to an- 
swer, as many of them have confessed them- 
selves. And it is a wonder to see, how in many 
of the foresaid things, they vary among them- 
selves. Whereas the other doctrine of the Scrip- 
ture, and of the old Catholick church, (but not 
of the lately corrupted Romish church,) is plain 
and easy, as well to be understood, as to answer 
to all the foresaid questions, without any absur- 
dity or inconvenience following thereof: so that 
every answer shall agree with God's word, with 
the old church, and also with all reason and true 


For as touching- the first point, what is broken, 
what is eaten, what drunken, and what chewed 
in this sacrament, it is easy to answer, the bread 
and wine, as St. Paul saith: the bread which we 

And as concerning the second and third points, 
neither is the substance of bread and wine with- 
out their proper accidents, nor their accidents 
hang alone in the air without any substance, but 
according to all learning the substances of the 
bread and wine reserve their own accidents, and 
the accidents do rest in their own substances. 

And also as concerning the fourth point, there 
is no place left void after consecration, (as the 
Papists dream,) but bread and wine fulfil their 
places, as they did before. 

And as touching the fifth point, (whereof the 
worms or moulding is engendered, and whereof 
the vinegar cometh^) the answer is easy to make, 
according to all learning and experience, that 
they come, according to the course of nature, of 
the substance of the bread and wine too long 
kept, and not of the accidents alone, as the Pa- 
pists do fondly fancy. And likewise the sub- 
stances of the bread and wine do feed and nou- 
rish the body of them that eat the same, and not 
the only accidents. 

In these answers is no absurdity nor inconve- 
nience, nothing spoken either contrary to holy 
Scripture, or to natural reason, philosophy, or 

H 2 


experience, or against any old ancient author, 
or the primitive or Catholick church ; but only 
against the malignant and Papistical church of 
Rome. Whereas on the other side, that cursed 
synagogue of Antichrist hath defined and deter- 
mined in this matter so many things contrary to 
Christ's word, contrary to the old Catholick 
church, and the holy martyrs and doctors of the 
same, and contrary to all natural reason, learn- 
ing, and philosophy. And the final end of all 
this Antichrist's doctrine is none other, but by 
subtlety and craft to bring Christian people, from 
the true honouring of Christ, unto the greatest 
idolatry that ever was in this world devised : as, 
by God's grace, shall be plainly set forth here- 





Now this matter of Transubstantiation being, as chap. 
I trust, sufficiently resolved, (which is the first 

part before rehearsed, wherein the Papistical sencroT 
doctrine varieth from the Catholick truth,) order sacramenu^ 
requireth next to treat of the second part, which 
is of the manner of the presence of the body and 
blood of our Saviour Christ in the sacrament 
thereof, wherein is no less contention than in 
the first part. For a plain explication whereof, 
it is not unknown to all true faithful Christian 
people, that our Saviour Christ, being perfect 
God, and in all things equal and co-eternal with 
his Father, for our sakes became also a perfect 
man, taking flesh and blood of his blessed mo- 
ther and virgin Mary, and, saving sin, being in 
all things like unto us ; adjoining unto his divi- 
nity a most perfect soul and a most perfect 
body; his soul being endued with life, sense, will. 


reason, wisdom, memory, and all other things 
required to the perfect soul of man; and his 
body being made of very flesh and bones, not 
only having all members of a perfect man's body 
in due order and proportion, but also being sub- 
ject to hunger, thirst, labour, sweat, weariness, 
cold, heat, and all other like infirmities and pas- 
sions of man, and unto death also, and that the 
most vile and painful, upon the cross. And 
after his death he rose again, with the self- same 
visible and palpable body, and appeared there- 
with, and shewed the same unto his apostles, 
and especially to Thomas, making him to put 
his hands into his side and to feel his wounds. 
Christ cor- And with the self-same body he forsook this 

porally is "^ 

ascended world, aud asccndcd into heaven, (the apostles 

into heaven. ' n i 

seeing and beholding his body when it ascend- 
ed,) and now sitteth at the right hand of his Fa- 
ther, and there shall remain until the last day, 
when he shall come to judge the quick and the 
dead ". This is the true Catholick faith, which 
the Scripture teacheth, and the universal church 
of Christ hath ever believed from the beginning 
until within these four or five hundred years 
last past, that the bishop of Rome, with the as- 
sistance of his Papists, hath set up a new faith 
and belief of their own devising, that the same 
body really, corporally, naturally, and sensibly, 

* Acts iii. 


is in this world still, and that in an hundred 
thousand places at one time, being enclosed in 
every pix and bread consecrated. 

And although we do affirm, (according to chap. 
God's word,) that Christ is "in all persons that 


truly believe in him, in such sort, that with his J,l!fe*be-^'' 
flesh and blood he doth spiritually nourish them, tru^anirthe 
and feed them, and giveth them everlasting life, doctrine* 

111 1 1 r- nil concerning 

and doth assure them thereoi, as well bv the the presence 

of Christ's 

promise of his word, as by the sacramental bread ^°^y- 
and wine in his holy supper, which he did insti- 
tute for the same purpose, yet we do not a little 
vary from the heinous errors of the Papists : for 
they teach, that Christ is in the bread and wine : 
but we say, according to the truth, that he is in 
them that worthily eat and drink the bread and 
wine. They say, that when any man eateth the 
bread and drinketh the cup, Christ goeth into 
his mouth or stomach with the bread and wine, 
and no further : but we say, that Christ is in the 
whole man, both in the body and soul of him 
that worthily eateth the bread and drinketh the 
cup, and not in his mouth or stomach only. 
They say, that Christ is received in the mouth, 
and entereth in with the bread and wine : we 
say, that he is received in the heart, and entereth 
in by faith. They say, that Christ is really in 
the sacramental bread, being reserved an whole 
year, or so long as the form of bread remaineth ; 
but after the receiving thereof, he flyeth up (say 


they) from the receiver unto heaven, as soon as 
the bread is chewed in the mouth, or changed in 
the stomach : but we say, that Christ remaineth 
in the man that worthily receiveth it, so long as 
the man remaineth'a member of Christ. 

They say, that in the sacrament, the corporal 
members of Christ be not distant in place one 
from another, but that wheresoever the head is, 
there be the feet, and wheresoever the arms be, 
there be the legs ; so that in every part of the 
bread and wine is altogether whole head, whole 
feet, whole flesh, whole blood, whole heart, 
whole lungs, whole breast, whole back, and al- 
together whole, confused, and mixt without dis- 
tinction or diversity. O, what a foolish and an 
abominable invention is this, to make of the 
most pure and perfect body of Christ such a 
confused and monstrous body ! And yet can the 
Papists imagine nothing so foolish, but all Chris- 
tian people must receive the same as an oracle 
of God, and as a most certain article of their 
faith, without whispering to the contrary. 

Furthermore the Papists say, that a dog or a 
cat eat the body of Christ, if they by chance do 
eat the sacramental bread : we say, that no 
earthly creature can eat the body of Christ, nor 
drink his blood, but only man. They say, that 
every man, good and evil, eateth the body of 
Christ : we say, that both do eat the sacramental 
bread and drink the wine, but none do eat the 


very body of Christ, and drink his blood, but 
only they that be lively members of his body. 

They say, that good men eat the body of 
Christ, and drink his blood, only at that time 
when they receive the sacrament : we say, that 
they eat, drink, and feed of Christ continually, 
so long as they be members of his body. 

They say, that the body of Christ that is in 
the sacrament, hath his own proper form and 
quantity : we say, that Christ is there sacra- 
mentally and spiritually, without form or quan- 

They say, that the fathers and prophets of the 
Old Testament did not eat the body nor drink 
the blood of Christ : we say, that they did eat 
his body and drink his blood, although he was 
not yet born nor incarnated. 

They say, that the body of Christ is every day 
many times made as often as there be masses 
said, and that then and there he is made of bread 
and wine : we say, that Christ's body was never 
but once made, and then not of the nature and 
substance of bread and wine, but of the sub- 
stance of his blessed mother. 

They say, that the mass is a sacrifice satisfac- 
tory for sin, by the devotion of the priest that 
offereth, and not by the thing that is offered : but 
we say, that their saying is a most heinous lie 
and detestable error against the glory of Christ. 
For the satisfaction for our sins is not the devo- 


tion nor offering of the priest ; but the only host 
and satisfaction for all the sins of the world is 
the death of Christ, and the oblation of his body 
upon the cross, that is to say, the oblation that 
Christ himself offered once upon the cross, and 
never but once, nor never none but he. And 
therefore that oblation, which the priests make 
daily in their Papistical masses, cannot be a sa- 
tisfaction for other men's sins by the priest's de- 
votion, but it is a mere elusion and subtle craft of 
the devil, whereby Antichrist hath many years 
blinded and deceived the world. 

They say, that Christ is corporally in many 
places at one time, affirming that his body is 
corporally and really present in as many places 
as there be hosts consecrated : we say, that as 
the Son corporally is ever in heaven, and no 
where else ; and yet by his operation and virtue, 
the Son is here on earth, by whose influence 
and virtue all things in the world be corporally 
regenerated, encreased, and grow to their per- 
fect state ; so likewise our Saviour Christ bodily 
and corporally is in heaven, sitting at the right 
hand of his Father, although spiritually he hath 
promised to be present with us upon earth unto 
the world's end. And whensoever two or three 
be gathered together in his name, he is there in 
the midst among them, by whose supernal grace 
all godly men be first by him spiritually regene- 
rated, and after increase and grow to their spiri- 


tual perfection in God, spiritually by faith eating 
his flesh and drinking his blood, although the 
same corporally be in heaven, far distant from 
our sight. 

Now to return to the principal matter, lest it c«ap. 
might be thought a new device of us, that Christ 


as concerning his body and his human nature is herei7by 
in heaven, and not in earth : therefore by God's sioninour 
grace, it shall be evidently proved, that this is creed. 
no new devised matter, but that it was ever the 
old faith of the Catholick church, until the Pa- 
pists invented a new faith, that Christ really, 
corporally, naturally, and sensibly is here still 
with us in earth, shut up in a box, or within the 
compass of bread and wine. This needeth no 
better nor stronger proof, than that which the 
old authors bring for the same, that is to say, 
the general profession of all Christian people in 
the common Creed, wherein, as concerning 
Christ's humanity, they be taught to believe 
after this sort: that he was conceived by the 
Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary ; that he 
suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, 
dead, and buried ; that he descended into hell, 
and rose again the third day ; that he ascended 
into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of his 
almighty Father, and from thence shall come to 
judge the quick and the dead. This hath been 
ever the Catholick faith of Christian people, that 
Christ, as concerning his body and his manhood^ 



is in heaven, and shall there continue until he 
come down at the last judgment. And foras- 
much as the Creed maketh so express mention 
of the article of his ascension, and departing 
hence from us ; if it had been another article of 
our faith, that his body tarrieth also here with us 
in earth, surely in this place of the Creed was so 
urgent an occasion given to make some mention 
thereof, that doubtless it would not have been 
passed over in our Creed with silence. For if 
Christ, as concerning his humanity, be both 
here and gone hence, and both those two be ar- 
ticles of our faith, when mention was made of 
the one in the Creed, it was necessary to make 
mention of the other, lest, by professing the one, 
we should be dissuaded from believing the other, 
being so contrary the one to the other. 
CHAP. To this article of our Creed accordeth holy 

'. — Scripture, and all the old ancient doctors of 

beieofby Christ's cliurch. For Christ himself said, " I 

the Scrip- 
ture, leave the world, and go to my Father^'." And 

also he said, '* You shall ever have poor folks 
with you, but you shall not ever have me with 
you ^" And he gave warning of this error be- 
fore hand, saying, " That the time would come 
when many deceivers should be in the world, 
and say, Here is Christ, and there is Christ; but 
believe them not, said Christ ^" And St. Mark 

^ John xvi. <= Matt. xxvi. ^ Matt. xxiv. 


writethin the last chapter of his Gospel, ** That 
the Lord Jesus was taken up into heaven, and 
sitteth at the right hand of his Father '." And 
St. Paul exhorteth all men *' to seek for things 
that be above in heaven, where Christ," saith 
he, " sitteth at the right hand of God his Fa- 
ther ^" Also he saith, " That we have such a 
bishop, that sitteth in heaven at the right hand 
of the throne of God's majesty ^." And " that 
he having offered one sacrifice for sins, sitteth 
continually at the right hand of God, until his 
enemies be put under his feet, as a footstool ''." 
And hereunto consent all the old doctors of the 

First, Origen* upon Matthew reasoneth this <^"^p- 
matter, how Christ may be called a stranger 


that is departed into another country, seeing thS°by 

11--1 t 1 in 1 ^"^ieit au- 

that he is with us alway unto the world s end, thors. 
and is among all them that be gathered together 
in his name, and also in the midst of them that 
know him not. And thus he reasoneth : *' If he 
be here among us still, how can he be gone 
hence as a stranger departed into another coun- 
try ? Whereunto he answereth, that Christ is 
both God and man, having in him two natures. 
And as a man he is not with us unto the world's 
end, nor is present with all his faithful that be 

• Mark vii. ^ Coloss. iii. « Heb. viii. *" Heb. x. 

' Oiigen. ill Mat. Tract. A'i. 


gathered together m his name; but his divine 
power and spirit is ever with us. Paul (saith 
he) was absent from the Corinthians in his body, 
when he was present with them in his spirit. 
So is Christ (saith he) gone hence, and absent 
in his humanity, which in his divine nature is 
every where. And in this saying (saith Origen) 
we divide not his humanity ; for St. John writ- 
eth, that no spirit that divideth Jesus can be of 
God ; but we reserve to both his natures their 
own properties." In these words Origen hath 
plainly declared his mind, that Christ's body is 
not both present here with us, and also gone 
hence and estranged from us. For that were to 
make two natures of one body, and to divide the 
body of Jesus ; forasmuch as one nature cannot 
at one time be both with us and absent from us. 
And therefore, saith Origen, that the presence 
must be understood of his divinity, and the ab- 
sence of his humanity. 

And according hereunto, St. Augustine writ- 
eth thus, in an Epistle Ad Darda?m?n ^. " Doubt 
not but Jesus Christ, as concerning the nature 
of his manhood, is now there, from whence he 
shall come ; and remember well and believe the 
profession of a Christian man, that he rose from 
death, ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right 
hand of his Father, and from that place, and 

'' August, ad Dardanum, Epist. 57. 


none other, shall he come to judge the quick 
and the dead. And he shall come (as the angels 
said) as he was seen go into heaven, that is to 
say, in the same form and substance, unto the 
which he gave immortality, but changed not na- 
ture. After this form, (saith he,) meaning his 
man's nature, we may not think that he is every 
where. For we must beware, that we do not so 
establish his divinity, that we take away the 
verity of his body." These be St. Augustine's 
plain words. And by and by, after, he addeth 
these words : " The Lord Jesus as God is every 
where, and as man is in heaven." And, finally, 
he concludeth this matter in these few words : 
" Doubt not but our Lord Jesus Christ is every 
where as God ; and as a dweller he is in man 
that is the temple of God, and he is in a certain 
place in heaven, because of the measure of a 
very body." And again St. Augustine writeth 
upon the Gospel of St. John' : *' The Lord Je- 
sus," saith he, ** is above, but yet the truth of 
his word is here. His body wherein he arose is 
in one place, but the truth of his word is spread 
every where." And in another place of the 
same book ™, St. Augustine, expounding these 
words of Christ, " You shall ever have poor men 
with you, but me you shall not ever have," saith, 
** That Christ spake these words of the presence 

' In Joan. Tract, 30. " Tract. 50. 


of his body. For (saith he) as concerning his 
Divine Majesty, as concerning his providence, 
as concerning his infallible and invisible grace, 
these words be fulfilled which he spake, ' I am 
with you unto the world's end.' But as con- 
cerning the flesh which he took in his incarna- 
tion, as concerning that which was born of the 
Virgin, as concerning that which was appre- 
hended by the Jews, and crucified upon a tree, 
and taken down from the cross, lapped in linen 
clothes, and buried, and rose again, and appeared 
after his resurrection ; as concerning that flesh 
he said, ' You shall not ever have me with you.' 
Wherefore seeing, that as concerning his flesh, 
he was conversant with his disciples forty days, 
and they accompanying, -seeing, and following 
him, he went up into heaven, both he is not 
here, (for he sitteth at the right hand of his Fa- 
ther,) and yet he is here, for he departed not 
hence, as concerning the presence of his Divine 
Majesty. As concerning the presence of his 
Majesty, we have Christ ever with us ; but as 
concerning the presence of his flesh, he said 
truly to his disciples, ' Ye shall not ever have 
me with you.' For as concerning the presence 
of his flesh, the church had Christ but a few 
days ; yet now it holdeth him fast by faith, 
though it see him not with eyes." All these be 
St. Augustine's words. 


Also in another book ", entitled to St. Auous- 
tine, is written thus : '* We must believe and 
confess, that the Son of God, as concerning his 
divinity, is invisible, without a body, immortal, 
and incircumscriptible ; but, as concerning his 
humanity, we ought to believe and confess, that 
he is visible, hath a body, and is contained in a 
certain place, and hath truly all the members of 
a man." Of these words of St. Augustine, it is 
most clear, that the profession of the Catholick 
faith is, that Christ, as concerning his bodily 
substance and nature of man, is in heaven, and 
not present here with us in earth. For the na- 
ture and property of a very body is to be in one 
place, and to occupy one place, and not to be 
every where, or in riiany places at one time. 
And though the body of Christ, after his resur- 
rection and ascension, was made immortal, yet 
the nature thereof was not changed ; for then, 
as St. Augustine saith, it were no very body. 
And further, St. Augustine sheweth both the 
manner and form, how Christ is here present 
with us in earth, and how he is absent, saying, 
that he is present by his divine nature and ma- 
jesty, by his providence, and by his grace ; but 
by his human nature and very body, he is ab- 
sent from this world, and present in heaven, 

" De Essentia Divinitatis. 


Cyrillus" likewise, upon the Gospel of St. 
John, agreeth fully with St. Augustine, saying, 
** Although Christ took away from hence the 
presence of his body, yet in the majesty of his 
Godhead he is ever here, as he promised to his 
disciples at his departing, saying, * I am with 
you ever unto the world's end.' " And in ano- 
ther place P of the same book, St. Cyril saith 
thus : *' Christian people must believe, that al- 
though Christ be absent from us, as concerning 
his body, yet by his power he governeth us and 
all things, and is present with all them that love 
him. Therefore he said, * Truly, truly I say 
unto you, wheresoever there be two or three ga- 
thered together in my name, there am I in the 
midst of them.' For like as when he was con- 
versant here in earth as a man, yet then he filled 
heaven, and did not leave the company of an- 
gels : even so being now in heaven with his flesh, 
yet he filleth the earth, and is in them that love 
him. And it is to be marked, that although 
Christ should go away only as concerning his 
flesh, (for he is ever present in the power of his 
divinity,) yet for a little time he said he would 
be with his disciples." These be the words of 
St. Cyril. 

St. Ambrose also saith \ " That we must not 

• Cyrillus in Joan. lib. 6. cap. 14. "^ Libro 6. cap. 21. 

'^ Ambrosius in Lucam. lib. 10. cap. 24. 


seek Christ upon earth, nor in earth, but in hea- 
ven, where he sitteth at the right hand of his 

And likewise St. Gregory "■ writeth thus: 
** Christ," saith he, " is not here by the pre- 
sence of his flesh, and yet he is absent no where 
by the presence of his majesty." What subtlety 
thinkest thou, good reader, can the Papists now 
imagine, to defend their pernicious error, that 
Christ in his human nature is bodily here in 
earth, in the consecrated bread and wine ; see- 
ing that all the old church of Christ believed the 
contrary, and all the old authors wrote the con- 
trary ? For they all affirmed and believed, that 
Christ, being one person, hath nevertheless in 
him two natures or substances, that is to say, 
the nature of his Godhead, and the nature of his 
manhood. They say furthermore, that Christ is 
both gone hence from us unto heaven, and is 
also here with us in earth, but not in his human 
nature, as the Papists would have us to believe ; 
but the old authors say, that he is in heaven, as 
concerning his manhood, and nevertheless both 
here and there, and every where, as concerning 
his Godhead. For although his divinity be such 
that it is infinite, without measure, compass, or 
place ; so that, as concerning that nature, he is 
circumscribed with no place, but is every where, 

' GregOiius in Horn, ruschat, 
1 2 


and filleth all the world : yet as concerning his 
human nature, he hath measure, compass, and 
place ; so that when he was here upon earth, he 
was not at the same time in heaven ; and now 
that he is ascended into heaven, as concerning 
that nature, he hath now forsaken the earth, and 
is only in heaven, 
CHAP. For one nature, that is circumscribed, com- 
passed, and measured, cannot be in divers places 


cZottm at one time. This is the faith of the old Catho- 
pilces at lick church, as appeareth as well by the authors 
before rehearsed, as by these that hereafter 

St. Augustine speaking, that a body must 
needs be in some place, saith, '* That if it be not 
within the compass of a place, it is no where. 
And if it be no where, then it is not '." 

And St. Cyril, considering the proper nature 
of a very body, said, '* That if the nature of the 
Godhead were a body, it must needs be in a 
place, and have quantity, greatness, and circum- 
scription *." 

If then the nature of the Godhead must needs 
be circumscribed, if it were a body, much more 
must the nature of Christ's manhood be circum- 
scribed and contained within the compass of a 
certain place. 

Didymus also ", in his book De Spiritu Saticto, 

• Ad Dardanum. » Cyrillus de Trin. lib. 2. 

" Didymus de Spiritu Sancto, lib. 1. cap. 1. 


(which St. Jerome did translate,) proveth, that the 
Holy Ghost is very God; because he is in many 
places at one time, which no creature can be. 
*'For," saith he, " all creatures, visible and invi- 
sible, be circumscribed and environed either with- 
in one place, (as corporeal and visible things be,) 
or within the propriety of their own substance, 
(as angels and invisible creatures be,) so that no 
angel," saith he, '* can be at one time in two places. 
And forasmuch as the Holy Ghost is in many 
men at one time, therefore," saith he, "the Holy 
Ghost must needs be God." The same affirm- 
eth St. Basil also ", " That the angel, which was 
with Cornelius, was not at the same time with 
Philip; nor the angel, which spake to Zachary 
in the altar, was not the same time in his proper 
place in heaven. But the Holy Ghost was at 
one time in Habakkuk, and in Daniel in Baby- 
lon, and with Jeremy in prison, and with Eze- 
kiel in Chober; whereby he proveth, that the 
Holy Ghost is God." Wherefore the Papists, 
which say that the body of Christ is in an infi- 
nite number of places at one time, do make his 
body to be God, and so confound the two na- 
tures of Christ, attributing to his human nature 
that tiling which belongeth only to his divinity, 
which is a most heinous and detestable heresy. 
Against whom writeth Fulgentius ^ in this wise, 

' Basilius (le Spiritu Sancto, cap. 22. 

^ Fulgentius ad Trasimundum Regem, lib. 2, 


speaking of the distinction and diversity of the 
two natures in Christ : " One and the self-same 
Christ," saith he, " of mankind was made a man, 
compassed in a place, who of his Father is God, 
without measure or place. One and the self- 
same person, as concerning his man's substance, 
was not in heaven, when he was in earth, and 
forsook the earth when he ascended into heaven: 
but as concerning his godly substance, which is 
above all measure, he neither left heaven, when 
he canie from heaven, nor he left not the earth 
when he ascended into heaven, w^hich may be 
known by the most certain word of Christ him- 
self, who, to shew the placing of his humanity, 
said to his disciples, * I ascend up to my Father 
and your Father, to my God and your God.' 
Also when he had said of Lazarus, that he was 
dead, he added, saying, * I am glad for your 
sakes, that you may believe ; for I was not there.' 
But to shew the unmeasurable compass of his 
divinity, he said to his disciples, ' Behold, I am 
with you always unto the world's end.' Now 
how did he go up into heaven, but because he is 
a very man, contained within a place ? Or how 
is he present with faithful people, but because 
he is very God, being without measure ?" Of 
these words of Fulgentius it is declared most 
certainly, that Christ is not here with us in earth, 
but by his Godhead, and that his humanity is in 
heaven only, and absent from us. 


Yet the same is more plainly shewed, (if more 
plainly can be spoken,) by Vigilius', a bishop and 
an holy martyr. He writeth thus against the he- 
retick Eutyches, which denied the humanity of 
Christ, holding opinion that he was only God, and 
not man. Whose error Vigilius confuting, proveth 
that Christ had in him two natures joined toge- 
ther in one person, the nature of his Godhead 
and the nature of his manhood. Thus he writ- 
eth: '* Christ said to his disciples, * If you loved 
me, you would be glad, for I go unto my Father.' 
And again he said, ' It is expedient for you that 
I go, for if I go not, the Comforter shall not 
come to you.' And yet surely the eternal word 
of God, the virtue of God, the wisdom of God, 
was ever with his Father, and in his Father, yea 
even at the same time when he was with us and 
in us. For when he did mercifully dwell in this 
world, he left not his habitation in heaven, for 
he is every where whole with his Father equal 
in divinity, whom no place can contain, for the 
Son filleth all things, and there is no place that 
lacketh the presence of his divinity. From 
whence then and whither did he say that he 
would go ? Or how did he say that he went to 
his Father, from whom doubtless he never de- 
parted ? But that to go to his Father, and from 
us, was to take from this world that nature which 

* Vigilius contra Eutychen, lib. 1. 


he received of us. Thou seest, therefore, that it 
was the property of that nature to be taken 
away and go from us, which in the end of the 
world shall be rendered again to us, as the an- 
gels witnessed, saying, * This Jesus, which is 
taken from you, shall come again, like as you saw 
him going up into heaven.' For look upon the 
miracle, look upon the mystery, of both the na- 
tures. The Son of God, as concerning his hu- 
manity, went from us ; as concerning his divi- 
nity, he said unto us, * Behold 1 am with you 
all the days unto the world's end.' " 

Thus far have I rehearsed the words of Vigi- 
lius, and by and bye he concludeth thus : " He 
is with us, and not with us. For those whom 
he left and went from them, as concerning his 
humanity, those he left not, nor forsook them 
not, as touching his divinity. For as touching 
the form of a servant, (which he took away from 
us into heaven,) he is absent from us ; but by 
the form of God, (which goeth not from us,) he 
is present with us in earth : aud nevertheless, 
both present and absent, he is all one Christ." 

Hitherto you have heard Vigilius speak, that 
Christ as concerning his bodily presence, and 
the nature of his manhood is gone from us, taken 
from us, is gone up into heaven, is not with us, 
hath left us, hath forsaken us. But as concern- 
ing the other nature of his Deity, he is still with 
us; so that he is both with us, and not with us : 


with US in the nature of his Deity, and not with 
us in the nature of his humanity. And yet more 
clearly doth the same Vigilius declare the same 
thing in another place % saying, " If the word 
and the flesh were both of one nature, seeing 
that the word is every where, why is not the 
flesh then every where ? For when it was in 
earth, then verily it was not in heaven ; and now 
when it is in heaven, it is not surely in earth. 
And it is so sure that it is not in earth, that as 
concerning it, we look for him to come from 
heaven, whom, as concerning his eternal word, ' 
we believe to be with us in earth. Therefore by 
your doctrine, (saith Vigilius unto Eutyches, 
who defended that the divinity and humanity in 
Christ was but one nature,) either the word is 
contained in a place with his flesh, or else the 
flesh is every where with the word. For one 
nature cannot receive in itself two divers and 
contrary things. But these two things be divers 
and far unlike, that is to say, to be contained in 
a place, and to be every where. Therefore inas- 
much as the word is every where, and the flesh 
is not every where, it appeareth plainly, that 
one Christ himself hath in him two natures ; 
and that by his divine nature he is every where, 
and by his human nature he is contained in a 
place ; that he is created, and hath no beginningj, 

* Contra Eutychen, lib. 4. 


that he is subject to death, and cannot die. 
Whereof one he hath by the nature of his word, 
- whereby he is God, and the other he hath by 
the nature of his flesh, whereby the same God 
is man also. Therefore one Son of God, the 
self-same was made the son of man, and he hath 
a beginning by the nature of his flesh, and no 
beginning by the nature of his Godhead. He is 
created by the nature of his flesh, and not cre- 
ated by the nature of his Godhead. He is com- 
prehended in a place by the nature of his flesh, 
and not comprehended in a place by the nature 
of his Godhead. He is inferior to angels in the 
nature of his flesh, and is equal to his Father in 
the nature of his Godhead. He died by the na- 
ture of his flesh, and died not by the nature of 
his Godhead. This is the faith and Catholick 
confession which the apostles taught, the mar- 
tyrs did corroborate, and faithful people keep 
unto this day." All these be the sayings of Vi- 
gilius, who, according to all the other authors 
before rehearsed, and to the faith and Catholick 
confession of the apostles, martyrs, and all faith- 
ful people unto his time, saith, that as concern- 
ing Christ's humanity, when he was here on 
earth, he was not in heaven ; and now when he 
is in heaven, he is not in earth. For one nature 
' cannot be both contained in a place in heaven, 
and be also herein earth at one time. And for- 
asmuch as Christ is here with us in earth, and 


also is contained in a place in heaven, he proveth 
thereby, that Christ hath two natures in him, 
the nature of a man, whereby he is gone from 
us, and ascended into heaven ; and the nature of 
his Godhead, whereby he is here with us in 
earths So that it is not one nature that is here 
with us, and that is gone from us, that is as- 
cended into heaven, and there contained, and 
that is permanent here with us in earth. Where- 
fore the Papists, which now of late years have 
made a new faith, that Christ's natural body is 
teally and naturally present both with us here 
in earth, and sitteth at the right hand of his Fa- 
ther in heaven, do err in two very horrible here- 
sies. The one, that they confound his two na- 
tures, his Godhead and his manhood, attributing 
unto his humanity that thing which appertaineth 
only to his divinity, that is to say, to be in hea- 
ven and earth and in many places at one time. 
The other is, that they divide and separate his 
human nature, or his body, making of one body 
of Christ two bodies and two natures; one which 
is in heaven, visible and palpable, having all 
members and proportions of a most perfect na- 
tural man ; and another, which they say is in 
earth here with us, in every bread and wine that 
is consecrated, having no distinction, form, nor 
proportion of members : Which contrarieties and 
diversities (as this holy martyr Vigilius saith) 
cannot be together in one nature. 


CHAP. But now seeing that it is so evident a matter, 


both by the express words of Scripture, and also 

An answer 

to the Pa- by all the old authors of the same, that our Sa- 

pists, alleg- 
ing for Uiem viour Christ (as concernino- his bodily presence) 

these words, ^ ^ j i / 

bod'"'"'*"^ is ascended into heaven, and is not here in earth ; 
and seeing that this hath been the true confes- 
sion of the Catholick faith ever since Christ's 
ascension ; it is now to be considered what moved 
the Papists to make a new and contrary faith, 
and what Scriptures they have for their purpose. 
What moved them I know not, but their own 
iniquity, or the nature and condition of the see 
of Rome, which is of all other most contrary to 
Christ, and therefore most worthy to be called 
the see of Antichrist. And as for Scripture, 

nienioftiie they allcgc none but only one, and that not truly 

Papists. Ill 1 • 

understood; but, to serve their purpose, wrested 

out of tune, whereby they make it to jar and 

sound contrary to all other Scriptures pertaining 

to that matter. 

Jr'Tta'tiorof Christ took bread, (say they,) blessed and 

II'tlj^u mj ^'^^^^ it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, 

boaj." i( rpj^-g jg j^y ]3Q(jy " These words they ever 

still repeat and beat upon, that Christ said, 
** This is my body." And this saying they make 
their sheet-anchor, to prove thereby as well the 
real and natural presence of Christ's body in the 
sacrament, as their imagined Transubstantiation. 
For these words of Christ (say they) be most 
plain and most true. Then forasmuch as he said^ 


** This is my body," it must needs be true, that 
that thing which the priest holdeth in his hands 
is Christ's body. And if it be Christ's body, 
then can it not be bread, whereof they gather 
by their reasoning, that there is Christ's body 
really present, and no bread. Now forasmuch 
as all their proof hangeth only upon these words, 
** This is my body," the true sense and meaning 
of these words must be examined. But (say 
they) what need they any examination ? What 
words can be more plain than to say, ** This is 
my body ?" 

Truth it is indeed, that the words be as plain The answer, 
as may be spoken ; but that the sense is not so 
plain, it is manifest to every man that weigheth 
substantially the circumstances of the place. 
For when Christ gave bread to his disciples, and 
said, ** This is my body," there is no man of any 
discretion, that understandeth the English 
tongue, but he may well know by the order of 
the speech, that Christ Ispake those words of the 
bread, calling it his body, as all the old authors 
also do affirm, although many of the Papists 
deny the same. Wherefore this sentence can- 
not mean as the words seem and purport, but 
there must needs be some figure or mystery in 
this speech, more than appeareth in the plain 
words. For by this manner of speech, plainly 
understood without any figure as the words lie, 
can be gathered none other sense but that bread • 


is Christ's body, and that Christ's body is bread, 
which all Christian ears do abhor to hear. 
Wherefore in these words must needs be sought 
out another sense and meaning than the words 
of themselves do bear. 
CHAP. And although the true sense and understand- 
ing of these words be sufficiently declared be- 


edbreadVs forc, whcu I spakc of Transubstautiatiou; yet to 
wbe hL" make the matter so plain that no scruple or doubt 
shall remain, here is occasion given more fully 
to treat thereof. In which process shall be 
shewed, that these sentences of Christ, *' This is 
my body," " This is my blood," be figurative 
speeches. And although it be manifest enough 
by the plain words of the Gospel, and proved 
before in the process of Transubstantiation, that 
Christ spake of bread when he said, " This is 
my body;" likewise that it was very wine which 
he called his blood ; yet lest the Papists should 
say that we suck this out of our own fingers, 
the same shall be proved, by testimony of all the 
old authors, to be the true and old faith of the 
Catholick church. Whereas the school authors 
and Papists shall not be able to shew so much 
as one word of any ancient author to the con- 

First, Irenaeus, writing against the Valenti- 
nians, in his fourth book^ saith, ** That Christ 

** Irenaeus contra Valen. li)). 4. cap. 32. 


confessed bread, which is a creature, to be his 
body, and the cup to be his blood." And in the 
same book% he writeth thus also : ** The bread, 
wherein the thanks be given, is the body of the 
Lord." And yet again, in the same book ^ he 
saith, ** That Christ taking bread of the same 
sort that our bread is of, confessed that it was 
his body. And that that thing which was tem- 
pered in the chalice, was his blood." And in 
the fifth book % he writeth further, " That of the 
chalice, which is his blood, a man is nourished, 
and doth grow by the bread, which is his body." 
These words of Irenseus be most plain, that 
Christ taking very material bread, a creature of 
God, and of such sort as other bread is, which 
we do use, called that his body, when he said, 
** This is my body." And the wine also, which 
doth feed and nourish us, he called his blood. 

Tertullian likewise, in his book written against 
the Jews^, saith, *' That Christ called bread his 
body." And in his book against Marcion, he 
oftentimes repeateth the self-same words. And 
St. Cyprian, in the first book of his Epistles ^, 
saith the same thing, " That Christ called such 
bread, as is made of many corns joined together, 
his body : and such wine he named his blood, as 
is pressed out of many grapes, and made into 

' Irenseus contra Valen. cap. 34. '' Cap. 57. * Lib. 5. 

' Tertullianus adversus Jiidaeos. 

^ Cyprianus ad Magnum, lib. 1. epist. 6. 


wine." And in his second book'', he saith these 
words, "Water is not the blood of Christ, but 
wine." And again, in the same Epistle, he saith, 
" That it was wine which Christ called his 
blood ; and that if wine be not in the chalice, 
then we drink not of the fruit of the vine." And 
in the same Epistle he saith, " That meal alone, 
or water alone, is not the body of Christ, except 
they be both joined together to make thereof 
bread." Epiphanius also saith ', ** That Christ, 
speaking of a loaf which is round in fashion, and 
cannot see, hear, nor feel, said of it, * This is 
my body.' " And St. Jerome, writing Ad Hedi- 
hiam, saith these words'', *' Let us mark, that 
the bread which the Lord brake and gave to his 
disciples, was the body of our Saviour Christ, as 
he said unto them, * Take and eat, this is my 
body.' " And St. Augustine also saith \ "■ That 
although we may set forth Christ by mouth, by 
writing, and by the sacrament of his body and 
blood, yet we call neither our tongue, nor words, 
nor ink, letters, nor paper, the body and blood 
of Christ ; but that we call the body and blood 
of Christ, which is taken of the fruit of the earth, 
and consecrated by mystical prayer." And also 
he saith"", *' Jesus called meat his body, and 
drink, his blood." 

'' Cyprianus ad Magnum, lib. 2. epist. 5. 

' Epiphan. in Ancorato. ^ Hieron. a<l Hedibiam« 

' August, de Ti'init. lib. 3. cap. 4. 

" De verbis Apostoli, serm. 2. 


Moreover Cyril, upon Si. John, saith", ** That 
Christ gave to his disciples pieces of bread, say- 
ing, * Take, eat, this is my body.' " 

Likew^ise Theodoretus saith", " When Christ 
gave the holy mysteries, he called bread his 
body ; and the cup mixt with wine and water^ 
he called his blood." 

By all these foresaid authors and places, with 
many more, it is plainly proved, that when our 
Saviour Christ gave bread unto his disciples, 
saying, ** Take and eat, this is my body ;" and 
likewise when he gave them the cup, saying, 
'* Divide this among you, and drink you all of 
this, for this is my blood ;" he called then the 
very material bread his body, and the very wine 
his blood. 

That bread (I say) that is one of the creatures 
here in earth among us, and that groweth out of 
the earth, and is made of many grains of corn, 
beaten into flour, and mixt with water, and so 
baken and made into bread, of such sort as other 
our bread is, that hath neither sense nor reason, 
and finally that feedeth and nourisheth our bo- 
dies. Such bread Christ called his body, when 
he said, ''This is my body." And such wine as 
is made of grapes pressed together, and thereof 
is made drink which nourisheth the body, such 

" Cyrillus in .Toanem. lib. 4. cap. 14. 
" Theodoretus in Dialocro. 1. 


wine he called his blood. This is the true doc- 
trine, confirmed as well by holy Scripture, as by 
all ancient authors of Christ's church, both 
Greeks and Latins, that is to say, that when our 
Saviour Christ gave bread and wine to his disci- 
ples, and spake these words, " This is my body," 
'* This is my blood," it was very bread and wine 
which he called his body and blood. 

Now let the Papists shew some authority for 
their opinion, either of Scripture or of some an- 
cient author. And let them not constrain all 
men to follow their fond devices, only because 
they say it is so, without any other ground or 
authority, but their own bare words. For in 
such wise credit is to be given to God's word 
only, and not to the word of any man. As many 
of them as I have read (the bishop of Winchester 
only excepted) do say, that Christ called not 
the bread his body, nor wine his blood, when he 
said, " This is my body, this is my blood." 
And yet in expounding these words, they vary 
among themselves : which is a token that they 
be uncertain of their own doctrine. For some 
of them say, that by this pronoun demonstra- 
tive, " this," Christ understood not the bread 
nor wine, but his body and blood. And other 
some say, that by the pronoun " this," he meant 
neither the bread nor wine, nor his body nor 
blood, but that he meant a particular thing un- 
certain, which they call iMdividuum vagum, or 


individuum i?i gencre, I trow some mathematical 
quiddity, they camiot tell what. But let all these 
Papists together shew any one authority, either 
of Scripture, or of ancient author, either Greek 
or Latin, that saith as they say, that Christ 
called not bread and wine his body and blood, 
but individuum vagwn ; and for my part I shall 
give them place, and confess that they say true. 
And if they can shew nothing for them of anti- 
quity, but only their own bare words, then it is 
reason that they give place to the truth con- 
firmed by so many authorities, both of Scripture 
and of ancient writers, which is, that Christ called 
very material bread his body, and very wine 
made of grapes his blood. 

Now this being fully proved, it must needs chap. 

follow consequently, that this manner of speak- If: 

ing is a figurative speech : for in plain and pro- ^od^'f wi™^ 
per speech it is not true to say that bread is be figura°uv, 
Christ's body, or wine his blood. For Christ'.s''^''"'"' 
body hath a soul, life, sense, and reason : but 
bread hath neither soul nor life, sense nor rea- 
son. Likewise, in plain speech, it is not true 
that we eat Christ's body, and drink his blood. 
For eating and drinking, in their proper and 
usual signification, is with the tongue, teeth, and 
lips, to swallow, divide, and chew in pieces : 
which thing to do to the flesh and blood of 
Christ, is horrible to be heard of any Christian. 

K 2 



To eat 

So that these speeches, to eat Christ's body^ 

and drink his blood, to call bread his body, or 

ciirist's wnro his blood, be speeches not taken in the 

llesli, and _ _ *• 

blood ^lie P^*^P^^' signification of every word, but by trans- 
/iguiative lation of these words, " eatinsf and drinkinof," 

speeches. ' ~ ~' 

from the signification of a corporeal thing* to sig- 
nify a spiritual thing; and by calling a thing that 
signifieth by the name of the thing which is 
signified thereby : which is no rare nor strange 
thing, but an usual manner and phrase in common 
speech. And yet lest this fault should be im- 
puted unto us, that we do feign things of our own 
heads without authority, (as the Papists be ac- 
customed to do,) here shall be cited sufficient 
authority, as well of Scripture, as of old ancient 
authors, to approve the same. 

First, when our Saviour Christ, in the sixth of 
John, said, " That he was the bread of life, the 
which whosoever did eat, should not die, but live 
for ever; and that the bread which he would 
give us^ was his flesh; and, therefore, whosoever 
should eat his flesh, and drink his blood, should 
have everlasting life ; and they that should not 
cat his flesh and drink his blood, should not 
have everlasting life p." When Christ liad 
spoken these words, with many more of the eat- 
ing of his flesh and drinking of his blood, both 
^ the Jews, and many also of his disciples, were 

•' Jolm vi. 


offended with his words, and said, " This is an 
hard saying : for how can he give us his flesli to \ 
be eaten ?" Christ perceiving their murmuring 
hearts, (because they knew none other eating of 
his flesh, but by chewing and swallowing,) to 
declare that they should not eat his body after 
that sort, nor that he meant of any such carnal 
eating, he said thus unto them, " What if you 
see the Son of man ascend up where he was be- 
fore ? It is the spirit that giveth life, the flesh 
availeth nothing. The words, which I spake 
unto you, be spirit and life." These words our 
Saviour Christ spake, to lift up their minds from 
earth to heaven, and from carnal to spiritual 
eating, that they should not fancy that they 
should with their teeth eat him presently here in 
earth, for his flesh so eaten (saith he) should no- 
thing profit them. And yet so they should not 
eat him, for he would take his body away from 
them, and ascend with it into heaven : and 
there by faith, and not with teeth, they should 
spiritually eat him, sitting at the right hand of 
his Father. " And therefore," saith he, " the 
words which I do speak, be spirit and life:" 
that is to say, are not to be understood that we 
shall eat Christ with our teeth grossly and car- 
nally, but that we shall spiritually and ghostly 
with our faith eat him, being carnally absent x 

from us in heaven, in such wise as Abraham and 
other holy fathers did eat him, many years be.- 


fore he was incarnated and born. As St. Paul 
saith, " That they did eat the same spiritual 
meat that we do, and drank the same spiritual 
drink, that is to say, Christ ''." For they spiri- 
tually by their faith were fed and nourished with 
Christ's body and blood, and had eternal life by 
him, before he was born, as we have now, that 
come after his ascension. Thus have you heard, 
by the declaration of Christ himself, and of St. 
Paul, that the eating and drinking of Christ's 
flesh and blood is not taken in the common sig- 
nification, with mouth and teeth to eat and chew 
a thing being present, but by a lively faith in 
heart and mind to chew and digest a thing being 
absent, either ascended hence into heaven, or 
else not yet born upon earth. 

And Origen " declaring the said eating of 
Christ's flesh and drinking of his blood, not to 
be understood as the words do sound, but figu- 
ratively, writeth thus upon these words of 
Christ : " Except you eat my flesh and drink 
my blood, you shall not have life in you." 
'* Consider," saith Origen, '* that these things, 
written in God's books, are figures ; and there- 
fore examine and understand them as spiritual 
and not as carnal men. For if you understand 
them as carnal men, they hurt you and feed you 
not. For even in the Gospels is there found let- 
's 1 Cor. X. ' Ormen, in Levit. Horn. 7. 


ter that killeth ; and not only in the Old Testa- 
ment, but also in the New, is there found letter 
that slayeth him that doth not spiritually under- 
stand that which is spoken. For if thou follow 
the letter or words of this that Christ said, * Ex- 
cept you eat my flesh and drink my blood,' this 
letter killeth." Who can more plainly express 
in any words, that the eating and drinking of 
Christ's flesh and blood are not to be taken in 
common signification, as the words pretend and 
sound, than Origen doth in this place? And St. 
John Chrysostome affirmeth the same % saying, 
" That if any man understand the words of 
Christ carnally, he shall surely profit nothing 
thereby. For what mean these words, ' The 
flesh availeth nothing ?' He meant not of his 
flesh, (God forbid,) but he meant of them that 
fleshly and carnally understood those things 
that Christ spake. But what is carnal under- 
standing ? To understand the words simply as 
they be spoken, and nothing else. For we ought 
not so to understand the things which we see, 
but all mysteries must be considered with in- 
ward eyes, and that is, spiritually to understand 
them." In these words St. John Chrysostome 
sheweth plainly, that the words of Christ, con- 
cerning the eating of his flesh and drinking of 
his blood, are not to be understood simply, as 

* Chrysost, in Joamiem. Horn. 26. 


they be spoken, but spiritually and figuratively. 
And yet most plainly of all other, St. Augustine 
doth declare this matter in his book De Doctrina 
Christiana *, in which book he instructeth Chris- 
tian people, how they should understand those 
places of Scripture, which seem hard and ob- 
scure. " Seldom," saith he, *' is any difficulty 
in proper words, but either the circumstance of 
the place, or the conferring of divers transla- 
tions, or else the original tongue wherein it was 
written, will make the sense plain. But in words 
that be altered from their proper signification, 
there is great diligence and heed to be taken. 
And specially we must beware, that we take not 
literally any thing that is spoken figuratively. 
Nor, contrariwise, we must not take for a figure 
any thing that is spoken properly. Therefore 
must be declared," saith St. Augustine, ** the 
manner how to discern a proper speech from a 
figurative ; wherein," saith he, *' must be ob- 
served this rule, that if the thing which is spoken 
be to the furtherance of charity, then it is a pro- 
per speech, and no figure. So that if it be a 
commandment that forbiddeth any evil or wick- 
ed act, or commandeth any good or beneficial 
thing, then it is no figure. But if it command 
any ill or wicked thing, or forbid any thing that 
iis good and beneficial, then it is a figurative 

' Augustinus De Doctrina Christ, lib. 3. 


speech. Now this saying of Christ, ' Except 
you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink 
his blood, you shall have no life in you,' seemeth 
to command an heinous and a wicked thing ; 
therefore it is a figure, commanding us to be 
partakers of Christ's passion, keeping in our 
minds, to our great comfort and profit, that his 
flesh was crucified and wounded for us." This 
is briefly the sentence of St. Augustine, in his 
book De Doctrina Christiana. And the like he 
writeth in his book De Catechisandis Rndibus ", 
and in his book Contra Adversarium Legis et 
Pi^ophetarmn % and in divers other places, which 
for tediousness I pass over. For if I should re- 
hearse all the authorities of St. Augustine and 
others which make mention of this matter, it 
would weary the reader too much. Wherefore 
to all them that by any reasonable means will 
be satisfied, these things before rehearsed are 
sufficient to prove that the eating of Christ's flesh 
and drinking of his blood, is not to be under- 
stood simply and plainly, (as the words do pro- 
perly signify,) that we do eat and drink him 
with our mouths ; but it is a figurative speech 
spiritually to be understood, that we must deeply 
print and fruitfully believe in our hearts, that his 
flesh was crucified, and his blood shed, for our 
redemption. And this our belief in him, is to 

" De Catech. rudib. cnp. 2G. 

* Contra advers. Legis ct Prophet, cap. 9. 


eat his flesh and to drink his blood, although 
they be not present here with us, but be as- 
cended into heaven. As our forefathers, before 
Christ's time, did likewise eat his flesh and drink 
his blood, which was so far from them, that he 
was not yet then born; 
CHAP. The same authors do say also, that when Christ 
called the bread his body, and the wine his 


ijo^'Vhis'is ^1^0^) i^ "^^s no proper speech that he then 

^'/figyrauve "^^^ » ^"^ ^^ ^^^ sacramcuts be figures of other 

speeches, ^jjingg^ ^nd yct have the very names of the things 

which they do signify : so Christ, instituting the 

sacrament of his most precious body and blood, 

did use figurative speeches, calling the bread by 

Je'jTrJ's^nfeth ^^^^ namc of his body, because it signifieth his 

dy'andtht body; and the wine he called his blood, because 

blood." it represented his blood. 

TertuUian \ herein writing against Marcion, 
saith these words : " Christ did not reprove 
bread, whereby he did represent his very body," 
And in the same book he saith, ** That Jesus 
taking bread, and distributing it amongst his 
disciples, made it his body, saying, 'This is my 
body;' that is to say, (saith Tertullian,) a figure 
of my body. And therefore, (saith Tertullian,) 
that Christ called bread his body, and wine his 
blood, because that, in the Old Testament, bread 
and wine were figures of his body and blood." 

' TertuUianus contra Marcionem, lib. 1. 


And St. Cyprian, the holy martyr', saith of 
this matter, ** That Christ's blood is shewed in 
the wine, and the people in the water, that is 
mixt with the wine : so that the mixture of the 
water to the wine, signifieth the spiritual com- 
mixtion and joining of us unto Christ." By 
which similitude Cyprian meant not that the 
blood of Christ is wine, or the people water ; 
but as the water doth signify and represent the 
people, so doth the wine signify and represent 
Christ's blood : and the uniting of the water and 
wine together, signifieth the uniting of Christian 
people unto Christ himself. And the same St. 
Cyprian, in another place "", writing hereof, saith, 
" That Christ, in his last supper, gave to his 
apostles with his own hands bread and wine, 
which he called his flesh and blood ; but in the 
cross he gave his very body to be wounded w^ith 
the hands of the soldiers, that the apostles might 
declare to the world how and in what manner 
bread and wine may be the flesh of Christ. And 
the manner he straightways declareth thus : that 
things which do signify, and those things which 
be signified by them, may be both called by one 
name." Here it is certain by St. Cyprian's 
mind, wherefore and in what wise bread is called 
Christ's flesh, and wine his blood ; that is to say, 
because that every thing that reprcscnteth and 

' Cyprianus, lib, 2. epist. 3, * De unctione Chrismatis. 


signifieth another thing, may be called by name 
of the thing which it signifieth. 

And therefore St. John Chrysostome saitll^ 
" That Christ ordained the table of his holy sup- 
per for this purpose, that in that sacrament he 
should daily shew unto us bread and wine for a 
similitude of his body and blood." 

St. Jerome likewise saith % upon the Gospel 
of Matthew, " That Christ took bread, which 
comforteth man's heart, that he might represent 
thereby his very body and blood." 

Also St. Ambrose "^ (if the book be his that is 
entitled De hiis qui misteriis initkmtur,) saith, 
** That before the consecration another kind is 
named ; but after the consecration the body of 
Christ is signified. Christ said his blood; before 
the consecration, it is called another thing; but, 
after the consecration, is signified the blood of 
Christ. And in his book De Sacramentis" , (if 
that be also his,) he writeth thus : " Thou dost 
receive the sacrament for a similitude of the flesh 
and blood of Christ ; but thou dost obtain the 
grace and virtue of his true nature ; and, receiv- 
ing the bread in that food, thou art partaker of 
his godly substance." And in the same book \ 
he saith, " As thou hast in baptism received the 
similitude of death, so likewise dost thou in this 

'' Chrysost. in Psal. xxii. "^ Hieronym. in Matt. xxvi. 

* Ambros. de hiis qui mysteriis initiantur. cap. ult. 

^ De sacramentis, lib. b*. cap. 10. ^ Lib. 4. cap. 4. 

l^'^ Hi.=> noLr supper. 141 

sacrament drink the similitude of Christ's pre- 
cious blood." And again he saith, in the said 
book% " The priest saith, make unto us this 
oblation to be acceptable, which is the figure of 
the body and blood of our Lord Jesu Christ." 
And upon the Epistle of St. Paul to the Corin- 
thians ^ he saith, " That in eating and drinking 
the bread and wine, we do signify the flesh and 
blood, which were offered for us. And the Old 
Testament," saith he, '* was instituted in blood, 
because that blood was a witness of God's bene- 
fit; in signification and figure whereof, we take 
the mystical cup of his blood, to the tuition of 
our body and soul." Of these places of SU 
Chrysostome, St. Jerome, and St. Ambrose, it 
is clear, that in the sacramental bread and wine, 
is not really and corporally the very natural sub- 
stance of the flesh and blood of Christ, but that 
the bread and wine be similitudes, mysteries, 
and representations, significations, sacraments, siirns and 
figures and signs of his body and blood; and the name's of 

ni 11 1 r 1 • *''^ tilings 

therefore be called and have the name of his which they 


very flesh and blood. 

And yet St. Augustine sheweth this matter 
more clearly and fully than any of the rest, spe- 
cially in an Epistle which he wrote Ad Botiifa- 
ciiim \ where he saith, "That a day or two before 

E Dc sacramcntis, lib. 4. cap. 5. '' 1 Cor. xi. 

' August, ad Bonifaciuni, Epist. 2'6. 


Good Friday, we used in common speech to say 
thus : to-morrow, or this day two days, Christ 
suffered his passion, where in very deed he never 
suffered his passion but once, and that was many 
years passed. Likewise upon Easter-day we 
say, this day Christ rose from death, where in 
very deed it is many hundred years since he rose 
from death. Why then do not men reprove us 
as liars, when we speak in this sort ? But be- 
cause we call these days so, by a similitude of 
these days, wherein these things were done in 
deed. And so it is called that day, which is not 
that day in deed, but by the course of the year 
is a like day, and such things be said to be done 
that day for the solemn celebration of the sacra- 
ment, which things in deed were not done that 
day, but long before. Was Ch'rist offered any 
more but once ? And he offered himself, and yet 
in a sacrament or representation, not only every 
solemn feast of Easter, but every day he is offer 
ed to the people ; so that he doth not lie that 
saith, he is every day offered. For if sacraments 
had not some similitude or likeness of those 
things, whereof they be sacraments, they could 
in no wise be sacraments. And for their simili- 
tude and likeness, commonly they have the name 
of the things, whereof they be sacraments. 
Therefore, as after a certain manner of speech, 
the sacrament of Christ's body, is Christ's body; 
the sacrament of Christ's blood, is Christ's blood : 


SO likewise the sacrament of faith, is faith. And 
to believe, is nothing else but to have faith : and 
therefore, when we answer for young children in 
their baptism, that they believe, which have not 
yet the mind to believe, we answer that they 
have faith, because they have the sacrament of 
faith. And we say also, that they turn unto 
God, because of the sacrament of the conversion 
unto God ; for that answer pertaineth to the ce- 
lebration of the sacrament. And likewise speak- 
eth the apostle of baptism, saying, ' That by 
baptism we be buried with him into death :' he 
saith not, that we signify burial ; but he saith 
plainly, that we be buried.' So that the sacra- 
ment of so great a thing is not called but by the 
name of the thing itself." 

Hitherto I haVe rehearsed the answer of St. 
Augustine unto Boniface, a learned bishop, who 
asked of him, how the parents and friends could 
answer for a young babe in baptism, and say in 
his person, that he believeth and converteth unto 
God, when the child can neither do nor think 
any such thing. Whereunto the answer of St. 
Augustine is this : that forasmuch as baptism is 
the sacrament of the profession of our faith, and 
of our conversion unto God, it becometh us so to 
answer for young children coming thereunto, as 
to that sacrament appertaineth, although the 
children indeed have no knowledge of such 
things. And yet in our said answers we ought • 


not to be reprehended as vain men or liars ; for- 
asmuch as in common speech we use daily to call 
sacraments and figures by the names of the 
things that be signified by them, although they 
be not the same thing indeed. As every Good 
Friday, (as often as it returneth from year to 
year,) we call it the day of Christ's passion; and 
every Easter-day we call the day of his resur- 
rection ; and every day in the year we say that 
Christ is offered, and the sacrament of his body, 
we call it his body, and the sacrament of his 
blood, we call it his blood ; and our baptism St. 
Paul calleth our burial with Christ. And yet in 
very deed Christ never suffered but once, never 
arose but once, never was offered but once; nor 
in very deed in baptism we be not buried, nor 
the sacrament of Christ's body fs not his body, 
nor the sacrament of his blood is not his blood . 
But so they be called, because they be figures, 
sacraments, and representations of the things 
themselves which they signify, and whereof they 
bear the name. Thus doth St. Augustine most 
plainly open this matter in his Epistle to Boni- 
facius. Of this manner of speech, (wherein a 
sign is called by the name of the thing which it 
signifieth,) speaketh St. Augustine also right 
largely in his questions Super Leviticum et contra 
Adamantimn ^ declaring how blood in Scripture 

'' Super Lev. quest. 57. 


is called the soul. " A thing which signifieth," 
saith he, " is wont to be called by the name of 
the thing which it signifieth, as it is written in 
the Scripture. The seven ears be seven years ; 
the Scripture saith not signifieth seven years ; 
and seven kine be seven years, and many other 
like. And so said Paul, that ' the stone was 
Christ,' and not that it signified Christ ; but 
even as it had been he in deed, which neverthe- 
less was not Christ by substance, but by signifi- 
cation. Even so," saith St. Augustine, ''because 
the blood signifieth and representeth the soul, 
therefore in a sacrament or signification it is 
called the soul," And Contra Adamant mm \ he 
"writeth much like, saying, *' In such wise is 
blood the soul, as the stone was Christ ; and yet 
the apostle saith not, that the stone signified 
Christ, but saith it was Christ. And this sen- 
tence, ' blood is the soul,' may be understood to 
be spoken in a sign or figure. For Christ did 
not stick to say, * This is my body,' when he 
gave the sign of his body." Here St. Augustine 
rehearsing divers sentences which were spoken 
figuratively, that is to say, when one thing was 
called by the name of another, and yet was not 
the other in substance, but in signification ; as 
that blood is the soul, seven kine be seven years, 
seven ears be seven years, the stone was Christ • 

' Contra Adaniaiitiiini, cap. 12. 


among such manner of speeches, he rehearsed 
those words which Christ spake at his last sup- 
per, **This is my body," which declareth plainly 
St. Augustine's mind that Christ spake those 
words figuratively, not meaning that the bread 
was his body by substance, but by signification. 
And therefore St. Augustine saith. Contra Majci- 
minum "", " That in sacraments we must not con- 
sider what they be, but what they signify. For 
they be signs of things, being one thing, and sig- 
nifying another." Which he doth shew specially 
of this sacramenty saying, "The heavenly bread, 
which is Christ's flesh, by some manner of speech 
is called Christ's body, when in very deed it is 
the sacrament of his body. And that ofi'ering 
of the flesh, which is done by the priest's hands, 
is called Christ's passion, death, and crucifying, 
not in very deed, but in a mystical significa- 

And to this purpose it is both pleasant, com- 
fortable, and profitable, to read Theodoretus, in 
his Dialogues", where he disputeth and sheweth 
at length, how the names of things be changed 
in Scripture, and yet the things remain still. 
And for example, he proveth, that the flesh of 
Christ is in the Scripture sometimes called a veil 
of covering, sometimes a cloth, sometimes a 

" Contra Maximinum, lib. 3. cap. 22. 

" In lib. sententiarum Prosperi de consecr. diss. 9. Hoc est, 

" Tk«odo?et, i>i dia^logis. 


vestment, and sometimes a stole : and the blood 
of the grape is called Christ's blood, and the 
names of bread and wine, and of his flesh and 
blood, Christ doth so change, that sometimes he 
calleth his body, corn or bread ; and sometimes 
contrary, he calleth bread, his body. And like- 
wise his blood sometime he calleth wine, and 
sometimes, contrary, he calleth wine his blood. 
For the more plain understanding whereof, it 
shall not be amiss to recite his own sayings in 
his foresaid Dialogues, touching this matter of 
the holy sacrament of Christ's flesh and blood. 
The speakers in these Dialogues be Orthodoxus 
the right believer, and Eranistes his companion, 
but not understanding the right faith. 

Orthodoxus saith to his companion, ** Dosfn^'i^'i"* 

■'■ Dialog lie 1 

thou not know that God calleth bread his flesh? 

Eranistes. " I know that. 

Orthodoxus. *' And in another place he calleth 
his body corn ? 

Eran. " I know that also ; for I have heard 
him say, *The hour is come that the Son of man 
shall be glorified P;' and except the grain-corn 
that falleth in the ground, die, it remaineth sole; 
but if it die, then it bringeth forth much fruit. 

Orth. " When he gave the mysteries or sacra- 
ments, he called bread his body ; and that which 
was mixt in the cup, he called blood. 

•* John xii. 
L 2 


Eran. " So he called them. 

Orth. " But that also which was his natural 
body, may well be called his body ; and his very 
blood also, may be called his blood. 

Eran. " It is plain. 

Orth. ''But our Saviour without doubt chang- 
ed the names, and gave to the body the name of 
the sign or token, and to the token he gave the 
name of the body. And so when he called him- 
self a vine, he called blood that, which was the 
token of blood. 

Eran. " Surely thou hast spoken the truth ; 
but I would know the cause wherefore the names 
were changed. 

Orth. " The cause is manifest to them that be 
expert in true religion. For he would that they 
which be partakers of the godly sacraments, 
should not set their minds upon the nature of the 
things which they see, but, by the changing of 
the names, should believe the things which be 
wrought in them by grace. For he that called 
that which is his natural body, corn and bread, 
and also called himself a vine, he did honour the 
visible tokens and signs with the names of his 
body and blood, not changing the nature, but 
adding grace to nature. 

Eran. " Sacraments be spoken of sacrament- 
ally, and also by them be manifestly declared 
things which all men know not. 

Orth. " Seeing then that it is certain that the 


patriarch called the Lord's body ' a vestment 
and apparel %' and that now we be entered to 
speak of godly sacraments, tell me truly of what 
thing thinkest thou this holy meat to be a token 
and figure ? Of Christ's divinity, or of his body 
and blood ? 

Eran. " It is clear that it is the figure of those 
things, whereof it beareth the name. 

Orth. ''Meanest thou of his body and blood? 

Eran. '* Even so I mean. 

Orth. " Thou hast spoken as one that loveth 
the truth ; for the Lord, when he took the token 
or sign, he said not, ' This is my divinity,' but 
* This is my body,' and * This is my blood.' 
And in another place, ' The bread which I will 
give, is my flesh, which I will give for the life of 
the world'.' 

Eran. " The things be true, for they be God's 

All this writeth Theodoretus in his first Dia- 

And in the second he writeth the same in Diaiogue>2. 
effect, (and yet in some things more plainly,) 
against such hereticks as aflirmed, that after 
Christ's resurrection and ascension his humanity 
was changed from the very nature of a man, and 
turned into his divinity. Against whom thus he 

' Gen. xlix. ' John vi. 


Orth. " Corruption, health, sickness, and 
death, be accidents ; for they go and come. 

Eran. " It is meet they be so called. 

Orth. " Men's bodies after their resurrection 
be delivered from corruption, death, and morta- 
lity, and yet they lose not their proper nature. 

Eran. " Truth it is. 

Orth. " The body of Christ therefore did rise 
quite clean from all corruption and death, and is 
impassible, immortal, glorified with the glory of 
Cod, and is honoured of the powers of heaven; 
and yet it is a body, and hath the same bigness 
that it had before. 

Eran. " Thy sayings seem true, and according 
to reason; but after he was ascended up into 
heaven, I think thou wilt not say, that his body 
was not turned into the nature of the Godhead. 

Orth. " I would not so say for the persuasion 
of man's reason ; nor am I so arrogant and pre- 
sumptuous to affirm any thing which Scripture 
passeth over in silence ; but I have heard St. 
Paul cry, ' That God hath ordained a day, when 
he will judge all the world in justice by that 
man which, he appointed before, performing his 
promise to all men, and raising him from death*.' 
I have learned also of the holy angels, * That he 
will come after that fashion, as his disciples saw 
him go to heaven*.' But they saw a nature of a 

* Acts xvii. * Acts i. 


certain bigness, not a nature which had no big- 
ness. I heard furthermore the Lord say, * You 
shall see the Son of man come in the clouds of 
heaven".' And I know that every thing that 
men see, hath a certain bigness. For that na- 
ture that hath no bigness, cannot be seen. 
Moreover to set in the throne of glory, and to set 
the lambs upon his right hand, and the goats 
upon his left hand, signifieth a thing that hath 
quantity and bigness." 

Hitherto I have rehearsed Theodoretus's 
words, and shortly after Eranistes saith : 

Ermi. ** We must turn every stone, (as the 
proverb saith,) to seek out the truth, but speci- 
ally when godly matters be propounded. 

Orth. ** Tell me then the sacramental signs, 
which be offered to God by his priests, whereof 
be they signs which be oifered to God by his 
priest ; whereof be they signs, sayest thou ? 

Eran. ** Of the Lord's body and blood. 

Orth. *' Of a very body, or not of a very body? 

Ei^an. " Of a very body. 

Orth. " Very well, for an image must be made 
after a true pattern ; for painters follow nature, 
and paint the images of such things as we see 
with our eyes. 

Eran. " Truth it is. 

Orth. '' If therefore the godly sacraments re- 

" Matt xxiv. 


present a true body, then is the Lord's body yet 
still a body, not converted into the nature of his 
Godhead, but replenished with God's glory. 

Eran. "^ It cometli in good time that thou 
makest mention of God's sacraments ; for by the 
same I shall prove, that Christ's body is turned 
into another nature. Answer, therefore, unto 
my questions. 

Orth. " I shall answer. 

Eraii. *' What callest thou that which is offer- 
ed before the invocation of the priest ? 

Orth. *' We must not speak plainly, for it is 
like that some be present, which have not pro- 
fessed Christ. 

Eran. " Answer covertly. 

Orth. *' It is a nourishment made of seeds 
that be like. 

Eran. *' Then how call we the other sign? 

Orth. " It is also a common name, that signi- 
lieth a kind of drink. 

Eran. " But how dost thou call them after 
the sanctification ? 

Orth. " The body of Christ, and the blood of 

Eran. " And dost thou believe that thou art 
made partaker of Christ's body and blood ? 

Orth. " I believe so. 

Eran. " Therefore as the tokens of God's body 
and blood be other things before the priest's in- 
vocation, but after the invocation they be chang- 


ed, and be other things: so also the body of 
Christ, after his assumption, is changed into his 
divine substance. 

Orth. " Thou art taken with thine own net. 
For the sacramental signs go not from their own 
nature after the sanctification, but continue in 
their former substance, form, and figure, and 
may be seen and touched as well as before; yet 
in our minds we do consider what they be 
made, and do repute and esteem them, and have 
them in reverence, according to the same things 
that they be taken for. Therefore compare the 
images to the pattern, and thou shalt see them 
like. For a figure must be like to the thing it- 
self. For Christ's body hath his former fashion, 
figure, and bigness ; and, to speak at one word, 
the same substance of his body. But after his 
resurrection, it was made immortal, and of such 
power, that no corruption nor death could come 
unto it ; and it was exalted to that dignity, that 
it was set at the right hand of the Father, and 
honoured of all creatures, as the body of him 
that is the Lord of nature. 

Er^an. ** But the sacramental token change th 
his former name ; for it is no more called as it was 
before, but is called Christ's body. Therefore 
must his body, after his ascension, be called 
God, and not a body. 

Orth. " Thou seemest to me ignorant ; for it 
is not called his body only, but also the bread of 



life, as the Lord called it. So the body of Christ 
we call a godly body, a body that giveth life, 
God's body, the Lord's body, our Master's body, 
meaning that it is not a common body, as other 
men's bodies be, but that it is the body of our 
Lord Jesu Christ, both God and man." 

This have I rehearsed of the great clerk and 
holy bishop Theodoretus, whom some of the Pa- 
pists perceiving to make so plainly against them 
have defamed, saying that he was infected with 
the error of Nestorius. Here the Papists shew 
their old accustomed nature and condition, which 
is, (even in a manifest manner,) rather to lie 
without shame, than to give place unto the truth, 
and confess their own error. And although his 
adversaries falsely bruited such a fame against 
him when he was yet alive, nevertheless he was 
purged thereof by the holy council of Calcedon, 
about eleven hundred years ago. And further- 
more, in his book which he wrote against here- 
sies, he specially condemneth Nestorius by name. 
And also all his three books of his Dialogues, 
before rehearsed, he wrote chiefly against Nes- 
torius, and was never herein noted of error this 
thousand year, but hath ever been reputed and 
taken for an holy bishop, a great learned man, 
and a grave author, until now at this present 
time, when the Papists have nothing to answer 
unto him, they begin in excusing of themselves, 
to defame him. 


Thus much have I spoken for Theodoretus, 
which I pray thee be not weary to read, good rea- 
der, but often and with delectation, deliberation, 
and good advertisement to read. For it con- 
taineth plainly and briefly the true instruction of 
a Christian man, concerning the matter which in 
this book we treat upon. 

First, that our Saviour Christ in his last sup- Five princi- 

*■ pal things to 

per, when he gave bread and wine to his apos- ^^ ""J^d ia 
ties, saying, *' This is my body, this is my blood," ^"'''• 
it was bread which he called his body, and wine 
mixed in the cup, which he called his blood : so 
that he changed the names of the bread and wine, 
which were the mysteries, sacraments, signs, 
figures, and tokens of Christ's flesh and blood, 
and called them by the names of the things 
which they did represent and signify, that is to 
say, the bread he called by the name of his very 
flesh, and the wine by the name of his blood. 

Second, that although the names of bread and 
wine were changed after sanctification, yet ne- 
vertheless the things themselves remained the 
self-same that they were before the sanctifica- 
tion, that is to say, the same bread and wine in 
nature, substance, form, and fashion. 

The third, seeing that the substance of the bread 
and wine be not changed, why be then their names 
changed, and the bread called Christ's flesh, and 
the wine his blood ? Theodoretus sheweth, that 
thecause thereof was this, that we should not have 


SO much respect to the bread and wine, which 
we see with our eyes and taste with our mouths, 
as we should have to Christ himself, in whom we 
believe with our hearts, and feel and taste him 
by our faith, and with whose flesh and blood, by 
his grace, we believe that we be spiritually fed 
and nourished. These things we ought to re- 
member and revolve in our minds, and to lift up 
our hearts from the bread and wine unto Christ 
that sitteth above. And because we should so 
do, therefore after the consecration, they be no 
more called bread and wine, but the body and 
blood of Christ. 

The fourth. It is in these sacraments of bread 
and wine, as it is in the very body of Christ. 
For as the body of Christ before his resurrection, 
and after, is all one in nature, substance, bigness, 
form, and fashion, and yet it is not called as 
another common body, but with addition, for 
the dignity of his exaltation, it is called a hea- 
venly, a godly, an immortal, and the Lord's 
body : so likewise the bread and wine, before 
the consecration and after, is all one in nature, 
substance, bigness, form, and fashion, and yet it 
is not called as other common bread, but for the 
dignity whereunto it is taken, it is called with 
addition, heavenly bread, the bread of life, and 
the bread of thanksgiving. 

The fifth, that no man ought to be so arrogant 
and presumptuous to affirm for a certain truth in 


religion, any thing which is not spoken of in 
holy Scripture. And this is spoken to the great 
and utter condemnation of the Papists, which 
make and unmake new articles of our faith from 
time to time, at their pleasure, without any 
Scripture at all, yea quite and clean contrary to 
Scripture. And yet will they have all men bound 
to believe whatsoever they invent, upon peril of 
damnation and everlasting fire. And they would 
constrain with fire and faggot all men to consent, 
contrary to the manifest words of God, to these 
their errors in this matter of the holy sacrament 
of Christ's body and blood. First, that there 
remaineth no bread nor wine after the consecra- 
tion, but that Christ's flesh and blood is made of 
them. Second, that Christ's body is really, cor- 
porally, substantially, sensibly, and naturally in 
the bread and wine. Thirdly, that wicked per- 
sons do eat and drink Christ's very body and 
blood. Fourthly, that priests offer Christ every 
day, and make of him a new sacrifice propitia- 
tory for sin. 

Thus, for shortness of time, do I make an end 
of Theodoretus, with other old ancient writers, 
which do most clearly affirm, that to eat Christ's 
body, and to drink his blood, be figurative 
speeches. And so be these sentences likewise, 
which Christ spake at his supper, " This is my 
body, this is my blood." 


CHAP. And marvel not, good reader, that Christ at 
xn. . . 
_ that time spake in figures, when he did institute 

Figumtive , ' . , . . 

speeches be that sacrament, seenig that it is the nature of all 

not strange. 

sacraments to be figures. And although the 
Scripture be full of schemes, tropes, and figures, 
yet specially it useth them when it speaketh of 

" When the ark," (which rq^resented God's 
majesty,) ** was come into the army of the Is- 
raelites, the Philistines said that God was come 
into the army \" And God himself said, by his 
prophet Nathan, " That from the time that he 
had brought the children of Israel out of Egypt, 
he dwelled not in houses, but that he was carried 
about in tents and tabernacles ^" And yet was 
not God himself so carried about, or went in 
tents or tabernacles, but because the ark, which 
was a figure of God, was so removed from place 
to place, he spake of himself that thing, which 
was to be understood of the ark. 
S used'"" ^^^ Christ himself oftentimes spake in simi- 
fpeeches! li^udcs, parablcs, and figures, as when he said, 
** The field is the world, the enemy is the devil, 
the seed is the word of God \" — " John is Elias, 
I am a vine, and you be the branches\" — " I am 
bread of life \"_-'* My father is an husbandman, 
and he hath his fan in his hand, and will make 

" 1 Sam. iv. y 2 Sam. a ii. » Matt. xiii. 

* Matt, xi, and xvii. »► JoH!i xvi. 


clean his floor, and gather the wheat into his 
barn ; but the chafF he will cast into everlasting 
fire'." — " I have a meat to eat, which you know 
nof*." — '* Work not meat that perisheth, but that 
endureth unto everlasting life*." — " I am a good 
shepherd ^" — "The Son of man will set the sheep 
at his right hand, and the goats at his left hand V 
• — " I am a door**." — One of you is the devil'." 
'* Whosoever doeth my Father's will, he is my 
brother, sister, and mother \" And when he 
said to his mother and to John, ** This is thy son, 
this is thy mother '." 

These, with an infinite number of like sen- 
tences, Christ spake in parables, metaphors, 
tropes, and figures. But chiefly when he spake 
of the sacraments, he used figurative speeches. 
As when of baptism he said, ** That we must be 
baptized with the Holy Ghost *" :" meaning of 
spiritual baptism. And like speech used St. 
John the Baptist, saying of Christ, *' That he 
should baptize with the Holy Ghost and fire°." 
And Christ said, " That we must be born again, 
or else we cannot see the kingdom of God "." 
And said also, '* Whosoever shall drink of that 
water which I shall give him, he shall never be 
dry again. But the water which I shall give 

* John vi. ^ John xv. Matt. iii. ' John iv. 

' John vi. " John x. '' Matt. xxv. ' John x. 

» John vi. ' Matt. xii. "' Acts i. " Matt, iii, 

* John iii. 


him, shall be made withm him a well, which 
shall spring into everlasting life ''." And St. 
Paul saith, *' That in baptism we clothe us with 
Christ, and be buried with him '." 

This baptism, washing, and new birth by the 
fire and the Holy Ghost, and this water that 
springeth in a man, and floweth into everlasting 
life, cannot be understood of any material water, 
material washing, and material birth, but by 
translation of things visible into things invisible, 
they must be understood spiritually and figura- 

After the same sort the mystery of our re- 
demption, and the passion of our Saviour Christ 
upon the cross, as well in the New as the Old 
Testament, is expressed and declared by many 
figures and figurative speeches. As the pure 
The paschal pasclial Lamb without spot, signified Christ. 
The effusion of the Lamb's blood, signified the 
effusion of Christ's blood. And the salvation of 
the children of Israel from temporal death by the 
Lamb's blood, signified our salvation from eter- 
nal death by Christ's blood. And as Almighty 
God, passing through Egypt, killed all the 
Egyptians' heirs in every house, and left not one 
alive ; and nevertheless he passed by the chil- 
dren of Israel's houses, where he saw the Lamb's 
blood upon the doors, and hurted none of them, 

■i John iv. ^ JRom. vi. Galat. iii. 


but saved them all by the means of the Lamb's 
blood : so likewise at the last judgment of the 
whole world, none shall be passed over and 
saved, but that shall be found marked with the 
blood of the most pure and immaculate Lamb 
Jesus Christ. And forasmuch as the shedding 
of that Lamb's blood, was a token and figure of The Lords 
the shedding of Christ's blood then to come; 
and forasmuch also as all the sacraments and 
figures of the Old Testament ceased and had an 
end in Christ : lest by our great unkindness we 
should peradventure be forgetful of the great 
benefit of Christ, therefore at his last supper, 
(when he took his leave of his apostles to depart 
out of the v/orld,) he did make a new will and 
testament, wherein he bequeathed unto us clean 
remission of all our sins, and the everlasting in- 
heritance of heaven. And the same he con- 
firmed the next day with his own blood and death. 
And lest we should forget the samC;, he ordained 
not a yearly memory, (as the paschal Lamb was 
eaten but once every year,) but a daily remem- 
brance he ordained thereof in bread and wine, 
sanctified and dedicated to that purpose, saying, 
*' This is my body; this cup is my blood, which * 
is shed for the remission of sins. Do this in the 
remembrance of me." Admonishing us by these 
words, spoken at the making of his last will and 
testament, and at his departing out of the world, 
(because they should be the better remember-' 



ed,) that whensoever we do eat the bread in his 
holy supper, and drink of that cup, we should 
remember how much Christ hath done for us, 
and how he died for our sakes. Therefore, saith 
St. Paul, " As often as ye shall eat of this bread 
and drink the cup, you shall shew forth the 
Lord's death until he come." And forasmuch as 
this holy bread broken, and the wine divided, do 
represent unto us the death of Christ now pass- 
ed, as the killing of the paschal Lamb did repre- 
sent the same yet to come : therefore our Saviour 
Christ used the same manner of speech of the 
bread and wine, as God before used of the pas- 
chal Lamb. For as in the Old Testament God 
said, " This is the Lord's pass-by, or passover :" 
even so saith Christ in the New Testament, 
** This is my body, this is my blood." But in 
the old mystery and sacrament, the Lamb was 
not the Lord's very passover or passing-by, but 
it was a figure which represented his passing by. 
So likewise in the New Testament, the bread 
and wine be not Christ's very body and blood, 
but they be figures, which by Christ's institu- 
tion be, unto the godly receivers thereof, sacra- 
ments, tokens, significations, and representations 
of his very flesh and blood : instructing their 
faith, that as the bread and wine feed them cor- 
porally, and continue this temporal life ; so the 
very flesh and blood of Christ feedeth them spi- 
ritually, and giveth them everlasting life. 


And why should any man think it strange to ^^j^^^^' ''^"" 
admit a figure in these speeches, " This is my ';^'^^';fj|"^ ^t 
body, this is my blood?" seeing that the com- ^upj',e,f '**** 
munication the same night (by the Papists' own 
confessions) was so full of figurative speeches ? 
For the apostles spake figuratively when they 
asked Christ where he would eat his passover or 
pass-by. And Christ himself used the same 
figure when he said, " I have much desired to 
eat this passover with you." Also to eat Christ's 
body and to drink his blood, I am sure they will 
not say that it is taken properly, to eat and drink 
as we do eat other meats and drinks. And when 
Christ said, '* This cup is a new testament in 
my blood;" here, in one sentence, be two 
figures, one in this word " cup," which is not 
taken for the cup itself, but for the thing con- 
tained in the cup : another is in this word " tes- 
tament ;" for neither the cup, nor the wine con- 
tained in the cup, is Christ's testament, but is a 
token, sign, and figure, whereby is represented 
unto us his testament, confirmed by his blood. 

And if the Papists will say, (as they say indeed,) 
that by this cup is neither meant the cup nor 
the wine contained in the cup, but that thereby 
is meant Christ's blood contained in the cup : 
yet must they needs grant that there is a figure. 
For Christ's blood is not in proper speech the 
new testament, but it is the thing that confirmed 
tke new testament. And yet by this strange in- 

M 2 



terpretation the Papists make a very strange 
speech, more strange than any figurative speech 
is. For this they make the sentence : this blood 
is a new testament in my blood. Which saying 
is so fond, and so far from all reason, that the 
foolishness thereof is evident to every man. 
Now forasmuch as it is plainly declared and 
^^^~ manifestly proved, that Christ called bread his 
tks and°a"- ^ody, and wine his blood, and that these sen- 
theTapls'ts. tences be figurative speeches; and that Christ, 
as concerning his humanity and bodily presence, 
is ascended into heaven with his whole flesh and 
blood, and is not here upon earth ; and that the 
substance of bread and wine do remain still, and 
be received in the sacrament ; and that although 
they remain, yet they have changed their names, 
so that the bread is called Christ's body, and the 
wine his blood ; and that the cause why their 
names be changed, is this, that we should lift 
up our hearts and minds from the things which 
we see unto the things which we believe, and be 
above in heaven, whereof the bread and wine 
have the names, although they be not the very 
same things in deed. These things well consi- 
dered and weighed, all the authorities and argu- 
ments, which the Papists feign to serve for their 
purpose, be clean wiped away. 
CHAP. For whether the authors (which they allege) 
say that we do eat Christ's flesh, and drink his 


One brief 

answectoaii. blood, Or that the bread and wine is converted 


into the substance of his flesh and blood, or that 
we be turned into his flesh, or that in the Lord's 
Supper we do receive his very flesh and blood ; 
or that in the bread and wine is received that 
which did hang upon the cross, or that Christ 
hath left his flesh with us, or that Christ is in us, 
and we in him ; or that he is whole here and 
whole in heaven ; or that the same thing is in the 
chalice which flowed out of his side, or that the 
same thing is received with our mouth which is 
believed with our faith; or that the bread and 
wine, after the consecration, be the body and 
blood of Christ ; or that we be nourished with 
the body and blood of Christ; or that Christ is 
both gone hence and is still here; or that Christ 
at his last supper bare himself in his own hands: 
• — These and all other like sentences may not be 
understood of Christ's humanity literally and 
carnally, as the words in common speech do pro- 
perly signify: for so doth no man eat Christ's 
flesh, nor drink his blood ; nor so is not the bread 
and wine turned into his flesh and blood, nor we 
into him ; nor so is the bread and wine after the 
consecration his flesh and blood ; nor so is not his 
flesh and blood whole here in earth, eaten with 
our mouths ; nor so did not Christ take himself 
in his own hands : But these and all other like 
sentences, which declare Christ to be here in 
earth, and to be eaten and drunken of Christian 
people, are to be understood either of his divinef 


nature, whereby he is every where, or else they 
must be understood figuratively or spiritually. 
For figuratively he is in the bread and wine, and 
spiritually he is in them that worthily eat and 
drink the bread and wine; but really, carnally, 
and corporally, he is only in heaven, from whence 
lie shall come to judge the quick and dead. 

This brief answer will suffice for all that the 
Papists can bring for their purpose, if it be aptly 
applied. And for the more evidence hereof, I 
shall apply the same to some such places as the 
Papists think do make most for them : that, by 
the answer to those places, the rest may be the 
more easily answered unto. 
CHAP. They allege St. Clement, whose words be 
these, as they report. "The sacraments of God's 


tt^cfemlns, sccrcts arc committed to three degrees, to a 
p's'o a 2. pj.-gg^^ ^ deacon, and a minister ; which with fear 
and trembling ought to keep the leavings of the 
broken pieces of the Lord's body, that no cor- 
ruption be found in the holy place, lest by neg- 
ligence great injury be done to the portion of the 
Lord's body." And by and by followeth : ** So 
many hosts must be offered in the altar, as will 
suffice for the people : and if any remain, they 
must not be kept until the morning, but be 
spent and consumed of the clerks with fear and 
trembling. And they that consume the residue 
of the Lord's body, may not by and by take 
other common meats, lest they should mix that 


holy portion with the meat which is digested by 
the belly, and voided by the fundament. There- 
fore if the Lord's portion be eaten in the morn- 
ing, the ministers that consume it must fast unto 
six of the clock ; and if they do take it at three 
or four of the clock, the minister must fast until 
the evening." Thus much writeth Clement of 
this matter, if the epistle which they allege were 
Clement's, as indeed it is not. But they have 
feigned many things in other men's names, 
thereby to establish their feigned purposes. But 
whose soever the epistle was, if it be thoroughly 
considered, it maketh much more against the 
Papists, than for their purpose. For by the same 
epistle appeareth evidently three special things 
against the errors of the Papists. 

The first is, that the bread in the sacrament is 
called the Lord's body, and the pieces of the 
broken bread be called the pieces and fragments 
of the Lord's body, which cannot be understood 
but figuratively. The second is, that the bread 
ought not to be reserved and hanged up, as the 
Papists every where do use. The third is, that 
the priests ought not to receive the sacrament 
alone, (as the Papists commonly do, making a 
sale thereof unto the people,) but they ought to 
communicate with the people. And here it is 
diligently to be noted, that we ought not un- 
reverently and unadvisedly to approach unto the 
meat of the Lcird's table, as we do to other com.- 


mon meats and drinks, but with great fear and 
dread ; lest we should come to that holy table 
unworthily, wherein is not only represented, 
but also spiritually given unto us, very Christ 
himself. And therefore ^we ought to come to 
that board of the Lord with all reverence, faith, 
love and charity, fear and dread, according to 
the same. 

Here I pass over Ignatius ' and Irenaeus *, 
which make nothing for the Papists' opinions, 
but stand in the commendation of the holy com- 
munion, and in exhortation of all men to the 
often and godly receiving thereof. And yet nei- 
ther they, nor no man else, can extol and com- 
mend the same sufficiently, according to the 
dignity thereof, if it be godly used, as it ought 
to be. 
tcIoion^Ss Dionysius also, whom they allege to praise 
Hie?cip."3. ^^^ extol this sacrament, (as indeed it is most 
worthy, being a sacrament of most high dignity 
and perfection, representing unto us our most 
perfect spiritual conjunction unto Christ, and 
our continual nourishing, feeding, comfort, and 
spiritual life in him,) yet he never said that the 
flesh and blood of Christ was in the bread and 
wine really, corporally, sensibly, and naturally, 
(as the Papists would bear us in hand ;) but he 

' Ignatius in Epist. ad Ephesianos. 
* Ireneeus, lib. 5, contra Valentin. 


calleth ever the bread and wine signs, pledges, 
and tokens, declaring unto the faithful receivers 
of the same, that they receive Christ spiritually, 
and that they spiritually eat his flesh and drink 
his blood. And although the bread and wine 
be the figures, signs, and tokens of Christ's flesh 
and blood, (as St. Dionysius calleth them both 
before the consecration as after,) yet the Greek 
annotations upon the same Dionysius do say, 
that the very things themselves be above in hea- 
ven. And as the same Dionysius maketh no- 
thing for the Papists' opinions in this point of 
Christ's real and corporal presence ; so in divers 
other things he maketh quite and clean against 
them, and that specially in three points ; in 
Transubstantiation, in reservation of the sacra- 
ment, and in the receiving of the same by the 
priest alone. 

Furthermore they do allege TertuUian, that The answer 

•^ P to Tertallia- 

he constantly affirmeth, that in the sacrament ofnusderesur- 

'' rectioiie car- 

the altar we do eat the body and drink thesis- 
blood of our Saviour Christ. To whom we grant 
that our flesh eateth and drinketh the bread and 
wine, which be called the body and blood of 
Christ, because (as TertuUian saith) they do re- 
present his body and blood, although they be 
not really the same in very deed. And we grant 
also, that our souls by faith do eat his very 
body and drink his blood ; but that is, spiritu- 
ally, sucking out of the same everlasting life. . 


But we deny that unto this spiritual feeding is 

required any real and corporal presence. And 

therefore this Tertullian, speaketh nothing 

against the truth of our Catholick doctrine, but 

he speaketh many things most plainly for us, 

and against the Papists, and specially in three 

points. First in that he saith, that Christ called 

bread his body. The second, that Christ called 

it so, because it representeth his body. The 

third, in that he saith, that by these words of 

Christ, " This is my body," is meant, this is a 

figure of my body. 

The answer Moreovcr they allege for them Origen, be- 
to origenes 111 1 
in^jumer. causc they would seem to have many ancient 

authors favourers of their erroneous doctrine; 
which Origen is most clearly against them. 
" For although he do say (as they allege) that 
those things which before we signified by ob- 
scure figures, be now truly in deed, and in their 
very nature and kind, accomplished and fulfill- 
ed ; and for the declaration thereof, he bringeth 
forth three examples ; one of the stone that flow- 
eth water, another of the sea and cloud, and the 
third of manna, which in the Old Testament did 
signify Christ to come, who is now come indeed, 
and is manifested and exhibited unto us, as it 
were^ face to face, and sensibly, in his word, in 
the sacrament of regeneration, and in the sacra- 
ments of bread and wine ;" — yet Origen meant 
not, that Christ is corporally either in his word. 


or in the water of baptism, or in the bread and 
wine, nor that we carnally and corporally be re- 
generated and born again, or eat Christ's flesh, 
and blood. For our regeneration in Christ is 
spiritual, and our eating and drinking is a spiri- 
tual feeding, which kind of regeneration and 
feeding requireth no real and corporal presence 
of Christ, but only his presence in spirit, grace, 
and effectual operation. And that Origen thus 
meant, that Christ's flesh is a spiritual meat, and 
his blood a spiritual drink ; and that the eating 
and drinking of his flesh and blood may not be 
understood literally, but spiritually ; it is mani- 
fested by Origen's own words, in his seventh 
homily upon the book called Leviticus, where he 
sheweth, " That those words must be understood 
figuratively, and whosoever understandeth them 
otherwise, they be deceived, and take harm by 
their own gross understanding "." 

And likewise meant Cyprian, in those places The answer 
which the adversaries of the truth allege for him, nus, Hb-'a. 
concerning the true eating of Christ's very flesh 
and drinking of his blood. 

For Cyprian spake of no gross and carnal eat- 
ing with the mouth, but of an inward, spiritual, 
and pure eating with heart and mind, which is 
to believe in our hearts, that his flesh was rent 
and torn for us upon the cross, and his blood 

" In Levit. Horn. 7. 


shed for our redemption, and that the same flesh 
and blood now sitteth at the right hand of the 
Father, making continual intercession for us ; 
and to imprint and digest this in our minds, put- 
ting our whole affiance and trust in him, as 
touching our salvation, and offering ourselves 
clearly unto him, to love and serve him all the 
days of our life : This is truly, sincerely, and 
spiritually to eat his flesh and to drink his 

And this sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, 
was that oblation which, Cyprian saith, was 
figured and signified, before it was done, by the 
wine which Noah drank, and by the bread and 
wine which Melchisedec gave to Abraham, and 
by many other figures which Cyprian there re- 

And now when Christ is come, and hath ac- 
complished that sacrifice, the same is figured, 
signified, and represented unto us by that bread 
and wine, which faithful people receive daily in 
the holy communion: wherein like as with their 
mouths carnally they eat the bread and drink 
the wine ; so by their faith spiritually they eat 
Christ's very flesh, and drink his very blood. 
And hereby it appeareth that St. Cyprian clearly 
affirmeth the most true doctrine, and is wholly 
upon our side. And against the Papists he 
teacheth most plainly, that the communion 
ought to be received of ^11 men under both the 


kinds, and that Christ called bread his body and 
wine his blood, and that there is no transub- 
stantiation, but that bread remaineth there as a 
figure to represent Christ's body, and wine to 
represent his blood ; and that those which be 
not the lively members of Christ, do eat the 
bread and drink the wine, and be nourished by 
them, but the very flesh and blood of Christ 
they neither eat nor drink. 

Thus have you heard declared the mind of 

But Hilarius (think they) is plainest for them The answer 


m this matter, whose words they translate thus: aeTrinitate. 
** If the word was made verily flesh, and we ve- 
rily receive the word being flesh in our Lord's 
meat, how shall not Christ be thought to dwell 
naturally in us ? who, being born man, hath 
taken unto him the nature of our flesh, that can- 
not be severed, and hath put together the nature 
of his flesh to the nature of his eternity, under 
the sacrament of the communion of his flesh unto 
us. For so we be all one, because the Father 
is in Christ, and Christ in us. Wherefore who- 
soever will deny the Father to be naturally in 
Christ, he must deny first either himself to be 
naturally in Christ, or Christ to be naturally in 
him. For the being of the Father in Christ, and 
the being of Christ in us, maketh us to be one 
in them. And therefore if Christ have taken 
verily the flesh of our body, and the man that . 


was verily born of the Virgin Mary is Christ, 
and also we receive under the true mystery the 
flesh of his body, by means whereof we shall be 
one, (for the Father is in Christ, and Christ in 
us,) how shall that be called the unity of will, 
when the natural property, brought to pass by 
the sacrament, is the sacrament of unity ?" 

Thus do the Papists (the adversaries of God's 
word and of his truth) allege the authority of Hila- 
rius, either perversely and purposely, as it seem- 
eth, untruly citing him, and wresting his words 
to their purpose, or else not truly understanding 
him. For although he saith that Christ is natu- 
rally in us, yet he saith also that we be naturally 
in him. And nevertheless in so saying, he meant 
not of the natural and corporal presence of the 
substance of Christ's body and of ours ; for as 
our bodies be not after that sort within his body, 
so it is not his body after that sort within our 
bodies ; but he meant that Christ in his incarna- 
tion received of us a mortal nature, and united 
the same unto his divinity, and so be we natu- 
rally in him. And the sacraments of baptism 
and of his holy supper, (if we rightly use the 
same,) do most assuredly certify us, that we be 
partakers of his godly nature, having given unto 
us by him immortality and life everlasting, and 
so is Christ naturally in us. And so be we one 
with Christ, and Christ with us, not only in will 
and mind, but also in very natural properties. 


And so concludeth Hilariiis against Arius, that 
Christ is one with his Father, not in purpose and 
will only, but also in very nature. And as the 
union between Christ and us in baptism is spi- 
ritual, and requireth no real and corporal pre- 
sence ; so likewise our union with Christ in his 
holy supper is spiritual, and therefore requireth 
no real and corporal presence. And therefore 
Hilarius, speaking there of both the sacraments, 
maketh no difference between our union with 
Christ in baptism, and our union with him in his 
holy supper; and saith further, that as Christ 
is in us, so be we in him; which the Papists 
cannot understand corporally and really, except 
they will say, that all our bodies be corporally 
within Christ's body. Thus is Hilarius answered 
unto both plainly and shortly. 

And this answer to Hilarius will serve also The answer 
unto Cyril, whom they allege to speak after the 
same sort that Hilarius doth, that Christ is na- 
turally in us. The words which they recite be 
these : *' We deny not," saith Cyril against the 
heretick, " but we be spiritually joined to Christ 
by faith and sincere charity ; but that we should 
have no manner of conjunction in our flesh with 
Christ, that we utterly deny, and think it utterly 
discrepant from God's holy Scriptures. For who 
doubteth, that Christ is so the vine tree, and we 
so the branches, as we get thence our life. Hear 
what St. Paul saith, ' We be all one body with . 


Christ ; for though we be many, we be one in 
him.' All we participate in one food. Thinketh 
this heretick that we know not the strength and 
virtue of the mystical benediction ? which, when 
it is made in us, doth it not make Christ, by 
communication of his flesh, to dwell corporally 
in us ? Why be the members of faithful men's 
bodies called the members of Christ ? * Know 
you not, (saith St. Paul,) that your members be 
the members of Christ ? And shall I make the 
members of Christ parts of the whore's body ? 
God forbid.' And our Saviour also saith, * He 
that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, 
dwelleth in me, and I in him.'" 

Although in these words Cyril doth say, that 
Christ doth dwell corporally in us, when we re- 
ceive the mystical benediction ; yet he neither 
saith that Christ dwelleth corporally in the bread, 
nor that he dwelleth in us corporally only at 
such times as we receive the sacrament, nor that 
he dwelleth in us, and not we in him ; but he 
saith as well, that we dwell in him, as that he 
dwelleth in us. Which dwelling is neither cor- 
poral nor local, but an heavenly, spiritual, and 
supernatural dwelling, whereby, so long as we 
dwell in him, and he in us, we have by him ever- 
lasting life. And therefore Cyril saith, in the 
same place, that Christ is the vine, and we the 
branches, because that by him we have life. 
For as the branches receive life and nourishment 


of the body of the vme, so receive we by him the 
natural property of his body, which is life and 
immortality ; and by that means we, being his 
members, do live, and are spiritually nourished. 
And this meant Cyril by this word corporally, 
when he saith, that Christ dwelleth corporally in 
us. And the same meant also St. Hilarius by 
this word naturally, when he said that Christ 
dwelleth naturally in us. And as St. Paul, when 
he said that in Christ dwelleth the fulJ divinity 
corporally, by this word corporally, he meant not 
that the divinity is a body, and so by that body 
dwelleth bodily in Christ. But by this word 
corporally, he meant that the divinity is not in 
Christ accidentally, lightly, and slenderly, but 
substantially and perfectly, with all his might 
and power: so that Christ was not only a mortal 
man, to suffer for us ; but also he was immortal 
God, able to redeem us. So St. Cyril, when he 
said that Christ is in us corporally, he meant 
that we have him in us, not lightly and to small 
effect and purpose, but that we have him in us 
substantially, pithily, and effectually, in such 
wise that we have by him redemption and ever- 
lastinof life. And this I suck not out of mine 
own fingers, but have it of Cyril's own express 
words, where he saith, '* A little benediction 
draweth the whole man to God, and filleth him 
with his grace ; and after this manner Christ 



dwelleth in us, and we in Christ \" But as for 
corporal eating and drinking with our mouths, 
and digesting with our bodies, Cyril never meant 
that Christ doth so dwell in us, as he plainly 

** Our sacrament," saith he^ " doth not affirm 
the eating of a man, drawing wickedly Christian 
people to hgtve gross imaginations and carnal 
fantasies of such things as be fine and pure, and 
received only with a sincere faith. But as two 
waxes that be molten and put together, they 
close so in one, that every part of the one is 
joined to every part of the other : even so, (saith 
Cyril %) he that receiveth the flesh and blood of 
the Lord, must needs be so joined with Christ, 
that Christ must be in him, and he in Christ." 
By these words of Cyril appeareth his mind 
plainly, that we may not grossly and rudely 
think of the eating of Christ with our mouths, 
but with our faith, by which eating, although he 
be absent hence bodily, and be in the eternal 
life and glory with his Father, yet we be made 
partakers of his nature, to be immortal and have 
eternal life and glory with him. And thus is 
declared the mind as well of Cyril as of Hila- 
rius. And here may be well enough passed over 
Basiiius, Basilius, Greoorius Nvssenus, and Gres^orius 

Nyssemis, , J ' O 

arid Nazian- Nazianzcnus, partly because thev speak little of 

^ In Johan. lib. 4. cap. 17. '' Ai>athematismo. 11, 

* In Johan. lib. 4. cap. 1 7. 


this matter, and because they may be easily an- 
swered unto, by that which is before declared 
and often repeated, which is, that a figure hath 
the name of the thing whereof it is the figure, 
and therefore of the figure may be spoken the 
same thing that may be spoken of the thing it- 
self. And as concerning the eating of Christ's 
flesh and drinking of his blood, they spake of 
the spiritual eating and drinking thereof by faith, 
and not of corporal eating and drinking with the 
mouth and teeth. 

Likewise Eusebius Emissenus is shortly an- The answer 

to Einisse- 

swered unto ; for he speaketh not of any real and n«s- 
corporal conversion of bread and wine into 
Christ's body and blood, nor of any corporal 
and real eating and drinking of the same, but he 
speaketh of a sacramental conversion of bread 
and wine, and of a spiritual eating and drinking 
of the body and blood. After which sort, 
Christ is as well present in baptism (as the same 
Eusebius plainly there declareth) as he is in the 
Lord's table : which is not carnally and corpo- 
rally, but by faith, and spiritually. But of this 
author is spoken before more at large in the 
matter of Transubstantiation. 

And now I will come to the saying of St. Am- The answer 

'' '-' to Ainbio- 

brose, which is always in their mouths. Before s'«s'ie;.i- 
the consecration, saith he, (as they allege,) it is '*''•»• ti'p.4. 
bread ; but after the words of consecration it is 

N 2 



the body of Christ. For answer hereunto, it 
must be first known what consecration is. 
Consecra- Cousccration is the separation of any thing 
from a profane and worldly use unto a spiritual 
and godly use. 

And therefore when usual and common water 
is taken from other uses, and put to the use of 
baptism in the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost, then it may rightly 
be called consecrated water, that is to say, wa- 
ter put to an holy use. Even so when common 
bread and wine be taken and severed from other 
bread and wine, to the use of the holy commu- 
nion, that portion of bread and wine, although it 
be of the same substance that the other is from 
the which it is severed, yet it is now called con- 
secrated or holy bread and holy wine. Not that 
the bread and wine have or can have any holi- 
ness in them, but that they be used to an holy 
work, and represent holy and godly things. 

And therefore St. Dionyse^ calieth the bread 
holy bread, and the cup an holy cup, as soon as 
they be set upon the altar to the use of the holy 

But specially they may be called holy and 
consecrated, when they be separated to that holy 
use by Christ's own words, which he spake for 
that purpose, saying of the bread, " This is my 

* De Ecci. Hierar. cap. 3. 


body*';" and of the wine, " This is my blood"/' 
So that commonly the authors, before those 
words be spoken, do take the bread and wine 
but as other common bread and wine ; but after 
those words be pronounced over them, then they 
take them for consecrated and holy bread and 
wine. Not that the bread and wine can be par- 
takers of any holiness or godliness, or can be the 
body and blood of Christ ; but that they repre- 
sent the very body and blood of Christ, and the 
holy food and nourishment which we have by 
him. And so they be called by the names of 
the body and blood of Christ, as the sign, token, 
and figure is called by the name of the very 
thing which it sheweth and signifieth. And 
therefore as St. Ambrose, in the words before 
cited by the adversaries, saith, that before the 
consecration it is bread, and after the consecra- 
tion it is Christ's body : so in other places he 
doth more plainly set forth his meaning, saying 
these words : " Before the benediction of the 
heavenly words, it is called another kind of 
thing; but, after the consecration, is signified 
the body of Christ. Likewise before the conse- 
cration, it is called another thing; but, after the 
consecration, it is named the blood of Christ ''." 
And again he saith : '' When 1 treated of the 

"" Matt. xxvi. Matt. xiv. " Luke xxii. 

"• De his qui mysteriis initiantuv cap. ult. 


sacraments, I told you, that that thing which is 
offered before the words of Christ, is called 
bread ; but when the words of Christ be pro- 
nounced, then it is not called bread, but it is 
called by the name of Christ's body\" 

By which words of St. Ambrose, it appeareth 
plainly, that the bread is called by the name of 
Christ's body after the consecration; and al- 
though it be still bread, yet after consecration it 
is dignified by the name of the thing which it 
representeth, as at length is declared before in 
' the process of Transubstantiation, and specially 
in the words of Theodoretus. 

And as the bread is a corporal meat, and cor- 
porally eaten, so, saith St. Ambrose ^ is the body 
of Christ a spiritual meat, and spiritually eaten, 
and that requireth no corporal presence. 
The answer Now Ict US cxamiuc St. John Chrysostome, 

lo Chrysos- i • ^ 

lomas. who, m sound of words, maketh most for the ad- 
versaries of the truth : but they that be familiar 
and acquainted with Chrysostome's manner of 
speaking, how in all his writings he is full of al- 
lusions, schemes, tropes, and figures, shall soon 
perceive, that he helpeth nothing their purposes, 
as it shall well appear by the discussing of those 
places, which the Papists do allege of him ; which 
be specially two : One is Li Sermont de Eucha- 
ristia in Encceniis ; and the other is, De Proditione 

• De sacramentis, lib. 5. cap. 4. ' Ibid. lib. 6. cap. 1. 


JudcE. And as touching the first, no man can 
speak more plainly against them than St. John 
Chrysostome speaketh in that sermon. Where- 
fore it is to be wondered why they should allege 
him for their party, unless they be so blind in 
their opinion that they can see nothing, nor dis- 
cern what maketh for them, nor what against 
them. For there he hath these words : " When 
you come to these mysteries, (speaking of the 
Lord's board and holy communion,) do not think 
that you receive by a man the body of God," 
meaning of Christ ^ These be St. John Chry- 
sostome's own words in that place. 

Then if we receive not the body of Christ at 
the hands of a man. Ergo, the body of Christ is 
not really, corporally, and naturally in the sacra- 
ment, and so given to us by the priest. And 
then it followeth that all the Papists be liars, be- 
cause they feign and teach the contrary. 

But this place of Chrysostome is touched be- 
fore more at length in answering to the Papists' 

Wherefore now shall be answered the other 
place'', which they allege of Chrysostome in 
these words : ** Here he is present in the sacra- 
ment and doth consecrate, which garnished the 
table at the maundy or last supper. For it is 

^ In sermone de Eiicharistia in Encaeniis. 
^ De proditione Judae. 


not man, which maketh of the bread and wine, 
being set forth to be consecrated, the body and 
blood of Christ ; but it is Christ himself (which 
for us is crucified) that maketh himself to be 
there present. The words are uttered and pro- 
nounced by the mouth of the priest, but the con- 
secration is by the virtue, might, and grace of 
God himself : and as this saying of God, ' In- 
crease, be multiplied, and fill the earth V once 
spoken by God, took always effect towards ge- 
neration : even so the saying of Christ, ' This 
is my body ^' being but once spoken, doth 
throughout all churches to this present, and shall 
to his last coming, give force and strength to 
this sacrifice o" 

Thus far they rehearse of Chrysostome's words. 
Which words, although they sound much for 
their purpose, yet if they be thoroughly consi- 
dered, and conferred with other places of the 
same author, it shall well appear, that he meant 
nothing less than that Christ's body should be 
corporally and naturally present in the bread 
and wine ; but that in such sort he is in heaven 
only, and in our minds by faith we ascend up 
into heaven, to eat him there, although sacra- 
mentally as in a sign and figure, he be in the 
bread and wine, and so is he also in the water of 
baptism ; and in them that rightly receive the 

' Gen. i. *" Matt. xxvi. Matt, xiv, Luke xxii. 


bread and wine, he is in a much more perfection 
than corporally, which should avail them no- 
thing ; but in them he is spiritually with his 
divine power, giving them eternal life. 

And as in the first creation of the world all 
living creatures had their first life by God's only 
word ; for God only spake his word, and all 
things were created by and by accordingly; 
and after their creation he spake these words, 
'' Increase and multiply ' ;" and, by the virtue of 
those words, all things have gendered and in- 
creased ever since that time : even so after that 
Christ said, " Eat, this is my body, and drink, 
this is my blood, do this hereafter in remem- 
brance of me"' ;" by virtue of these words, and 
not by virtue of any man, the bread and wine be 
so consecrated, that whosoever with a lively faith 
doth eat that bread and drink that wine, doth 
spiritually eat, drink, and feed upon Christ, sit- 
ting in heaven with his Father. And this is the 
whole meaning of St. Chrysostome. 

And therefore doth he so often say, that we 
receive Christ in baptism ; and when he hath 
spoken of the receiving of him in the holy Com- 
munion, by and by he speaketh of the receiving 
of him in baptism, without declaring any diver- 
sity of his presence in the one, from his presence 
in the other. 

' Gen. i. " Matt. xxvi. Mark xiv. Luke xxii. 


He saith also in many places ", ** That we as- 
cend into heaven, and do eat Christ sitting there 

And wh^re St. Chrysostome and other authors 
do speak of the wonderful operation of God in 
his sacraments, passing all man's wit, senses, 
and reason, he meaneth not of the working of 
God in the water, bread, and wine, but of the 
marvellous working of God in the hearts of them 
that receive the sacraments, secretly, inwardly, 
and spiritually transforming them ; renewing, 
feeding, comforting, and nourishing them with 
his flesh and blood, through his most Holy Spi- 
rit, the same flesh and blood still remaining in 

Thus is this place of Chrysostome sufficiently 
answered unto ; and if any man require any 
more, then let him look what is recited of the 
same author before, in the matter of Transub- 
Si'oX Yet furthermore they bring for them Theophi- 
Mar'kx'iv. lus Alcxaudriuus, who (as they allege) saith 
thus : '* Christ giving thanks did break, (which 
also we do,) adding thereto prayer: And he 
gave unto them, saying, ' Take, this is my 
body ;' this that I do now give, and that which 
ye now do take. For the bread is not a figure 
only of Christ's body, but it is changed into the 

" Ad populum Antiochetium, horn. 61. et in Joan. horn. 45. 


very body of Christ ; for Christ saith, * The 
bread which I will give you, is my flesh °.' Ne- 
vertheless the flesh of Christ is not seen for our 
weakness, but bread and wine are familiar unto 
us. And surely if we should visibly see flesh 
and blood, we could not abide it. And there- 
fore our Lord, bearing with our weakness, doth 
retain and keep the form and appearance of 
bread and wine ; but he doth turn the very 
bread and wine into the very flesh and blood of 

These be the words which the Papists do cite 
out of Theophilus upon the Gospel of St. Mark. 
But by this one place it appeareth evidently, 
either how negligent the Papists be in searching 
out and examining the sayings of the authors, 
which they allege for their purpose ; or else how 
false and deceitful they be, which willingly and 
wittingly have made in this one place, and, as it 
were with one breath, two loud and shameful 

The first is, that because they would give the 
more authority to the words by them alleged, 
they (like false apothecaries that sell quid pro quo) 
falsify the author's name, fathering such sayings 
upon Theophilus Alexandrinus, an old and an- 
cient author, which were indeed none of his 
words, but were the words of Theophylactus, 



who was many years after Theophilus Alexan- 
drinus. But such hath ever been the Papistical 
subtleties, to set forth their own inventions, 
dreams, and lies, under the name of antiquity and 
ancient authors. 

The second lie or falsehood is, that they falsify 
the author's words and meaning, subverting the 
truth of his doctrine. For where Theopliylactus 
(according to the Catholick doctr'ine of ancient 
authors) saith, that Almighty God, condescend- 
ing to our infirmity, reserveth the kind of bread 
and wine^ and yet turneth them into the virtue of 
Christ's flesh and blood, they say that he re- 
serveth the forms and appearances of bread and 
wine, and turneth them into the verity of his 
flesh and blood, so turning and altering kinds 
into forms and appearances, and virtue into ve- 
rity, that of the virtue of the flesh and blood they 
make the verity of his flesh and blood. And 
thus have they falsified as well the name as the 
words of TheophylactuSj turning verity into plain 
and flat falsity. 

But to set forth plainly the meaning of Theo- 
pliylactus in this matter : As hot and burning iron 
is iron still, and yet hath the force of fire ; and 
as the flesh of Christ, still remaining flesh, giv- 
eth life, as the flesh of him that is God : so the 
sacramental bread and wine remain still in their 
proper kinds; and yet to them that worthily eat 
and drink them, they be turned not into the cor- 


poral presence, but into the virtue of Christ's 
flesh and blood. 

And although Theophylactus spake of the eat- 
ing of the very body of Christ, and the drinking 
of his very bloody, (and not only of the figures of 
them,) and of the conversion of the bread and 
wine into the body and blood of Christ, yet he 
meaneth not of a gross, carnal, corporal, and 
sensible conversion of the bread and wine, nor 
of a like eating and drinking of his flesh and 
blood ; for so not only our stomachs would yearn 
and our hearts abhor to eat his flesh and to drink 
his blood ; but also such eating and drinking 
could nothing profit and avail us : but he spake 
of the celestial and spiritual eating of Christ, 
and of a sacramental conversion of the bread, 
calling the bread not only a figure, but also the 
body of Christ, giving us by those words to un- 
derstand, that in the sacrament we not only eat 
corporally the bread, which is a sacrament and 
figure of Christ's body ; but spiritually we eat 
also his very body, and drink his very blood. 
And this doctrine of Theophylactus is both true, 
godly, and comfortable. 

Besides this our adversaries do allege St. Je- Tiie answer 

*^ to Hierony- 

rome, upon the Epistle Ad Titiim, that there is ^'j;?^*;'^7 
as great diflTerence between the loaves called'^'"""- 
panes 'propositionis, and the body of Christ, as 
there is between a shadow of a body, and the 
body itself, and as there is between an image • 


and the thing itself, and between an example of 
things to come and the things that be prefigured 
by them." 

These words of St. Jerome, truly understood, 
serve nothing for the intent of the Papists. For 
he meant that the shew-bread of the law was 
but a dark shadow of Christ to come ; but the 
sacrament of Christ's body is a clear testimony 
that Christ is already come, and that he hath 
performed that which was promised, and doth 
presently comfort and feed us spiritually with 
his precious body and blood, notwithstanding 
that corporally he is ascended into heaven. 
Augustinus, And the same is to be answered unto all that 


Leo Ful- tjjg adversaries brinof of St. Auorustine, Sedulius, 

gentius.Cas- " o ' ? 

Gregorius ^^^* Fulgcutius, Cassiodorus, Gregorius, and 
others, concerning the eating of Christ in the 

Which thing cannot be understood plainly as 
the words sound, but figuratively and spiritually, 
as before is sufficiently proved, and hereafter 
shall be more fully declared in the fourth part 
of this book. 

But here John Damascene ^ may in no wise 
be passed over, whom for his authority the ad- 
versaries of Christ's true natural body do reckon 
as a stout champion sufficient to defend all the 
whole matter alone. But neither is the autho- 

" Damascenus de fide orth. lib. 4. cap. 14. 


rity of Damascene so great, that they may op- 
press us thereby, nor his words so plain for 
them, as they boast and untruly pretend. For 
he is but a young new author in the respect of 
those which we have brought in for our party. 
And in divers points he varieth from the most 
ancient authors, (if he mean as they expound 
him,) as when he saith, that the bread and wine 
be not figures, which all the old authors call 
figures, and that the bread and wine consume 
not, nor be voided downward, which Origen and 
St. Augustine affirm, or that they be not called 
the examples of Christ's body after the consecra- 
tion, which shall manifestly appear false by the 
Liturgy ascribed unto St. Basil. 

And moreover the said Damascene was one 
of the bishop of Rome's chief proctors against 
the emperors, and as it were his right hand, to 
set abroad all idolatry by his own hand-writing. 
And therefore if he lost his hand (as they say he 
did) he lost it by God's most righteous judg- 
ment, whatsoever they feign and fable of the 
miraculous restitution of the same. And yet 
whatsoever the said Damascene writeth in other 
matters, surely in this place which the adversa- 
ries do allege, he writeth spiritually and godly, 
although the Papists either of ignorance mistake 
him, or else willingly wrest him and writhe him 
to their purpose, clean contrary to his meaning. 

The sum of Damascene's doctrine in this mat- • 


ter is this : that as Christ, being both God and 
man, hath in him two natures ; so hath he two 
nativities, one eternal and the other temporal. 
And so likewise we, being as it were double men, 
or having every one of us two men in us, the new 
man and the old man, the spiritual man and the 
carnal man, have a double nativity : one of our 
first carnal father, Adam, by whom as by ancient 
inheritance cometh unto us malediction and 
everlasting damnation; and the other of our hea- 
venly Adam, that is to say, of Christ, by whom 
we be made heirs of celestial benediction and 
everlasting glory and immortality. 

And because this Adam is spiritual, therefore 
our generation by him must be spiritual, and our 
feeding must be likewise spiritual. And our spi- 
ritual generation by him is plainly set forth in 
baptism, and our spiritual meat and food is set 
forth in the holy communion and supper of the 
Lord. And because our sights be so feeble that 
we cannot see the spiritual water wherewith we 
be washed in baptism, nor the spiritual meat 
wherewith we be fed at the Lord's table ; there- 
fore to help our infirmities, and to make us the 
better to see the same with a pure faith, our Sa- 
viour Christ hath set forth the same as it were 
before our eyes by sensible signs and tokens, 
which we be daily used and accustomed unto. 

And because the common custom of men is to 
wash in water, therefore our spiritual regenera- 


tion in Christ, or spiritual washing in his blood, 
is declared unto us in baptism by water. Like- 
wise our spiritual nourishment and feeding in 
Christ, is set before our eyes by bread and wine, 
because they be meats and drinks which chiefly 
and usually we be fed withal ; that as they feed 
the body, so doth Christ with his flesh and blood 
spiritually feed the soul. 

And therefore the bread and wine be called 
examples of Christ's flesh and blood, and also 
they be called his very flesh and blood, to sig- 
nify unto us that as they feed us carnally, so do 
they admonish us that Christ with his flesh and , 

blood doth feed us spiritually and most truly 
unto everlasting life. And as Almighty God by 
his most mighty word and his Holy Spirit and 
infinite power brought forth all creatures in the 
beginning, and ever since hath preserved them ; 
even so by the same word and power he work- 
eth in us from time to time this marvellous spiri- 
tual generation and wonderful spiritual nourish- 
ment and feeding, which is wrought only by 
God, and is comprehended and received of us 
by faith. 

And as bread and drink by natural nourish- 
ment be changed into a man's body, and yet the 
body is not changed, but the same that it was 
before ; so although the bread and wine be sa- 
cramentally changed into Christ's body, yet his 
body is the same and in the same place that it' 



was before, that is to say, in heaven, without 
any alteration of the same. 

And the bread and wine be not so changed 
into the flesh and blood of Christ, that they be 
made one nature, but they remain still distinct 
in nature, so that the bread in itself is not his 
flesh, and the wine his blood, but unto them 
that worthily eat and drink the bread and wine, 
to them the bread and wine be his flesh and 
blood, that is to say, by things natural and which 
they be accustomed unto, they be exalted unto 
things above nature. For the sacramental bread 
and wine be not bare and naked figures, but so 
pithy and efficacious, that whosoever worthily 
eateth them, eateth spiritually Christ's flesh and 
blood, and hath by them everlasting life. 

Wherefore whosoever cometh to the Lord's 
table, must come with all humility, fear, reve- 
rence, and purity of life, as to receive not only 
bread and wine, but also our Saviour Christ both 
God and man, with all his benefits, to the relief 
and sustentation both of their bodies and souls. 

This is briefly the sum and true meaning of 
Damascene, concerning this matter. 

Wherefore they that gather of him either the 
natural presence of Christ's body in the sacra- 
ments of bread and wine, or the adoration of the 
outward and visible sacrament, or that after the 
consecration there remaineth no bread nor wine 
nor other substance^ but only the substance of 


the body and blood of Christ; either they under- 
stand not Damascene, or else of wilful froward- 
ness they will not understand him; which rather 
seemeth to be true, by such collections as they 
have unjustly gathered and noted out of him. 

For although he say, that Christ is the spiri- 
tual meat, yet as in baptism the Holy Ghost is 
not in the water, but in him that is unfeignedly 
baptized; so Damascene meant not that Christ 
is in the bread, but in him that worthily eateth 
the bread. 

And though he say, that the bread is Christ's 
body, and the wine his blood, yet he meant not 
that the bread considered in itself, or the wine 
in itself being not received, is his flesh and 
blood ; but to such as by unfeigned faith wor- 
thily receive the bread and wine, to such the 
bread and wine are called by Damascene the 
body and blood of Christ, because that such 
persons through the working of the Holy Ghost 
be so knit and united spiritually to Christ's flesh 
and blood, and to his divinity also, that they be 
fed with them unto everlasting life. 

Furthermore Damascene saith not that the sa- 
crament should be worshipped and adored, as 
the Papists term it, which is plain idolatry, but 
that we must worship Christ, God and man. 
And yet we may not worship him in bread and 
wine, but sitting in heaven with his Father, and 
being spiritually within ourselves. 

o 2 


Nor he saith not, that there remaineth no bread 
nor wine, nor none other substance, but only the 
substance of the body and blood of Christ ; but 
he saith plainly, that as a burning coal is not 
wood only, but fire and wood joined together ; 
so the bread of the communion is not bread 
only, but bread joined to the divinity. But 
those that say, that there is none other substance 
but the substance of the body and blood of 
Christ, do not only deny that thepe is bread and 
wine, but by force they must deny also that 
thexe is either Christ's divinity or his soul. For 
if the flesh and blood, the soul and divinity of 
Christ be four substances, and in the sacrament 
be but two of them, that is to say, his flesh and 
blood, then where be his soul and divinity? And 
thus these men divide Jesus, separating his divi- 
nity from his humanity: of whom St. John saith, 
*' Whosoever divideth Jesus, is not of God, but 
he is Antichrist ''." 

And moreover these men do so separate 
Christ's body from his members in the sacra- 
ment, that they leave him no man's body at all. 
For as Damascene saith, " That the distinction 
of members pertain so much to the nature of a 
man's body, that where there is no such distinc- 
tion, there is no perfect man's body '." But by 
these Papists' doctrine, there is no such distinc- 

' 1 John iv. ■■ In libio de duabus in Christo voluntatibus. 


tion of members in the sacrament ; for either 
there is no head, feet, hands, arms, legs, mouth, 
eyes, and nose at all ; or else all is head, all feet, 
all hands, all arms, all legs, all mouth, all eyes, 
and all nose. And so they make of Christ's 
body no man's body at all. 

Thus being confuted the Papists' errors as 
well concerning Transubstantiation, as the real, 
corporal, and natural presence of Christ in the 
sacrament,! which were two principal points pur- 
posed in the beginning of this work ; now it is 
time something to speak of the third error of 
the Papists, which is concerning the eating of 
Christ's very body and drinking of his blood. 







CHAP. The gross error of the Papists, is of the carnal 
eating and drinking of Christ's flesh and blood 


Whether ill • , i , , 

men do eat With OUr mOUths. 

chrilt?" For they say, that whosoever eat and drink 
the sacraments of bread and wine, do eat and 
drink also with their mouths Christ's very flesh 
and blood, be they never so ungodly and wicked 
persons. But Christ himself taught clean con- 
trary in the sixth of John, that we eat not him 
carnally with our mouths, but spiritually with 
Thegodij our faith, saying, *' Verily, verily I say unto you, 
Christ. he that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. I 
am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna 
in the wilderness, and died. This is the bread 
that came from heaven, that whosoever shall eat 
thereof, shall not die. I am the lively bread that 
came from heaven ; if any man eat of this bread. 


he shall live for ever. And the bread which I 
will give, is my flesh, which I will give for the 
life of the world." 

This is the most true doctrine of our Saviour 
Christ, that whosoever eateth him, shall have 
everlasting life. And by and by it folio we th in 
the same place of John more clearly : " Verily, 
verily I say unto you, except you eat the flesh 
of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall 
not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh 
and drinketh my blood, hath life everlasting, and 
I will raise him again at the last day : for my 
flesh is very meat, and my blood is very drink. 
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, 
dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Fa- 
ther hath sent me, and I live by the Father ; 
even so he that eateth me, shall live by me. 
This is the bread which came down from hea- 
ven, not as your fathers did eat manna, and are 
dead ; he that eateth of this bread, shall live for 

This taught our Saviour Christ as well his 
disciples as the Jews at Capernaum, that the 
eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood was 
not like to the eating of manna. For both good 
and bad did eat manna, bmt none do eat his flesh 
and drink his blood, but they have everlasting 
life. For as his Father dwelleth in him, and he 

* John vi. 


in his Father, and so hath life by his Father : so 
he that eateth Christ's flesh and drinketh his 
blood, dwelleth in Christ, and Christ in him, 
and by Christ he hath eternal life. 

What need we any other witness, when Christ 
himself doth testify the matter so plainly, that 
whosoever eateth his flesh and drinketh his 
blood, hath everlasting life ? And that to eat his 
flesh and to drink his blood, is to believe in him? 
And whosoever believeth in him, hath everlast- 
ing life ? Whereof it followeth necessarily, that 
ungodly persons, being limbs of the devil, do not 
eat Christ's flesh nor drink his blood : except 
the Papists would say, that such have everlast- 
ing life. 

But as the devil is the food of the wicked, 
which he nourisheth in all iniquity, and bringeth 
up unto everlasting damnation : so is Christ the 
very food of all them that be the lively members 
of his body, and them he nourisheth, feedeth, 
bringeth up, and cherisheth unto everlasting 
CHAP. And every good and faithful Christian man 
feeleth in himself how he feedeth of Christ, eat- 


Sn^oV'^ii^g his flesh, and drinking his blood. For he 

flesb!and putteth thc wholc hope and trust of his redemp- 

Lis"biood? tion and salvation in that only sacrifice, which 

Christ made upon the cross, having his body 

there broken-, and his blood there shed for the 

remission of his sins. And this great benefit of 



Christ the faithful man earnestly considereth in 
his mind, cheweth and digesteth it with the sto- 
mach of his heart, spiritually receiving Christ 
wholly into him, and giving again himself wholly 
unto Christ. 

And this is the eating of Christ's flesh and 
drinking of his blood, the feeling whereof is to 
every man the feeling how he eateth and drink- 
eth Christ, which none evil man nor member of 
the devil can do. 

For as Christ is a spiritual meat, so is he spi- 
ritually eaten and digested with the spiritual 

r» 1*1 • • ^ -I ii'/> Christ is not 

part of us, and giveth us spiritual and eternal life, eaten with 
and is not eaten, swallowed, and digested with withVaith. 
our teeth, tongues, throats, and bellies. " There- 
fore," saith St. Cyprian ^ ** he that drinketh of 
the holy cup, remembering this benefit of God, 
is more thirsty than he was before. And lifting 
up his heart unto the living God, is taken with 
such a singular hunger and appetite, that he ab- 
horreth all gaily and bitter drinks of sin; and all 
savour of carnal pleasure is to him, as it were, 
sharp and sour vinegar. And the sinner being- 
converted, receiving the holy mysteries of the 
Lord's Supper, giveth thanks unto God, and 
boweth down his head, knowing that his sins be 
forgiven, and that he is made clean and perfect; 
and his soul (which God hath sanctified) he ren- 

'' Cyprianus dc cocna Domini, 


dereth to God again as a faithful pledge, and 
then he glorieth with Paul, and rejoiceth, saying, 
* Now it is not 1 that live, but it is Christ that 
liveth within me.' These things be practised 
and used among faithful people ; and to pure 
minds the eating of his flesh is no horror but 
honour, and the spirit delighteth in the drinking 
of the holy and sanctifying blood. And doing 
this, we whet not our teeth to bite, but with pure 
faith we break, the holy bread." These be the 
words of Cyprian. 

And according unto the same, St. Austin saith, 
*' Prepare not thy jaws, but thy hearts" And 
in another place"*, (as it is cited of him,) he 
saith, " Why dost thou prepare thy belly and 
thy teeth? believe, and thou hast eaten." But 
of this matter is sufficiently spoken before, where 
it is proved, that to eat Christ's flesh and drink 
his blood be figurative speeches. 
CHAP. And now to return to our purpose, that only 
the lively members of Christ do eat his flesh and 


The good 


oniyITt drink his blood, I shall bring forth many other 
places of ancient authors before not mentioned. 
First, Origen' writeth plainly after this manner: 
" The word was made flesh and very meat, which 
whoso eateth, shall surely live for ever ; which 
no evil man can eat. For if it could be that he 

•^ August, de verbis Domini, serm. o3. 
* In Joan, tract. 25, ^ Origenes in Math. cap. 15. 


that continueth evil, might eat the word made 
flesh, seeing that he is the word and bread of 
life, it should not have been written, * Whoso- 
ever eateth this bread, shall live for ever.'" 
These words be so plain, that I need say nothing 
for the more clear declaration of them. Where- 
fore you shall hear how Cyprian agreeth with 
him. Cyprian, in his sermon ascribed unto him 
of the Lord's Supper \ saith, " The author of 
this tradition said, that except we eat his flesh 
and drink his blood, we should have no life in 
us ; instructing us with a spiritual lesson, and 
opening to us a way to understand so privy a 
thing, that we should know that the eating is 
our dwelling in him, and our drinking is as it 
were an incorporation in him, being subject 
unto him in obedience, joined unto him in our 
wills, and united in our affections. The eating 
therefore of this flesh, is a certain hunger and 
desire to dwell in him." Thus writeth Cyprian 
of the eating and drinking of Christ. And a little 
after he saith, " That none do eat of this lamb, 
but such as be true Israelites, that is to say, 
pure Christian men, without colour or dissimu- 

And AthanasiusS speaking of the eating of 
Christ's flesh, and drinking of his blood, saith, 

' Cyprianus in sermo. de coena Domini. 

e Athanasiuti de peccalo in Spiritum Sanctum. 


*' That for this cause he made mention of his as- 
cension into heaven, to pluck them from corporal 
fancy, that they might learn hereafter that his 
flesh was called the celestial meat that came 
from above, and a spiritual food which he would 
give. For those things that I speak to you 
(saith he) be spirit and life. Which is as much 
to say, as that thing which you see shall be slain, 
and given for the nourishment of the world, that 
it may be distributed to every body spiritually, 
and be to all men a conservation unto the resur- 
rection of eternal life. 

In these words Athanasius declareth the cause 
why Christ made mention of his ascension into 
heaven, when he spake of the eating and drink- 
ing of his flesh and blood. The cause after Atha- 
nasius's mind was this, that his hearers should 
not think of any carnal eating of his body with 
their mouths ; for as concerning the presence of 
his body, he should be taken from them, and as- 
cend into heaven ; but that they should under- 
stand him to be a spiritual meat, and spiritually 
to be eaten, and by that refreshing to give eter- 
nal life, which he doth to none but to such as 
be his lively members. 

And of this eating speaketh also Basilius '', 
" That we eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood, 
being made, by his incarnation and sensible life, 

^ Basilius, epistola. 141. 


partakers of his word and wisdom. For his 
flesh and blood be called all his mystical con- 
versation here in his flesh and his doctrine, con- 
sisting of his whole life, pertaining both to his 
humanity and divinity, whereby the soul is nou- 
rished and brought to the contemplation of 
things eternal." Thus teacheth Basilius how 
we eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood, which 
pertaineth only to the true and faithful members 
of Christ. 

St. Jerome also saith ', *' All that love pleasure 
more than God, eat not the flesh of Jesu, nor 
drink his blood, of the which himself saith, * He 
that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, 
hath everlasting life.' " * 

And in another place'', St. Jerome saith, 
" That hereticks do not eat and drink the body 
and blood of the Lord." 

And moreover he saith ', '* That hereticks eat 
not the flesh of Jesu, whose flesh is the meat of 
faithful men." 

Thus agreeth St. Jerome with the other before 
rehearsed, that hereticks and such as follow 
worldly pleasures, eat not Christ's flesh nor drink 
his blood, because that Christ said, " He that 
eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath 
everlasting life." 

' Hieronimus in Esaiam, cap. (!>(). 
^ In Hieremiam. ' la Oseani. cap. 8. 



And St. Ambrose saith "", " That Jesus is the 
bread which is the meat of saints ; and that he 
that taketh this bread, dieth not a sinner's death ; 
for this bread is the remission of sins." 

And in another book to him entitled", he writ- 
eth thus : '* This bread of life which came from 
heaven, doth minister everlasting life ; and who- 
soever eateth this bread, shall not die for ever ; 
and is the body of Christ." 

And yet in another book" set forth in his name, 
he saith on this wise : '* He that did eat manna 
died, but he that eateth this body shall have re- 
mission of his sins, and shall not die for ever." 

And again he saith p, ** As often as thou drink- 
est, thou hast remission of thy sins.'* 

These sentences of St. Ambrose be so plain 
in this matter, that there needeth no more but 
only the rehearsal of them. 

But St. Augustine in many places'' plainly 
discussing this matter, saith: " He that agreeth 
not with Christ, doth neither eat his body nor 
drink his blood, although to the condemnation of 
his presumption he receive every day the sacra- 
ment of so high a matter." 

And moreover St. Augustine most plainly 
resolveth this matter in his book De civitate 

" Ambrosius de benedictione patriarcharum, cap. 9. 

" De his qui mysteriis initiantur. 

" De sacramentis, lib. 4. cap. 5. ^ Lib. 5. cap. 3. 

*• Augustinus in sententiis ex Prospero decerptis, cap. 339. 


Dei\ disputing against two kinds of hereticks : 
*' Whereof the one said, that as many as were 
christened and received the sacrament of Christ's 
body and blood, should be saved, howsoever 
they lived or believed ; because that Christ said, 
* This is the bread that came from heaven ; that 
whosoever shall eat thereof, shall not die. I am 
the bread of life, which came from heaven ; who- 
soever shall eat of this bread, shall live for 
ever.' Therefore (said these hereticks) all such 
men must needs be delivered from eternal death, 
and at length be brought to eternal life." 

*' The other said, that hereticks and schis- 
maticks might eat the sacrament of Christ's body, 
but not his very body ; because they be no 
members of his body. And therefore they pro- 
mised not everlasting life to all that received 
Christ's baptism and the sacrament of his body, 
but all such as professed a true faith, although 
they lived never so ungodly. For such (said 
they) do eat the body of Christ, not only in a 
sacrament, but also in deed, because they be 
members of Christ's body." 

But St. Augustine, answering to both these 
heresies, saith, '' That neither hereticks, nor 
such as profess a true faith in their mouths and 
in their living shew the contrary, have either a 
true faith, (which worketh by charity and doth 

■" De civitate Dei, lib. 21. cap. %5, 


none evil,) or are to be counted among the mem- 
bers of Christ. For they cannot be both mem- 
bers of Christ and members of the devil. There- 
fore (saith he) it may not be said, that any of 
them eat the body of Christ. For when Christ 
saith, 'He that eateth my flesh and drinkethmy 
blood, dwelleth in me and I in him ;' he sheweth 
what it is (notsacramentally, but in deed) to eat 
his body and drink his blood : which is, when a 
man dwelleth so in Christ, that Christ dwelleth 
in him. For Christ spake those words, as if he 
should say, ' He that dwelleth not in me, and in 
whom I dwell not, let him not say or think, that 
he eateth my body or drinketh my blood.' " 

These be the plain words of St. Augustine, 
that such as live ungodly, although they may 
seem to eat Christ's body, (because they eat 
the sacrament of his body,) yet indeed they 
neither be members of his body, nor do eat his 

Also upon the Cospel of St. John ' he saith, 
** That he that doth not eat his flesh and drink 
his blood, hath not in him everlasting life. And 
he that eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood, 
hath everlasting life. But it is not so in those 
meats, which we take to sustain our bodies; for 
although without them we cannot live, yet it is 
not necessary that whosoever receiveth them 

• In Jolian. tract. 26. 


shall live, for they may die by age, sickness, or 
Other chances. But in this meat and drink of 
the body and blood of our Lord, it is otherwise ; 
for both they that eat and drink them not, have 
not everlasting life : and, contrariwise, whoso- 
ever eat and drink them, have everlasting life." 

Note and ponder well these words of St. Au- 
gustine, that the bread and wine and other meats 
and drinks, which nourish the body, a man may 
eat, and nevertheless die ; but the very body 
and blood of Christ no man eateth but that hath 
everlasting life. So that wicked men cannot eat 
nor drink them, for then they must needs have 
by them everlasting life. 

And in the same place St. Augustine saith fur- 
ther: *• The sacrament of the unity of Christ's 
body and blood, is taken in the Lord's table of 
some men to life, and of some men to death ; but 
the thing itself (whereof it is a sacrament) is 
taken of all men to life, and of no man to death." 
And moreover he saith, " This is to eat that 
meat, and drink that drink, to dwell in Christ, 
and to have Christ dwelling in him. And for 
that cause, he that dwelleth not in Christ, and 
in whom Christ dwelleth not, without doubt he 
eateth not spiritually his flesh nor drinketh his 
blood, although carnally and visibly with his 
teeth he bite the sacrament of his body and 

Thus writetli St. Augustine in the twenty-sixth - 


Ilomily of St. John. And in the next Homily 
following*, he writeth thus: " This day our 
sermon is of the body of the Lord, which he said 
he would give to eat for eternal life. And he 
declared the manner of his gift and distribution, 
how he would give his flesh to eat, saying, * He 
that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, 
dwelleth in me, and I in him.' This therefore is 
a token or knowledge, that a man hath eaten and 
drunken, that is to say, if he dwell in Christ, and 
have Christ dwelling in him ; if he cleave so to 
Christ, that he is not severed from him. This 
therefore Christ taught and admonished by these 
mystical or figurative words, that we should be 
in his body under him our head, among his mem- 
bers, eating his flesh, not forsaking his unity." 

And in his book De Doctrina Christiana'', 
St. Augustine saith, (as before is at length de- 
clared,) " That to eat Christ's flesh and to drink 
his blood, is a figurative speech, signifying the 
participation of his passion, and the delectable 
remembrance to our benefit and profit, that his 
flesh was crucified and wounded for us." 

And in another sermon also, De verbis Apos- 
ioli", he expoundeth what is the eating of Christ's 
body, and the drinking of his blood, saying, 
" The eating is to be refreshed, and the drinking 

' In Johan. tract. 27. 

" De Doctrina Christiana, lib. 3. cap. 14. 

' De verbis Apostoli, scrm. 20. 


what is it but to live ? Eat life, drink life. And 
that shall be, when that which is taken visibly 
in the sacrament, is in very deed eaten spiritually 
and drunken spiritually." 

By all these sentences of St. Augustine, it is 
evident and manifest, that all men, good and 
evil, may with their mouths visibly and sensibly 
eat the sacrament of Christ's body and blood ; 
but the very body and blood themselves be not 
eaten but spiritually, and that of the spiritual 
members of Christ, which dwell in Christ, and 
have Christ dwelling in them, by whom they be 
refreshed and have everlasting life* 

And therefore, saith St. Augustine^, that when 
the other apostles did eat bread that was the 
Lord, yet Judas did eat but the bread of the 
Lord, and not the bread that was the Lord. So 
that the other apostles, with the sacramentat 
bread, did eat also Christ himself, whom Judas 
did not eat. And a great number of places more 
hath St. Augustine for this purpose, which for 
eschewing of tediousness I let pass for this time, 
and will speak something of St. Cyril. 

Cyril, upon St. John's Gospel % saith, " That 
those which eat manna died, because they re- 
ceived thereby no strength to live ever, (for it 
gave no life, but only put away bodily hunger;) 
but they that receive the bread of life shall be 

^ In Johan. tract. 59. ' Cyrillus in Johan. lib. 4. caj). 10 1 

V 2 



made immortal, and shall eschew all the evils 
that pertain to death, living with Christ for 
ever." And in another place" he saith : " For- 
asmuch as the flesh of them to Christ doth natu- 
rally give life, therefore it maketh them to live 
that be partakers of it. For it putteth death 
away from them, and utterly driveth destruction 
out of them." 

And he concludeth the matter shortly in ano- 
ther place ^ in few words, saying, '* That when 
we eat the flesh of our Saviour, then have we 
life in us. For if things that were corrupt were 
restored by only touching of his clothes, how 
can it be that we shall not live that eat his 
flesh?" And further' he saith, " That as two 
waxes that be molten together, do run every part 
into other : so he that receiveth Christ's flesh 
and blood, must needs be joined so with him, 
that Christ must be in him, and he in Christ." 

Here St. Cyril declareth the dignity of Christ's 
flesh, being inseparably annexed unto his divi- 
nity, saying, that it is of such force and power, 
that it giveth everlasting life. And whatsoever 
occasion of death it findeth, or let of eternal life, 
it putteth out and driveth clean away all the 
same from them that eat that meat and receive 
that medicine. Other medicines or plasters 
sometimes heal, and sometimes heal not ; but 

* Cyrillus in Johan. lib. 4. cap. 1 2. " Cap. 1 4. ' Cap. 1 7. 



this medicine is of that effect and strength, that 
it eateth away all rotten and dead flesh, and 
perfectly healeth all wounds and sores that it is 
laid unto. 

This is the dignity and excellency of Christ's 
flesh and blood joined to his divinity; of the 
which dignity Christ's adversaries, the Papists, 
deprive and rob him when they affirm, that such 
men do eat his flesh and receive this plaster as 
remain still sick and sore, and be not holpen 

And now for corroboration of Cyril's saying, 
I would thus reason with the Papists, and de- - 
mand of them, when an unrepentant sinner re- 
ceiveth the sacrament, whether he have Christ's 
body within him or no ? 

If they say no, then have I my purpose, that 
evil men, although they receive the sacrament 
of Christ's body, yet receive they not his very 
body. If they say yea, then I would ask them 
further, whether they have Christ's spirit within 
them or no ? 

If they say nay, then do they separate Christ's 
body from his spirit, and his humanity from his 
divinity, and be condemned by the Scripture as 
very Antichrists that divide Christ. 

And if they say yea, that a wicked man hath 
Christ's spirit in him, then the Scripture also 
condemneth them, saying, " That as he which 
hath no spirit of Christ's, is none of his ; so he 


that hath Christ in him, liveth, because he is 
justified. And if his spirit that raised Jesus from 
death dwell in you, he, that raised Christ from 
death, shall give life to your mortal bodies for 
his spirit's sake, which dwelleth in you*^." 

Thus on every side the Scripture condemneth 
the adversaries of God's word. 

And this wickedness of the Papists is to be 
wondered at, that they affirm Christ's flesh, 
blood, soul, holy spirit, and his deity to be a man 
that is subject to sin, and a limb of the deviL 
They be wonderful jugglers and conjurers, that 
with certain words can make God and the devil 
to dwell together in one man, and make him both 
the temple of God and the temple of the devil. 
It appeareth that they be so blind, that they can- 
not see the light from darkness, Belial from 
Christ, nor the table of the Lord from the table 
of devils. 

Thus is confuted this third intolerable error 
and heresy of the Papists, that they which be 
the limbs of the devil do eat the very body of 
Christ, and drink his blood, manifestly and di- 
rectly contrary to the words of Christ himself, 
who saith, *' Whosoever eateth my flesh, and 
drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life." 
CHAP. But lest they should seem to have nothing to 
say for themselves, they allege St. Paul, in the 


** Romans viii. 


eleventh to the Corinthians, where he saith, ^'Ve'ra-"'' 
" He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eat-^'*''" 
eth and drinketh his own damnation, not dis- 
cerning the Lord's body V 

But St. Paul in that place speaketh of the eat- 
ing of the bread, and drinking of the wine, and 
not of the corporal eating of Christ's flesh and 
blood, as it is manifest to every man that will 
read the text : for these be the words of St. Paul, 
" Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the 
bread, and drink of the cup ; for he that eateth 
and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh 
his own damnation, not discerning the Lord's 


In these words St. Paul's mind is, that foras- 
much as the bread and wine in the Lord's Sup- 
per do represent unto us the very body and blood 
of our Saviour Christ, by his own institution and 
ordinance ; therefore, although he sit in heaven 
at his Father's right hand, yet should we come 
to this mystical bread and wine with faith, reve- 
rence, purity, and fear, as we would do if we 
should come to see and receive Christ himself 
sensibly present. For unto the faithful Christ is 
at his own holy table present, with his mighty 
spirit and grace, and is of them more fruitfully 
received, than if corporally they should receive 
him bodily present. And therefore they that 

* 1 Cor. XI. 


shall worthily come to this God's board, must, 
after due trial of themselves, consider first who 
ordained this table, also what meat and drink 
they shall have that come thereto, and how they 
ought to behave themselves thereat. He that 
prepared the table, is Christ himself. The meat 
and drink wherewith he feedeth them that come 
thereto as they ought to do, is his own body, 
flesh, and blood. They that come thereto must 
occupy their minds in considering how his body 
was broken for them, and his blood shed for 
their redemption. And so ought they to ap- 
proach to this heavenly table with all humble- 
ness of heart, and godliness of mind, as to the 
table wherein Christ himself is given. And they 
that come otherwise to this holy table, they 
come unworthily, and do not eat and drink 
Christ's flesh and blood, but eat and drink their 
own damnation ; because they do not duly con- 
sider Christ's very flesh and blood, which be 
offered there spiritually to be eaten and drunken, 
but despising Christ's most holy supper do 
come thereto, as it were to other common meats 
and drinks, without regard of the Lord's body, 
which is the spiritual meat of that table. 
CHAP. But here may not be passed over the answer 
unto certain places of ancient authors, which at 


Su.epr'^the first shew seem to make for the Papists' 

thols.""' purpose, that evil men do eat and drink the very 

flesh and blood of Christ, But if those places 


be truly and thoroughly weighed, it shall appear 
that not one of them maketh for their error, that 
evil men do eat Christ's very body. 

The first place is of St. Augustine Conlva 
Cresconiicm Gramimiticum \ where he saith, "That 
although Christ himself say, ' He that eateth 
not my flesh, and drinketh not my blood, shall 
not have life in him :' yet do not his apostles 
teach that the same is pernicious to them v/hich 
use it not well ; for he saith, ' Whosoever eateth 
the bread and drinketh the cup of the Lord un- 
worthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood 
of the Lord.' " 

In which words St. Augustine seemeth to 
conclude, that as well the evil as the good do eat 
the body and blood of Christ, although the evil 
have no benefi.t but hurt thereby. 

But consider the place of St. Augustine dili- 
gently, and then it shall evidently appear that 
he meant not of the eating of Christ's body, but 
of the sacrament thereof. For the intent of St. 
Augustine there, is to prove that good things 
avail not to such persons as do evil use them ; 
and that many things which of themselves be 
good, and be good to some, yet to other some 
they be not good. As the light is good for whole 
eyes, and hurteth sore eyes ; the meat which is 
good for some, is ill for other some : one medi-. 

' Augustiuus contra Cresconium, lib. 1. cap. 25. 


cine healeth some, and maketh other sick ; one 
harness doth arm one, and cumbreth another ; 
one coat is meet for one, and too straight for 
another. And after other examples, at the last 
St. Augustine sheweth the same to be true in 
the sacraments both of baptism and of the Lord's 
body, which he saith do profit only them that 
receive the same worthily. 

And the words of St. Paul, which St. Augus- 
tine citeth, do speak of the sacramental bread 
and cup, and not of the body and blood. And 
yet St. Augustine calleththe bread and the cup, 
the flesh and blood ; not that they be so indeed, 
but that they so signify ; as he saith in another 
place. Contra Maxim'mum^. ** In sacraments," 
saith he, *' is to be considered not what they 
be, but what they shew ; for they be signs of 
other things, being one thing, and signifying 

Therefore, as in baptism, those that come 
fcignedly, and those that come unfeignedly, both 
be washed with the sacramental water, but both 
be not washed with the Holy Ghost, and clothed 
with Christ : so, in the Lord's Supper, both eat 
and drink the sacramental bread and wine, but 
both eat not Christ himself, and be fed with his 
flesh and blood, but those only which worthily 
receive the sacrament. 

^ Contra Maximinum, lib. 3. cap. 22. 


And this answer will serve to another place ^ 
of St. Augustine against the Donatists, where he 
saith, *' That Judas received the body and blood 
of the Lord." For as St. Augustine in that place 
speaketh of the sacrament of baptism, so doth he 
speak of the sacrament of the body and blood, 
which nevertheless he calleth the body and 
blood, because they signify and represent unto 
us the very body, flesh, and blood. 

And (as before is at length declared) a figure <^"ap. 
hath the name of the thing that is signified there- '. 

■, . ,. . Ill I- ■> Fieures be 

by. As a man s image is called a man, a lion s caiiedby 

, . - . , , . 1 • 1 1 the names of 

image, a lion ; a bird s image, a bird ; and an uie things 

iii-ni 1 wliicli they 

image oi a tree and herb, is called a tree or herb, signify. 
So were we wont to say, our lady of Walsing- 
ham, our lady of Ipswich, our lady of grace, our 
lady of pity, St. Peter of Milan, St. John of 
Amyas, and such like, not meaning the things 
themselves, but calling their images by the name 
of the things by them represented. And like- 
wise we were wont to say, great St. Christopher 
of York or Lincoln ; our lady smileth, or rocketli 
her child ; let us go in pilgrimage to St. Peter 
at Rome, and St. James in Compostella: and a 
thousand like speeches, which were not under- 
stood of the very things, but only of the images 
of them. 

So doth St. John Chrysostome say, that we 

'' De bap. contra Donat. lib. 5. cap. 8. 


see Christ with our eyes, touch him, feel him, 
and grope him with our hands, fix our teeth in 
his flesh, taste it, break it, eat it, and digest it, 
make red our tongues and dye them with his 
blood, and swallow it, and drink it. 

And in a Catechism by me translated, and set 
forth, I used like manner of speech, saying, that 
with our bodily mouths we receive the body and 
blood of Christ. Which my saying divers igno- 
rant persons (not used to read old ancient au- 
thors, nor acquainted with their phrase and 
manner of speech) did carp and reprehend, for 
lack of good understanding. 

For this speech, and other before rehearsed of 
Chrysostome, and all other like, be not under- 
stood of the very flesh and blood of our Saviour 
Christ, (which in very deed we neither feel nor 
see,) but that which we do to the bread and wine, 
by a figurative speech is spoken to be done to 
the flesh and blood, because they be the very 
signs, figures, and tokens instituted of Christ, to 
represent unto us his very flesh and blood. 

And yet as with our corporal eyes, corporal 
hands and mouths, we do corporally see, feel, 
taste, and eat the bread, and drink the wine, 
(being the signs and sacraments of Christ's body,) 
even so with our spiritual eyes, hands, and 
mouths, we do spiritually see, feel, taste, and eat 
his very flesh and drink his very blood. 


As Eusebius Emisseniis saith ', " When thou 
comest to the reverend altar to be filled with 
spiritual meats, with thy faith look upon the 
body and blood of him that is thy God, honour 
him, touch him with thy mind, take him with 
the hand of thy heart, and drink him with the 
draught of thine inward man." And these spi- 
ritual things require no corporal presence of 
Christ himself, who sitteth continually in hea- 
ven, at the right hand of his Father. 

And as this is most true, so it is full and suffi- 
cient to answer all things that the Papists can 
bring in this matter, that have any appearance 
for their party. 

Now it is requisite to speak something of the chap. 
manner and form of worshipping of Christ, by 


them that receive this sacrament, lest that intionofUie 
the stead of Christ himself be worshipped the ^^*''""''" ' 
sacrament. For as his humanity, joined to his 
divinity, and exalted to the right hand of his 
Father, is to be worshipped of all creatures in 
heaven, earth, and under the earth : even so, if 
in the stead thereof we worship the signs and 
sacraments, we commit as great idolatry as ever 
was, or shall be, to the world's end. 

And yet have the very Antichrists (the sub- Tiie simple 

. . people be 

tlest enemies that Christ hath) by their fine m- deceived. 
ventions,and crafty scholastical divinity, deluded 

' Eusebius Emissenus in serm. de Eucharistia. 


many simple souls, and brought them to this 
horrible idolatry, to worship things visible and 
made with their own hands, persuading them 
that creatures were their Creator, their God, 
and their Maker. 

For else what made the people to run from 
their seats to the altar, and from altar to altar, 
and from sakering (as they called it) to sakering, 
peeping, tooting, and gazing at that thing, 
which the priest held up in his hands, if they 
thought not to honour that thing which they 
saw ? What moved the priests to lift up the sa- 
crament so high over their heads ? or the people 
to cry to the priest, hold up, hold up, and one 
man to say to another, stoop down before, or to 
say, this da,y I have seen my Maker; and, I 
cannot be quiet except I see my Maker once a 
day ? What was the cause of all these, and that 
as well the priests as the people so devoutly did 
knock and kneel at every sight of the sacrament,- 
but that they worshipped that visible thing which 
they saw with their eyes, and took it for very 
God ? For if they worshipped in spirit only 
Christ, sitting in heaven with his Father, what 
needeth they to remove out of their seats to toot 
and gaze, as the apostles did after Christ when 
he was gone up into heaven ? If they worship- 
ped nothing that they saw, why did they rise 
up to see ? Doubtless many of the simple peo- 


pie worshipped that thing which they saw with 
their eyes. 

And although the subtle Papists do colour 
and cloak the matter never so finely, saying", that 
they worship not the sacraments which they see 
with their eyes, but that thing which they be- 
lieve with their faith to be really and corporally 
in the sacraments, yet why do they then run from 
place to place to gaze at the things which they 
see, if they worship them not, giving thereby 
occasion to them that be ignorant to worship 
that which they see ? Why do they not rather 
quietly sit still in their seats, and move the peo- 
ple to do the like, worshipping God in heart and 
in spirit, than to gad about from place to place, 
to see that thing- which they confess themselves 
is not to be worshipped ? 

And yet to eschew one inconvenience (that is 
to say, the worshipping of the sacrament,) they 
M\ into another as evil, and worship nothing 
there at all. For they worship that thing (as 
they say) which is really and corporally and yet 
invisibly present under the kinds of bread and 
wine, which (as before is expressed and proved) 
is utterly nothing. And so they give unto the 
ignorant occasion to worship bread and wine, 
and they themselves worship nothing there at 


But the Papists (for their own commodity to 
keep the people still in idolatry) do often allege 



a certain place ^ of St. Augustine upon the 
Psalms, where he saith, " That no man doth eat 
the flesh of Christ, except he first worship it, 
and that we do not offend in worshipping there- 
of, but we should offend if we should not wor- 
ship it." 

That is true which St. Augustine saith in this 
place. For who is he that professeth Christ, and 
is spiritually fed and nourished with his flesh and 
blood, but he will honour and worship him, sit- 
ting at the right hand of his Father, and render 
unto him, from the bottom of his heart, all laud, 
praise, and thanks, for his merciful redemp- 
tion ! 

And as this is most true which St. Augustine 
saith, so is that most false which the Papists 
would persuade upon St. Augustine's words, that 
the sacramental bread and wine, or any visible 
thing, is to be worshipped in the sacrament. 
For St. Augustine's mind was so far from any 
such thought, that he forbiddeth utterly to wor- 
ship Christ's own flesh and blood alone, but in 
consideration and as they be annexed and joined 
to his divinity. How much less then could he 
think or allow that we should worship the sa- 
cramental bread and wine, or any outward or 
visible sacrament, which be shadows, figures, 
and representations of Christ's very flesh and 
blood ! 

■^ Autrust. in Psul. xcviii. 


AndSt. Auguytine was afraid, lest in worship- 
ping of Christ's very body we should offend ; 
and therefore he biddeth us, when we worship 
Christ, that we should not tarry and fix our 
minds upon his flesh, which of itself availeth no- 
thing, but that we should lift up our minds from 
the flesh to the spirit, which giveth life : and yet 
the Papists be not afraid, by crafty means, to in- 
duce us to worship those things, which be signs 
and sacraments of Christ's body. 

But what will not the shameless Papists allege 
for their purpose, when they be not ashamed to 
maintain the adoration of the sacrament by these 
words of St. Augustine, wherein he speaketh not 
one word of the adoration of the sacrament, but 
only of Christ himself? 

And although he say, that Christ gave his 
flesh to be eaten of us, yet he meant not that his 
flesh is here corporally present, and corporally 
eaten, but only spiritually. As his words de- » 
clare plainly, which follow in the same place, 
where St. Augustine, as it were, in the person of 
Christ, speaketh these words : " It is the spirit 
that giveth life, but the flesh profiteth nothing. 
The words which I have spoken unto you, be 
spirit and life. That which I have spoken, un- 
derstand you spiritually. You shall not eat this 
body which you see, and drink that blood which 
they shall shed that shall crucify me. I have 
commended unto you a sacrament, understand it ' 



spiritually, and it shall give you life. And al- 
though it must be visibly ministered, yet it must 
be invisibly understood." 

These words of St. Augustine, M^ith the other 
before recited, do express his mind plainly, that 
Christ is not otherwise to be eaten than spiritu- 
ally, which spiritual eating requireth no corpo- 
ral presence ; and that he intended not to teach 
here any adoration either of the visible sacra- 
ments, or of any thing that is corporally in them. 
For indeed there is nothing really and corporally 
in the bread to be worshipped, although the Pa- 
pists say, that Christ is in every consecrated 

But our Saviour Christ himself hath given us 
warning before hand, that such false Christians 
and false teachers should come, and hath bid us 
to beware of them, saying, " If any man tell you 
that Christ is here, or Christ is there, believe 
him not ; for there shall arise false Christs and 
false prophets, and shall shew many signs and 
wonders, so that if it were possible, the very elect 
should be brought into error. Take heed, I 
have told you beforehand ^" 

Thus our Saviour Christ, like a most lovijig 
pastor and saviour of our souls, hath given us 
warning beforehand of the perils and dangers 
that were to come, and to be wise and ware that 

' -Matt. xxiv. 


we should not give credit unto such teachers as 
would persuade us to worship a piece of bread, 
to kneel to it, to knock to it, to creep to it, to 
follow it in procession, to lift up our hands to it, 
to offer to it, to light candles to it, to shut it up 
in a chest or box, to do all other honour unto it, 
more than we do unto God ; having alway this 
pretence or excuse for our idolatry. Behold herti 
is Christ. But our Saviour Christ calleth them 
false prophets, and saith, ''Take heed, I tell you 
before, believe them not ; if they say to you, Be- 
hold Christ is abroad or in the wilderness, go 
not out ; and if they say that he is kept in close 
places, believe them not ""." 

And if you will ask me the question, who be chaf. 
those false prophets and seducers of the people. 

the answer is soon made ; the Romish Antichrists papisis''th-.t 
and their adherents, the authors of all error, ig- eT^iieTeo- 
norance, blindness, superstition, hypocrisy, and ^ '^ 

For Innocentius the Third, one of the most innooentrns 
Wicked men that ever was m the see of Rome, 
did ordain and decree that the host should be 
diligently kept under lock and key. 
** And Honorius the Third not only confirmed Honoii,, 
the same, but commanded also that the priests 
should diligently teach the people from time to 
time, that when they lifted up the bread called 


M.iU. xxi\-. 

u 2 


the host, the people should then reverently bow 
clown, and that likewise they should do when 
the priest carrieth the host unto sick folks. 
These be the statutes and ordinances of Rome, 
under pretence of holiness, to lead the people 
unto all error and idolatry ; not bringing them 
by bread unto Christ, but from Christ unto 
CHAP. But all that love and believe Christ himself, 
let them not think that Christ is corporally in 


uo/toThe'* the bread, but let them lift up their hearts unto 
ing^ofChHrt heaven, and worship him, sitting there at the 
ment. right hand of his Father. Let them worship 
him in themselves, whose temples they be, in 
whom he dwelleth and liveth spiritually : but in 
no wise let them worship him as being corporally 
in the bread ; for he is not in it, neither spiritu- 
ally, as he is in man, nor corporally, as he is in 
heaven; but only sacramentally, as a thing may 
be said to be in the figure, whereby it is signi- 

Thus is sufficiently reproved the third princi- 
pal error of the Papists, concerning the Lord's 
Supper, which is, that wicked members of the 
devil do eat Christ's very body, and drink his 






The greatest blasphemy and injury that can be chap. 

agamst Christ, and yet universally used through [; 

the Popish kingdom, is this, that the priests JJlf ofTh" 
make their mass a sacrifice propitiatory, to remit "**'** 
the sins as well of themselves, as of other both 
quick and dead, to whom they list to apply the 
same. Thus, under pretence of holiness, the 
Papistical priests have taken upon them to be 
Christ's successors, and to make such an obla- 
tion and sacrifice, as never creature made but 
Christ alone, neither he made the same any more 
times than once, and that was by his death upon 
the cross. 

For as St. Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews chap. 
witnesseth, " Although the high priests of the.. 



ScVbe-"' old law offered many times, (at the least every 

sacrifice of year once,) yet Christ ofFereth not himself many 

ofthepriests times, foT then he should many times have died. 

[aw'r*'^'^ But now he offereth himself but once, to take 

away sin by that offering of himself. And as 

men must die once, so was Christ offered once, 

to take away the sins of many %" 

And furthermore St. Paul saith, " That the 
sacrifices of the old law, although they were 
continually offered from year to year, yet could 
they not take away sin, nor make men perfect. 
For if they could once have quieted men's con- 
sciences by taking away sin, they should have 
ceased, and no more have been offered. But 
Christ, with once offering, hath made perfect for 
ever them that be sanctified ; putting their sins 
clean out of God's remembrance. And where 
remission of sins is, there is no more offering for 

And yet further he saith, concerning the Old 
Testament, " That it was disannulled and taken 
away, because of the feebleness and unprofita- 
bleness thereof; for it brought nothing to perfec- 
tion. And the priests of that law were many, 
because they lived not long, and so the priest- 
hood went from one to another; but Christ liveth 
ever, and hath an everlasting priesthood that 
passeth not from him to any man else. Where^ 

^ Heb. ix. * Heb. x. 


fore he is able perfectly to save them that come 
to God by him, forasmuch as he livetli ever to 
make intercession for us. For it was meet for 
us to have such an high priest that is holy, in- 
nocent, w^ithout spot, separated from sinners, 
and exalted up above heaven ; who needeth not 
daily to offer up sacrifice, as Aaron's priests did, 
first for his own sins, and then for the people. 
For that he did once, when he offered up him- 

Here, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, St. Paul 
hath plainly and fully described unto us the dif- 
ference between the priesthood and sacrifices of 
the Old Testament, and the most high and wor- 
thy priesthood of Christ, his most perfect and 
necessary sacrifice, and the benefit that cometh 
to us thereby. For Christ offered not the blood 
of calves, sheep, and goats, as the priests of the 
old law used to do; but he offered his own blood 
upon the cross. And he went not into an holy 
place made by man's hand, (as Aaron did,) but 
he ascended up into heaven, where his Eternal 
Father dwelleth ; and before Him he maketh con- 
tinual supplication for the sins of the whole 
world, presenting his own body, which was torn 
for us, and his precious blood, which of his most 
gracious and liberal charity he shed for us upon 
the cross. 

And that sacrifice was of such force, that it 

' Heb. vii. 


was no need to renew it every year, as the bi- 
shops did of the Old Testament ; whose sacrifices 
were many times offered, and yet were of no 
great effect or profit, because they were sinners 
themselves that offered them, and offered not 
their own blood, but the blood of brute beasts ; 
but Christ's sacrifice, once offered, was sufficient 
for evermore. 

And that all men may the better understand 
CHAP, this sacrifice of Christ, which he made for the 
great benefit of all men, it is necessary to know 


Jf'Iaorifices. the distinction and diversity of sacrifices. 

One kind of sacrifice there is, which is called 
a propitiatory or merciful sacrifice, that is to say, 
such a sacrifice as pacifieth God's wrath and in- 
dignation, and obtaineth mercy and forgiveness 
for all our sins, and is the ransom for our redemp- 
tion from everlasting damnation. 

And although in the Old Testament there were 
Thesacrifice ccrtaiu sacrificcs called by that name, yet in 

of Christ. ^ '' 

very deed there is but one such sacrifice where- 
by onr sins be pardoned, and God's mercy and 
favour obtained, which is the death of the Son of 
God our Lord Jesu Christ ; nor never was any 
other sacrifice propitiatory at any time, nor ever 
shall be. 

This is the honour and glory of this our High 
Priest, wherein he admitteth neither partner nor 
successor. For by his one oblation he satisfied 
his Father for all men's sins, and reconciled 


mankind unto his grace and favour. And who- 
soever deprive him of this honour, and go about 
to take it to themselves, they be very Anti- 
christs and most arrogant blasphemers against 
God, and against his Son Jesus Christ whom 
He hath sent. 

Another kind of sacrifice there is, which doth J^J)fo,-t[,^' 
not reconcile us to God, but is made of them *"''"''''''• 
that be reconciled by Christ, to testify our duties 
unto God, and to shew ourselves thankful unto 
him; and therefore they be called sacrifices of 
laud, praise, and thanksgiving. 

The first kind of sacrifice Christ offered to 
God for us ; the second kind we ourselves offer 
to God by Christ. 

And by the first kind of sacrifice Christ ofter- 
ed also us urto his Father ; and by the second 
we offer ourselves, and all that we have, unto him 
and his Father. 

And this sacrifice generally is our whole obe- 
dience unto God, in keeping his laws and com- 
mandments. Of which manner of sacrifice 
speaketh the prophet David, saying, " A sacri- 
fice to God, is a contrite heart '^." And St. Pe- 
ter saith of all Christian people, *' That they be 
an holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices, 
acceptable to God by Jesu Christ %" And St. 
Paul saith, *' That alway we offer unto God a 
sacrifice of laud and praise by Jesus Christ V 

■* PsaL 1. • 1 Pet. ii. ' Heb. xiii. 


CHAP. But now to speak somewhat more largely of 

IV. . *" 

the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ, he was 

plain decia- such an high bishop, that he, once offering him- 
sacrifice of self, was sufficicnt, bv one effusion of his blood, 

Christ. 11,- 1 

to abohsh sm unto the world s end. He was so 
perfect a priest, that by one oblation he purged 
an infinite heap of sins, leaving an easy and a 
ready remedy for all sinners, that his one sacri- 
fice should suffice for many years unto all men 
that would not shew themselves unworthy. And 
he took unto himself not only their sins that 
many years before were dead, and put their 
trust in him, but also the sins of those that until 
his coming again should truly believe in his Gos- 
pel. So that now we may look for none other 
priest, nor sacrifice, to take away our sins, but 
only him and his sacrifice. And as he, dying 
once, was offered for all, so, as much as pertained 
to him, he took all men's sins unto himself. So 
that now there remaineth no more sacrifices for 
sin, but extreme judgment at the last day, 
when he shall appear to us again, not as a man 
to be punished again, and to be made a sacrifice 
for our sins, as he was before ; but he shall come 
in his glory, without sin, to the great joy and 
comfort of them, which be purified and made 
clean by his death, and continue in godly and 
innocent living ; and to the great terror and dread 
of them that be wicked and ungodly ^" 

» Heb. ix. 


Thus the Scripture teacheth, that if Christ 
had made any oblation for sin more than once, 
he should have died more than once ; foras- 
much as there is none oblation and sacrifice for 
sin, but only his death. And now there is no 
more oblation for sin, seeing that by him our sins 
be remitted, and our consciences quieted. 

And although in the Old Testament there cuAr. 

were certain sacrifices, called sacrifices for sin, "^ 

yet they were no such sacrifices that could take ficeVoTthe 
away our sins in the sight of God ; but they were "^^ ^^'^* 
ceremonies ordained to this intent, that they 
should be, as it were, shadows and figures, to 
signify beforehand the excellent sacrifice of 
Christ that was to come, which should be the 
very true and perfect sacrifice for the sins of the 
whole world. 

And for this signification they had the name 
of a sacrifice propitiatory, and were called sacri- 
fices for sins, not because they indeed took away 
our sins, but because they were images, sha- 
dows, and figures, whereby godly men were ad- 
monished of the true sacrifice of Christ then to 
come, which should truly abolish sin and ever- 
lasting death. 

And that those sacrifices, which were made by 
the priests in the old law, could not be able to 
purchase our pardon, and deserve the remission 
of our sins, St. Paul doth clearly affirm in his 
said Epistle to the Hebrews, where he saith, 


** It is impossible that our sins should be taken 
away by the blood of oxen and goats \" 

Wherefore all godly men, although they did 
use those sacrifices ordained of God, yet they 
did not take them as things of that value and 
estimation, that thereby they should be able to 
obtain remission of their sins before God. But 
they took them partly for figures and tokens 
ordained of God, by the which he declared, that 
he would send that seed, which he promised to 
be the very true sacrifice for sin, and that he 
would receive them that trusted in that promise, 
and remit their sins for the sacrifice after to 
come. And partly they used them as certain 
ceremonies, whereby such persons as had offend- 
ed against the law of Moses, and were cast 
out of the congregation, were received again 
among the people, and declared to be absolved. 
As for like purposes we use, in the church of 
Christ, sacraments by him instituted. And this 
outward casting out from the people of God, 
and receiving in again, was according to the law 
and knowledge of man ; but the true reconcilia- 
tion and forgiveness of sin before God, neither 
the fathers of the old law had, nor we yet have, 
but only by the sacrifice of Christ, made in the 
mount of Calvary. And the sacrifices of the old 
law were prognostications and figures of the 

'> Heb. ix. 



same then to come, as our sacraments be figures 
and demonstrations of the same now passed. . 

Now by these foresaid things may every man chap. 
easily perceive, that the offering of the priest in 

the mass, or the appointing of his ministration at noTa "acri-* 
his pleasure, to them that be quick or dead, can- ato^^"^"^' '' 
not merit and deserve,- neither to himself, nor to 
them for whom he singeth or sayeth, the remis- 
sion of their sins : but that such Popish doctrine 
is contrary to the doctrine of the Gospel, and in- 
jurious to the sacrifice of Christ. 

For if only the death of Christ be the oblation, 
sacrifice, and price, wherefore our sins be par- 
doned, then the act or ministration of the priest 
cannot have the same office. Wherefore it is an 
abominable blasphemy to give the office or dig- 
nity to a priest, which pertaineth only to Christ; 
or to affirm that the church hath need of any 
such sacrifice ; as who should say, that Christ's 
sacrifice were not sufficient for the remission of 
our sins ; or else that his sacrifice- should hang 
upon the sacrifice of a priest. 

But all such priests as pretend to be Christ's 
successors, in making a sacrifice of him, they be 
his most heinous and horrible adversaries. For 
never no person made a sacrifice of Christ, but 
he himself only. And therefore St. Paul saith, 
" That Christ's priesthood cannot pass from him 
to another. For what needeth any more sacri- 
fices, if Christ's sacrifice be perfect and suffi- 


cient'?" And as St. Paul saith, *' That if the 
sacrifices and ministration of Aaron, and other 
priests of that time, had lacked nothing, but had 
been perfect and sufficient, then should not the 
sacrifice of Christ have been required, (for it had 
been but in vain to add any thing to that, which 
of itself was perfect;) so likewise if Christ's sa- 
crifice which he had made himself be sufficient, 
what need we every day to have more and more 
sacrifices ^ ?" Wherefore all Popish priests that 
presume to make every day a sacrifice of Christ, 
either must they needs make Christ's sacrifice 
vain, imperfect, and unsufficient, or else is their 
sacrifice in vain, which is added to the sacrifice 
which is already of itself sufficient and perfect. 

But it is a wonderous thing to see what shifts 

and cautels the Popish Antichrists devise, to 

colour and cloak their wicked errors. And as a 

chain is so joined together, that one link draw- 

eth another after it ; so be vices and errors knit 

together, that every one draweth his fellow with 

him. And so doth it here in this matter. 

CHAP. For the Papists, to excuse themselves, do say, 

^"' that they make no new sacrifice, nor none other 

LlZnhe sacrifice than Christ made ; for they be not so 

fMhw''' blind, but they see that then they should add 

another sacrifice to Christ's sacrifice, and so 

make his sacrifice imperfect ; but they say, that 

' Meb. vil. ^ Meb. viii. 


tliey make the self-same sacrifice for sin that 
Christ himself made. 

And here they run headlong into the foulest 
and most heinous error that ever was imagined. 
For if they make every day the same oblation 
and sacrifice for sin that Christ himself made, 
and the oblation that he made v^^as his deaths 
and the effusion of his most precious blood upon 
the cross, for our redemption and price of our 
sins : then followeth it of necessity, that they 
every day slay Christ and shed his blood ; and 
so be they worse than the wicked Jews and 
Pharisees, which slew him, and shed his blood 
but once. 

Almighty God, the Father of light and truth, chap. 

banish all such darkness and error out of his !!l[l_ 

church, with the authors and teachers thereof ; ^'jJfiVeTf'aTi 
or else convert their hearts unto him, and give pe'„'pfe?" 
this light of faith to every man, that he may 
trust to have remission of his sins, and be deli- 
vered from eternal death and hell, by the merit 
only of the death and blood of Christ : and that 
by his own faith every man may apply the same 
unto himself, and not take it at the appointment 
of Popish priests, by the merit of their sacrifices 
and oblations. 

If we be indeed, as we profess, Christian men, 
we may ascribe this honour and glory to no man, 
but to Christ alone. Wherefore let us give the 
whole laud and praise hereof iinto him ; let us . 


fly only to him for succour; let us hold him fast, 
and hang upon him, and give ourselves wholly 
to him. And forasmuch as he hath given him- 
self to death for us, to be an oblation and sacri- 
fice to his Father for our sins, let us give our- 
selves again unto him, making unto him an obla- 
tion, not of goats, sheep, kine, and other beasts 
that have no reason, as was accustomed before 
Christ's coming ; but of a creature that hath 
reason, that is to say, of ourselves, not killing 
our ov^^n bodies, but mortifying the beastly and 
unreasonable affections that would gladly rule 
and reign in us. 

So long as the law did reign, God suffered 
dumb beasts to be offered unto him ; but now 
that we be spiritual, we must offer spiritual ob- 
lations, in the place of calves, sheep, goats, and 
doves. We must kill devilish pride, furious an- 
ger, insatiable covetousness, filthy lucre, stink- 
ing lechery, deadly hatred and malice, foxy 
wiliness, wolvish ravening and devouring, and 
all other unreasonable lusts and desires of the 
flesh. " And as many as belong to Christ, must 
crucify and kill these for Christ's sake, as Christ 
crucified himself for their sakes'." 

These be the sacrifices of Christian men ; these 
hosts and oblations be acceptable to Christ. 
And as Christ offered himself for us, so is it our 

' Galat. V. 


duties after this sort to offer ourselves to him 
again. And so shall we not have the name of 
Christian men in vain; but as we pretend to be- 
long to Christ in word and profession, so shall 
we indeed be his in life and inward affection. 
So that within and without we shall be altoge- 
ther his, clean from all hypocrisy or dissimula- 
tion. And if we refuse to offer ourselves after 
this wise unto him, by crucifying our own wills, 
and committing us wholly to the will of God, 
we be most unkind people, superstitious hypo- 
crites, or rather unreasonable beasts, worthy to 
be excluded utterly from all the benefits of 
Christ's oblation. 

And if we put the oblation of the priest in the chap. 
stead of the oblation of Christ, refusing to receive 


the sacrament of his body and blood ourselves, Jil'^^s'dS 
as he ordained ; and trusting to have remission laK^uuSj 
of our sins by the sacrifice of the priest in theeVfromaii 
mass, and thereby also to obtain release of the congreg"- 
pains in purgatory, we do not only injury to 
Christ, but also commit most detestable idola- 
try. For these be but false doctrines, without 
shame devised, and feigned, by wicked Popish 
priests, idolaters, monks, and friars, which for 
lucre have altered and corrupted the most holy 
Supper of the Lord, and turned it into manifest 
idolatry. Wherefore all godly men ought with 
all their heart to resist and abhor all such blas- 
phemy against the Son of God. 



And forasmuch as in such masses is manifest 
wickedness and idolatry, wherein the priest 
alone maketh oblation satisfactory, and applieth 
the same for the quick and the dead at his will 
and pleasure ; all such Popish masses are to be 
clearly taken away out of Christian churches, 
and the true use of the Lord's Supper is to be 
restored again, wherein godly people assembled 
together may receive the sacrament every man 
for himself, to testify that he is a member of 
Christ's body, fed with his flesh, and drinking 
his blood spiritually. 
CHAP. Christ did not ordain his sacraments to this 
use, that one should receive them for another. 

Every man •r-nii 

ought to re- and the priest tor all the lay people ; but he or- 
sacrament clalncd tlicm for tlils iutcut, that every man 

himself, and '' 

not one for ghouM rcccivc thcm for himself, to ratify, con- 

snother. *' 

firm, and establish his own faith and everlasting 
salvation. Therefore as one man may not be 
baptized for another, (and if he be, it availeth 
nothing ;) so ought not one to receive the holy 
communion for another. For if a man be dry or 
hungry, he is never a whit eased, if another man 
drink or eat for him : or if a man be all befiled, 
it helpeth him nothing, another man to be wash- 
ed for him : so availeth it nothing to a man, if 
another man be baptized for him, or be refreshed 
for him with the meat and drink at the Lord's 
table. And therefore, said St. Peter, '* Let 
every man be baptized in the name of Jesu 


Christ ""." And our Saviour Christ said to the 
multitude, *' Take, and eat." And further he 
said, " Drink you all of this." Whosoever there- 
fore will be spiritually regenerated in Christ, he 
must be baptized himself. And he that will live 
himself by Christ, must by himself eat Christ's 
flesh and drink his blood. 

And briefly to conclude : he that thinketh to 
come to the kingdom of Christ himself, must 
also come to his sacraments himself, and keep 
his commandments himself, and do all things 
that pertain to a Christian man and to his voca- 
tion himself ; lest if he refer these things to ano- 
ther man to do them for him, the other may with 
as good right claim the kingdom of heaven for 

Therefore Christ made no such diflerence be- chap. 
tween the priest and the layman, that the priest . 


should make oblation and sacrifice of Christ for InL^he^^' 
the layman, and eat the Lord's Supper from him priest and 
all alone, and distribute and apply it as him liketh. 
Christ made no such difference; but the difference 
that is between the priest and the layman in this 
matter, is only in the ministration ; that the 
priest, as a common ministerof the church, doth 
minister and distribute the Lord's Supper unto 
other, and other receive it at his hands. But 
the very supper itself was by Christ instituted 
and given to the whole church, not to be offered 

'" Acts ii. 



and eaten of the priest for other men, but by 
him to be delivered to all that would duly ask 

As in a prince's house the officers and minis- 
ters prepare the table, and yet other, as well as 
they, eat the meat and drink the drink : so do 
the priests and ministers prepare the Lord's 
Supper, read the Gospel, and rehearse Christ's 
words; but all the people say thereto. Amen. 
All remember Christ's death, all give thanks to 
God, all repent and offer themselves an oblation 
to Christ, all take him for their Lord and Savi- 
our, and spiritually feed upon him; and in token 
thereof, they eat the bread and drink the wine in 
his mystical supper. 

And this nothing diminislieth the estimation 

and dignity of priesthood and other ministers of 

the church, but advanceth and highly commend- 

eth their ministration. For if they are much to 

be loved, honoured, and esteemed that be the 

king's chancellors, judges, officers, and ministers 

in temporal matters ; how much then are they to 

be esteemed that be ministers of Christ's words 

and sacraments, and have to them committed the 

keys of heaven, to let in and shut out, by the 

ministration of his word and gospel! 

CHAP. Now, forasmuch, as 1 trust that I have plainly 

^^^' enough set forth the propitiatory sacrifice of our 

totVeTC"^ Saviour Jesu Christ, to the capacity and comfort 

^" '' X)f all men that have any understanding of Christ ; 


and have declared the hemous abomination and 
idolatry of the Popish mass, wherein the priests 
have taken upon them the office of Christ, to 
make a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the 
people, it is now necessary to make answer to 
the subtle persuasions and sophistical cavilla- 
tions of the Papists, whereby they have deceived 
many a simple man, both learned and un- 

The place of St. Paul unto the Hebrews ", 
(which they do cite for their purpose,) maketh 
quite and clean against them. For where St. 
Paul saith, " That every high priest is ordained 
to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins," he spake 
not that of the priests of the New Testament, 
but of the Old: which (as he saith) offered calves 
and goats. And yet they were not such priests, 
that by their offerings and sacrifices they could 
take away the people's sins, but they were sha- 
dows and figures of Christ, our everlasting priest, 
which only by one oblation of himself taketh 
away the sins of the world." Wherefore the 
Popish priests that apply this text unto them- 
selves, do directly contrary to the meaning of 
St. Paul, to the great injury and prejudice oi' 
Christ, by whom only, St. Paul saith, " That 
the sacrifice and oblation for the sin of the whole 
world was accomplished and fulfilled." 

" Hebrews V. 


And as little serveth for the Papists' purpose 
the text of the prophet Malachi, ** That every 
where should be offered unto God a pure sacri- 
fice and oblation"." For the prophet in that 
place spake no word of the mass, nor of any ob- 
lation propitiatory to be made by the priests ; 
but he spake of the oblation of all faithful people 
(in what place soever they be) which offer unto 
God, with pure hearts and minds, sacrifices of 
laud and praise : prophesying of the vocation of 
the Gentiles, that God would extend his mercy 
unto them, and not be the God only of the Jews, 
but of all nations from east to west, that with 
pure faith call upon him, and glorify his name. 
CHAP. But the adversaries of Christ gather together 


a great heap of authors, which (as they say) call 

An answer , , ^ . • n -n 

to the au- the mass, or holy communion, a sacrince. J3ut 

thors. 11 1 1 1 • 1 • 

all those authors be answered unto m this one 
sentence, that they called it not a sacrifice for 
sin, because that it taketh away our sin, (which 
was taken away only by the death of Christ,) 
but because it was ordained of Christ to put us 
in remembrance of the sacrifice made by him 
upon the cross. And for that cause it beareth 
the name of that sacrifice, as St. Augustine de- 
clare th plainly in his Epistle Ad Bonifacium^, 
before rehearsed in this book ; and in his book 
J)e Jide ad Petrum Diacomim, before rehearsed 

^ Malachi i, ? Augustinus ad Bonifacium. 


also. And in his book De civitate Dei ^ he saith, 
*' That which men call a sacrifice, is a sign or 
representation of the true sacrifice." 

And the master of the sentences (of whom all 
the school authors take their occasion to write) 
judged truly in this point, saying, ** That which 
is offered and consecrated of the priest, is called 
a sacrifice and oblation, because it is a memory 
and representation of the true sacrifice and holy 
oblation, made in the altar of the cross '." 

And St. John Chrysostome \ after he hath said 
that Christ is our bishop which offered that sa- 
crifice that made us clean, and that we offer the 
same now, lest any man might be deceived by 
his manner of speaking, he openeth his meaning 
more plainly, saying, **That which we do, is 
done for a remembrance of that which was done 
by Christ. For Christ saith. Do this in re- 
membrance of me." Also Chrysostome declar- 
ing at length, theft the priests of the old law 
offered ever new sacrifices, and changed them 
from time to time, and that Christian peopld do 
not so, but offer ever one sacrifice of Christ ; yet 
by and by, lest some men might be offended with 
this speech, he maketh as it were a correction of 
his words, saying, " But rather we make a re- 
membrance of Christ's sacrifice." As though 

*> De civitat. lib. 10. cap. 5. "^ Lombardus, lib. \. dist. IIS. 

=" Chrysost. ad Heb. Horn. 17. 


he should say : Although in a certam kind of 
speech we may say, that every day we make a 
sacrifice of Christ ; yet in very deed, to speak 
properly, we make no sacrifice of him, but only 
a commemoration and remembrance of that sa- 
crifice, which he alone made, and never none but 
he. Nor Christ never gave this honour to any 
creature, that he should make a sacrifice of him, 
nor did not ordain the sacrament of his holy sup- 
per, to the intent that either the people should 
sacrifice Christ again, or that the priests should 
make a sacrifice of him for the people: but his 
holy supper was ordained for this purpose, that 
every man eating and drinking thereof should 
remember that Christ died for him, and so should 
exercise his faith, and comfort himself by the 
remembrance of Christ's benefits ; and so give 
unto Christ most hearty thanks, and give him- 
self also clearly unto him. 

Wherefore the ordinance of Christ ought to 
be followed ; the priest to minister the sacrament 
to the people, and they to use it to their conso- 
lation. And in this eating, drinking, and using 
of the Lord's Supper, we make not of Christ a 
new sacrifice propitiatory for remission of sin. 
CHAP. But the humble confession of all penitent 
hearts, their acknowledging of Christ's benefits. 


sons make a tlicir tlianksgiviug for the same, their faith and 

sacrifice as . , . . 

well as the cousolation in Christ, their humble submission 


and obedience to God's will and commandments, 


is a sacrifice of laud and praise, accepted and 
allowed of God no less than the sacrifice of the 
priest. For Almighty God, without respect of 
person, accepteth the oblation and sacrifice of 
priest and lay person, of king and subject, of 
master and servant, of man and woman, of young 
and old, yea of English, French, Scot, Greek, 
Latin, Jew, and Gentile ; of every man according 
to his faithful and obedient heart unto Him; and 
that through the sacrifice propitiatory of Jesu 


And as for the saying or singing of mass by chap. 
the priest, as it was in time passed used, it is '— 

A -^ . ThePapis- 

neither a sacrifice propitiatory, nor yet a sacri- ticaima^sis 

i ■■■ •' *^ neither a sa- 

fice of laud and praise, nor in any wise allowed •^rJJ^jyj^^"- 
before God, but abominable and detestable, and ^"^^"'^g/. 
thereof may well be verified the saying of Christ, ^"s- 
*' Xhat thing which seemeth an high thing be- 
fore men, is abomination before God *." 

They therefore which gather of the doctors, 
that the mass is a sacrifice for remission of sin, 
and that it is applied by the priest to them for 
whom he saith or singeth ; they which so gather 
of the doctors, do to them most grievous injury 
and wrong, most falsely belying them. 

For these monstrous things were never se^n chap. 
nor known of the old and primitive church, nor 1, 

There wero 

there were not then in one church many masses no Papisti- 

' Luke Avi. 


h* tiir Hmi- Gvery day, but upon certain days there was a 
tive church, commou table of the Lord's Supper, where a 
number of people did together receive the body 
and blood of the Lord : but there were then no 
daily private masses, where every priest received 
alone, like as until this day there is none in the 
Greek churches but one common mass in a day. 
Nor the holy fathers of the old church would not 
have suffered such ungodly and wicked abuses 
of the Lord's Supper. 

But these private masses sprang up of late 
years partly through the ignorance and supersti- 
tion of unlearned monks and friars, which knew 
not what a sacrifice was, but made of the mass a 
sacrifice propitiatory, to remit both sin and the 
pain due for the same ; but chiefly they sprang 
of lucre and gain, when priests found the means 
to sell masses to the people, which caused masses 
so much to increase, that every day was said an 
infinite number, and that no priest would receive 
the communion at another priest's hand, but 
every one would receive it alone ; neither re- 
garding the godly decree of the most famous and 
holy council of Nice", which appointeth in what 
order priests should be placed above deacons at 
the communion ; nor yet the canons of the apos- 
tles % which command that when any commu- 

" Concilium Nicenum, cap. 14. 
' Canones Apostolorum, cap. 8, 


nion is ministered, all the priests together should 
receive the same, or else be excommunicated. 
So much the old fathers misliked, that any priest 
should receive the sacrament alone. 

Therefore when the old fathers called the mass, 
or supper of the Lord, a sacrifice, they meant 
that it was a sacrifice of lauds and thanksgiving, 
(and so as well the people as the priest do sacri- 
fice,) or else that it was a remembrance of the 
very true sacrifice propitiatory of Christ: but 
they meant in no wise that it is a very true sacri- 
fice for sin, and applicable by the priest to the 
quick and dead. 

For the priest may well minister Christ's 
words and sacraments to all men both good and 
bad, but he can apply the benefit of Christ's 
passion to no man of age and discretion, but 
only to such as by their own faith do apply the 
same unto themselves. So that every man of 
age and discretion taketh to himself the benefits 
of Christ, or refuseth them himself, by his own 
faith, quick or dead ; that is to say, by his true 
and lively faith, that worketh by charity, he re- 
ceiveth them, or else by his ungodliness or 
feigned faith rejecteth them. 

And this doctrine of the Scripture clearly con- 
demneth the wicked inventions of the Papists in 
these latter days, which have devised a purga- 
tory to torment souls after this life, and oblations 
of masses said by the priests to deliver them . 





from the said torments; and a great number of 
other commodities do they promise to the sim- 
ple ignorant people by their masses. 

Now the nature of man being ever prone to 
idolatry from the beginning of the world, and 

The causes •> -n • • 

hot pTTs Papists bemg ready by all means and policy 

ticai masses to defcud aud cxtol thc mass for their estima- 

entered into v^iji-ixiiti, 

the church, tion and profit; and the people being superstiti- 
ously enamoured and doted upon the mass, be- 
cause they take it for a present remedy against 
all manner of evils ; and part of the princes being 
blinded by Papistical doctrine, part loving quiet- 
ness, and loth to offend their clergy and sub- 
jects, and all being captive and subject to the 
Antichrist of Rome; the state of the world re- 
maining in this case, it is no wonder that abuses 
grew and increased in the church, that super- 
stition with idolatry were taken for godliness 
and true religion, and that many things were 
brought in without the authority of Christ: 
J/1L'pS-As purgatory, the oblation and sacrificing of 
ucai masses. Qj^j.j^^ by tlic priest alone, the application and 
appointing of the same to such persons as the 
priest would sing or say mass for, and to such 
abuses as they could devise, to deliver some from 
purgatory, and some from hell, if they were not 
there finally by God determined to abide, as 
they termed the matter; to make rain or fair 
weather, to put away the plague and other sick- 
nesses both from man and beast, to hallow and 



preserve them that went to Jerusalem, to Rome, 
to St. James in Compostella, and to other places 
in pilgrimage ; for a preservative against tempest 
and thunder, against perils and dangers of the sea ; 
for a remedy against murrain of cattle, against 
pensiveness of the heart, and against all manner 
of affliction and tribulation. 

And, finally, they extol their masses far above 
Christ's passion ; promising many things there- 
by, which were never promised us by Christ's 
passion : As that if a man hear mass, he shall 
lack no bodily sustenance that day, nor nothing 
necessary for him, nor shall be letted in his jour- 
ney ; he shall not lose his sight that day, nor die 
no sudden death ; he shall not wax old in the 
time that he heareth mass, nor no wicked spirits 
shall have power of him, be he never so wicked 
a man, so long as he looketh upon the sacrament. 
All these foolish and devilish superstitions the 
Papists of their own idle brain have devised of 
late years, which devices were never known in 
the old church. 

And yet they cry out against them that pro- chap. 
fess the Gospel, and say that they dissent from ^^".^' 
the church, and would have them to follow thedmlxi'isto 
example of their church. And so would they 
gladly do, if the Papists would follow the first 
church of the apostles, which was most pure and 
incorrupt ; but the Papists have clearly varied 
from the usage and example of that church, and - 


have invented new devices of their own brains, 
and will in no wise content to follow the primi- 
tive church ; and yet they would have other to 
follow their church, utterly varying and dissent- 
ing from the first most godly church. 

But thanks be to the Eternal God, the manner 
of the holy communion, which is now set forth 
within this realm^ is agreeable with the institu- 
tion of Christ, with St. Paul and the old pri- 
mitive and apostolick church, with the right 
faith of the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross for 
our redemption, and with the true doctrine of 
our salvation, justification, and remission of all 
our sins by that only sacrifice. 

A short in- Now rcstcth uothiug but that all faithful sub- 
struction to ^ , 
theboiy jects will 2'ladlv receive and embrace the same, 

being sorry for their former ignorance ; and every 
man repenting himself of his off'ences against 
God, and amending the same, may yield himself 
wholly to God, to serve and obey Him all the 
days of his life, and often to come to the holy 
supper, which our Lord and Saviour Christ hath 
prepared ; and as he there corporally eateth the 
very bread, and drinketh the very wine ; so spi- 
ritually he may feed of the very flesh and blood 
of Jesu Christ his Saviour and Redeemer, re- 
membering his death, thanking him for his bene- 
fits, and looking for none other sacrifice at no 
priest's hands for remission of his sins, but only 
trusting to his sacrifice, which being both the 




high priest, and also the Lamb of God, prepared 
from the beginning to take away the sins of the 
world, offered up himself once for ever in a sa- 
crifice of sweet smell unto his Father, and by 
the same paid the ransom for the sins of the 
whole world; who is before us entered into 
heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of his Fa- 
ther, as patron, mediator, and intercessor for us ; 
and there hath prepared places for all them 
that be lively members of his body, to reign 
with him for ever, in the glory of his Father ; to 
Whom with Him, and the Holy Ghost, be glory, 
honour, and praise, for ever and ever. Amen. 


No. I. 

From bishop Ridley's Replies in the Dispttfation with 
the Papists, held at Cambridge, June 20, 1549. First 
printed in Fox's Acts and Monuments,- reprinted in 
1 688 by Dr. Gilbert Ironside, as some assert ,- by the 
learned and reverend Henry lVharfo?i, according to 

I GRANT that the old ancient fathers do record, and wit- 
ness, a certain honour and adoration to be due unto 
Christ's body ; but they speak not of it in the sacrament, 
but of it in heaven, at the right hand of the Father ; as 
holy Chrysostome saith, Hotwur thou it, and then eat it. 
But that honour may not be given to the outward sign, 
but to the body of Christ itself in heaven. For that body 
is » there only in a sign virtually, by grace, in the exhi- 
bition of it in spirit, effect, and faith, to the worthy 
receiver of it. For we receive, virtually only, Christ's 
body in the sacrament. 

Also I grant, that there is a mutation of the common 
bread and wine spiritually into the Lord's bread and wine, 
by the sanctifying of them in the Lord's word. But I 
deny that there is any mutation of the substances ; for 
there is no change either of the substances, or of 
the accidents ; but in very deed there do come unto the 

. ill I lie Snorainciit. 



bread other accidents, insomuch that whereas the bread 
and wine were not sanctified before, nor holy, yet after- 
wards they are sanctified, and so do receive then another 
sort or kind of virtue which they had not before. 

Christ dwelleth in us by faith, and by faith we receive 
Christ both God and man, both in spirit and flesh ; that 
is, this sacramental eating is the mean, and way, whereby 
we attain to the spiritual eating ; and indeed for the 
strengthening of us to the eating of this spiritual food 
was this sacrament ordained. And these words. This is 
my body, are meant thus : by grace it is my true body, 
but not my fleshly body, as some of you suppose. — '' The 
circumstances of the Scripture, the analogy and propor- 
tion of the sacraments, and the testimony of the faith- 
ful Fathers, ought to rule us in taking the meaning of 
the Holy Scripture touching the sacrament [of the Lord's 
Supper.] But the words of the Lord's Supper, the 
circumstances of the Scripture, the analogy of the sa- 
craments, and the sayings of the Fathers, do most effec- 
tually and plainly prove a figurative speech in the words 
of the Lord's Supper. Therefore, a figurative sense 
and meaning is specially to be received in these words. 
This is my body. 

The circumstances of the Scripture : Do this in re- 
membrance of me. As oft as ye shall eat of this breads 
and drink of this cup, ye shall shew forth the Lord's 
death. Let a man prove himself, and so eat of this 
bread and drink of this cup. They came together to 
break bread ; and they continued in breaking of bread* 
The bread which we break, %c. For we, being many, 
are all one bread and one body, %c, 

^ From the bishop's Answers to the Propositions of the Papists, ia 
the Disputation at Oxford, in April, 1534. First printed in Fox's Acts 
and Monuments i reprinted in 168S. 


The analogy of the sacraments is necessary ; for if the 
sacraments had not some similitude or likeness of the 
things whereof they be sacraments, they could in no wise 
be sacraments. And this similitude, in the sacrament of 
the Lord's Supper, is taken three manner of ways. The 
first consisteth in nourishing ; as you shall read in Raba- 
mis, Cyprian, Austin, Irenceus, and most plainly in Isi- 
dore out of Bertram, The second, in the uniting and 
joining of many into one, as Cyprian teacheth. The 
third is a similitude of unlike things ; where, like as the 
bread is turned into one body, so we by the right use of 
this sacrament are turned, through faith, into the body 
of Christ. 

The sayings of the Fathers declare it to be a figurative 
speech ; as it appeareth in Origen, TertulUan, Chrysos- 
tome in opere imperfecto, Augustine, Basil, Gregory 
Na%ian%en, Hilary, and most plainly of all, in Bertram. 
Moreover the sayings and places of all the fathers, whose 
names I have *= before recited against the assertion of the 
first proposition, do quite overthrow TransuMstantiation. 
But of all, most evidently and plainly, Irenceus, Origen, 
Cyprian, Chrysostome to Caesarius the monk, Augustine 
against Adamantius, Gelasius, Cyril, Epiphanius, Chry- 
sostome again on the 20th of Matthew, Rabanus, Da- 
mascene, and Bertram. — Finally, with Bertram, I con- 
fess that Christ's body is in the sacrament in this respect ; 
namely, as he writeth : because there is in it the spirit of 
Christ ; that is, the power of the Word of God, which 

« Namely, against the assertion, that in the sacrament of the altar, 
by the virtue of God's Word spoken of the priest, the natural body of 
Christ, born of the Virgin Mary, and his natural blood, is really pre- 
sent under the forms of bread and wine. Against this assertion, the 
fathers, whom Ridley adduces, besides those named in the preceding 
and subsequent sentences above, are, Justin, Irenceus, Eusebius Emis- 
sen us, Athanasius, Jerome, Vigilius, and Fulyentius, 



not only feedeth the soul, but also cleanseth it. — I sup- 
pose it may [now] appear unto all men how far we are 
from that opinion, whereof some go about falsely to 
slander us to the world, saying, we teach that the godly 
and faithful should receive nothing else at the Lord's 
Table but a figure of the body of Christ. 

'' I answer also to this proposition, [that in the mass 


OF THE DEAD,] that being taken in such sense as the 
words seem to import, it is not only erroneous, but withal 
so much to the derogation and defacing of the death and 
passion of Christ, that I judge it may and ought most 
worthily to be counted wicked and blasphemous against 
the most precious blood of our Saviour Christ. 


No sacrifice ought to be done, but where the priest is 
meet to offer the same. 

All other ^priests are unmeet to offer sacrifice propi- 
tiatory for si^i, save only Christ. 

Therefore, no other priests ought to sacrifice for sin, 
but Christ alone. 

The second part of my argument is thus proved. 

No honour in God's Church ought to be taken, where- 
imto a man is not called as Aaron. 

It is a great honour in God's Church to sacrifice for 

Therefore, no man ought to sacrifice for sin, but only 
they which are called. 

But only Christ is called to that honour. 

Therefore, no other priest but Christ ought to sacri- 
fice for mi. 

•' From tltc bishop's Answers, &c. as b< loit' 

AiM'ENDlX. 261 

That no man is called to this degree of honour but 
Christ alone, it is evident ; for there are but two only 
orders of priesthood allowed in the Word of God; 
namely, the order of Aaron and the order of Melchise- 
dech. But now the order of Aaron is come to an end, 
by reason that it was unprofitable and weak ; and of the 
order of Melchisedech there is but one priest alone, even 
Christ the Lord, who hath a priesthood that cannot pass 
to any other. 


That thing is vain, and to no effect, where no necessity 
is wherefore it is done. 

To offer up any more sacrifice propiatory for the quick 
and the dead there is no necessity ; for Christ our Sa- 
viour did that fully and perfectly, once for all. 

Therefore, to do the same in the mass, it is in vain. 


After that eternal redemption is found and obtained, 
there needeth no more daily offering for the same. 

But Christ, coming an high bishop, &c. found and ob- 
tained for us eternal redemption. 

Therefore, there needeth now no more daily oblation 
for the sins of the quick and the dead. 


All remission of sins cometh only by shedding of 

In the mass there is no shedding of blood. 

Therefore, in the mass there is no remission of sins ; 
and so it followeth also that there is no propitiatory sacri- 


In the mass the passion of Christ is not in verity, but 
in a mystery, representing the same; yea even there, 
where the Lord's Supper is duly ministered. 


But where Christ sufFereth not, there is he not offered ^ 
in verity : for the Apostle saith, Not that he might offer 
up himself oftentimes ; for then must he have suffered 
oftentimes since the beginning of the world. Now where 
Christ is not offered, there is no propitiatory sacrifice. 

Therefore, in the mass there is no propitiatory sacri- 
fice. For Christ appeared once in the latter end of the 
world, to put sin to flight by the offering up of himself. 
And as it is appointed to all men that they shall once die, 
and then cometh the judgment ; even so Christ was once 
offered to take away the sins of many. And unto them 
that look for him shall he appear again without sin tmto 


Where there is any sacrifice that can make the comers 
thereunto perfect, there ought men to cease from offer- 
ing any more expiatory and propitiatory sacrifices. 

But in the New Testament there is one only sacrifice 
now already long since offered, which is able to make the 
-comers thereunto perfect for ever. 

Therefore, in the New Testament they ought to cease 
from offering any more propitiatory sacrifice. 


By the ivhich will, saith the Apostle, we are sanctified 
by the offering up of the body of Jesus Christ, once for 
all. And in the same place. But this man, after that he 
had offered one sacrifice for sin, sitteth for ever at the 
right hand of God, Sfc. For with one offering hath he 
made perfect for ever them that are sanctified, and by 
himself hath he purged our sins. I beseech you to mark 


these words, hy himself; the which, well weighed, will, 
without doubt, cease all controversy. The Apostle 
plainly denieth any other sacrifice to remain for him that 
treadeth under his feet the blood of the Testament by 
the which he was made holy. Christ will not be crucified 
again ; he will not his death to be had in derision. He 
hath reco7iciled us in the body of his flesh. Mark, I be- 
seech you, he saith not in the mystery of his body, but 
in the body of his flesh. If any man sin, ive have an ad- 
vocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and 
lie is the propitiation for our sins ; not for ours only, but 
for the sins of the whole world. 

I know that all these places of the Scripture are 
avoided by two manner of subtil shifts. The one is by 
the distinction of the bloody and unbloody sacrifice ; as 
though our unbloody sacrifice of the Church were any 
other than the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, than 
a commemoration, a showing forth, and a sacramental 
representation of that one only bloody sacrifice offered 
up once for all. The other is by depraving and wresting 
the sayings of the ancient Fathers unto a strange kind of 
sense, as the Fathers themselves, indeed, never meant. 
For what the meaning of the Fathers was, is evident by 
that which St. Augustin writeth in his Epistle to Boni- 
face, and in the 83d chapter of his ninth book against 
Faustus, the Manichee ; besides many other places : 
likewise by Eusebius Emissene, Cyprian, Chrysostome, 
Fulgentius, Bertram, and others ; which do wholly con- 
cord and agree together in this vmity in the Lord ; that 
the redemption, once made in verity for the salvation of 
man, continueth in full effect for ever, and worketh with- 
out ceasing unto the end of the world ; that the sacrifice, 
once offered, cannnot be consumed; that the Lord's 
death and passion is as effectual, the virtue of that blood 


once shed, as fresh at this day for the washing away of 
sins, as it was even the same day that it flowed out of the 
side of our blessed Saviour ; and finally, that the whole 
substance of our sacrifice, which is frequented of the 
Church in the Lord's Supper, consisteth in prayers, 
praise, and giving of thanks, and in remembering and 
showing forth of that sacrifice once oflfered upon the 
altar of the cross ; that the same might continually be had 
in reverence by mystery, which once only, and no more, 
was offered for the price of our redemption. 


No. II. 

From bishop Hooper's Brief and Clear Confession of 
the Christian Faith, first j^rinted in 1 550, again in 
1581, and in 1584. 

I believe that the holy sacrament of the Supper Is a 
holy and outward ceremony, instituted by Jesus Christ in 
the Gospel, a day before his death, in the nature and 
substance of bread and wine, in remembrance and for a 
memorial of his death and passion, having and contain- 
ing in it a promise of the remission of sins. By this 
sacrament we are indeed made partakers of the body 
and blood of Jesus Christ, and are therewith nourished 
and fed in the house of the Lord, which is his Church, 
and after that into the same M'e are entered through 
Baptism. The same ought to be given and ministered 
unto all under both the kinds, according to the ordinance 
and commandment of Christ; for the altei'ing whereof 
none ought to be so hardy as to attempt any thing. 

I believe that in the holy sacrament these signs and 
badges are not changed in any point, but the same do 
remain wholly in their nature ; that is to say, the bread 
is not changed and transubstantiated (as the fond Papists 
and false doctors do teach, deceiving the poor,) into the 
body of Jesus Christ, neither the wine transubstantiated 
into his blood ; but the bread remaineth still bread, and 
the wine remaineth still wine, every one in its proper and 
first nature. For the words that Christ spake to his dis- 
ciples in giving them the bread, saying, This is my body, 
I understand and believe to be spoken by a figurative 


manner of speech, called metonymia, which is a manner 
of speaking very common in the Scriptures ; as the same 
was understood and also declared by the writing of the 
holy fathers and doctors of the Church, Irenceus, Cy- 
prian, Tertullian, Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostome, 
and other like, who lived before the Council of Lateran ; 
when it was concluded that the bread was transubstan- 
tiated into the body of Christ, and the wine into his 
blood ; and then was it given forth as an article of faith, 
to the great dishonour of God, and to the great slander 
of all the Church. 

I believe that all this sacrament consisteth in the use 
thereof; so that without the right use the bread and 
wine in nothing differ from other common bread and wine 
that are commonly used ; and therefore do not believe 
that the body of Christ can be contained, hid, or en- 
closed, in the bread, under the bread, or with the 
bread ; neither the blood in the wine, under the wine, or 
with the wine. But I believe and confess the very body 
of Christ to be in heaven, on the right hand of the Fa- 
ther ; and that always and as often as we use this bread 
and wine, according to the ordinance and institution of 
Christ, we do verily and indeed receive his body and 

I believe that this receiving is not done carnally or 
bodily, but spiritually, through a true and lively faith ; 
this is to say, the body and blood of Christ are not given 
to the mouth and belly for the nourishing of the body, 
but imto our faith for the nourishing of the spirit, and 
inward man, unto eternal life. And for that cause we 
have no need that Christ should come from heaven to us, 
but that we should ascend unto him, lifting up our hearts 
through a lively faith on high unto the right hand of the 
Father, where Christ sitteth, from whence we wait for 


our redemption ; and we must not seek for Christ in these 
bodily elements. 

I believe that Jesus Christ, by the sacrifice of his body 
which he offered upon the tree of the cross, hath de- 
faced and destroyed sin, death, and the devil, with all his 
kingdom ; and hath wholly performed the work of our 
salvation ; and hath abolished and made an end of all 
other sacrifices. So that from thenceforth there is none 
other propitiatory sacrifice, either for the living or the 
dead, to be looked for, or sought for, than the same. 
For by this one only oblation hath he consecrated for ever 
all those that are sanctified. 

I believe that the Holy Supper of the Lord is not a 
sacrifice, but only a remembrance and commemoration of 
this holy sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Therefore, it ought 
not to be worshipped as God, neither as Christ therein 
contained, who must be worshipped in faith only, without 
all corruptible elements. 

Likewise, I believe and confess that the Popish mass 
is the invention and ordinance of man, a sacrifice of anti- 
christ, and a forsaking of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, 
that is to say, of his death and passion ; and that it is a 
foul and infected sepulchre, which hidetli and covereth 
the merit of the blood of Christ ; and therefore ought 
the mass to be abolished, and the Holy Supper of the 
Lord to be restored and set in its perfection again. 


No. III. 

From bishop Jeremy Taylor's Dlssaasivc from Popery, 
chap. 2. sect. 12. 

If their [the Papists'] doctrines, as they are expK- 
cated by their practice and the commentaries of their 
greatest doctors, do make their disciples guilty of 
IDOLATRY ; there is not any thing greater to deter men 
from them, than that danger to their souls, which is 
imminent over them, upon that account. 

Their worshipping of images we have already re- 
proved upon the account of its novelty, and innovation, 
in Christian religion. But that it is against good life ; a 
direct breach of the second commandment; an act of 
idolatry, as much as the heathens themselves were 
guilty of, in relation to the second commandment ; is but 
too evident by the doctrines of their own leaders. 

The same also is the case in their worshipping the 
CONSECRATED BREAD AND WINE. Of wliich how far they 
will be excused before God by their ignorant pretensions 
and suppositions, we know not ; but they hope to save 
themselves harmless by saying, that they believe the 
BREAD TO BE THEIR Saviour, and that if they did not 
believe so, they would not do so. We believe that they 
say true ; but we are afraid that this will no more excuse 
them, than it will excuse those who worship the sun, 
and moon, and the queen of heaven, whom they would 


not worship, if they did not beUeve to have divinity in 
them. And it may be observed, that they are very fond 
of that persuasion, by which they are led into this wor- 
ship. The error might be some excuse, if it were pro- 
bable, or if there were much temptation to it ; but when 
they choose this persuasion, and have nothing for it but 
a tropical expression of Scripture, which rather than not 
believe in the natural, useless, and impossible sense, they 
will defy all their own reason, and four of the five ope- 
rations of their soul, seeing, smelling, tasting, and feel- 
ing ; and contradict the plain doctrine of the ancient 
Church, before they can consent to believe this error, 


MAKE HIS Maker; — we have too much cause to fear, 
that the error is too gross to admit an excuse. And it 
is hard to suppose it invincible and involuntary, because 
it is so hard, and so vmtempting, and so unnatural, to 
admit the error. We do desire that God may find an 
excuse for it, and that they would not. But this we are 
most sure of, that they might, if they pleased, find many 
excuses, or rather just causes, for not giving divine ho- 
nour to the consecrated elements ; because there are so 
many contingencies in the whole conduct of this affair, 
and we are so uncertain of the priest's intention, and we 
can never be made certain, that there is not in the whole 
order of causes any invalidity in the consecration ; and it 
is so impossible that any man should be sure that here^ 
and now, and this bread is transubstantiated, and is really 
the natural body of Christ ; that it were fit to omit the 
giving God's due to that which they do not know to be 
any thing but a piece of bread ; and it cannot consist 
with holiness, and our duty to Cod, certainly to give 


divine worship to that thing, which, though their doc- 
trine were true, they cannot know certainly to have a 
divine being. 

'"We hope it may be sufficient to say, that what the 
Church of Rome teaches of Transubstantiation, is 
absolutely impossible, and implies contradictions 


body being in heaven, glorious, spiritual, and impassible, 
cannot be broken. And since, by the Roman doctrine, 
nothing is broken but that which cannot be broken, that 
is, the colour, the taste, and other accidents of the ele- 
ments ; yet if they could be broken, since the accidents 
of bread and wine are not the substance of Christ's 
body and blood, it is certain that on the altar Christ's 
body naturally, and properly, cannot be broken. And 
since they say that every consecrated wafer is Christ's 
whole body, and yet this wafer is not that wafer ; there- 
fore either this, or that, is not Christ's body ; or else 
Christ hath two bodies, for there are two wafers. But 
when Christ instituted the sacrament, and said, This is 
my body which is broken ; because at that time Christ's 
body was not broken naturally and properly, the very 
words of institution do force us to understand the sacra- 
ment in a sense not natural^ but spiritual, that is, truly 
sacramental. And all this is besides the plain demon- 
strations of sense, which tells us it is bread and it is 
wine naturally as much after as before consecration. And 
after all, the natural sense is such as our Blessed Saviour 
reproved in the men of Capernaum, and called them to a 
spiritual understanding; the natural sense being not 

* From the Dissuasive, chap. i. sect, 5. 


only unreasonable and impossible, but also to no purpose 
of the spirit, or any ways perfective of the soul ; as 
hath been clearly demonstrated by many learned men 
against the fond hypothesis of the Church of Rome in 
this article. 



PRINTED BY K. G 1 L B !■ K T, 

ST. john's-square. 

Princeton Theological Semmary-Speef 

1 1012 01082 2288