A playne demonstration of Iohn Frithes lacke of witte and learnynge in his vnderstandynge of holie scripture and of the olde holy doctours, in the blessed sacrament of the aulter, newly set foorthe by Iohn Gwynneth clerke.

Cap. 39.

HERE.

Sir, Saint Austen maketh no suche di∣stinction or difference betwene reall and spiritual eatyng, nor betwene generall and speciall eating as ye speake of.

CATH.

Why saiest thou so? for, although he doth it not, euen in those maner of woordes, with suche conference of both together as thou woldest haue yet he doth it in deede for all that. as it doth right well appere vpon the syxt of Saint Iohn, Tracta. 27. where his woordes be these.

Hoc totum quod dominus de carne & de sanguine suo loquutus est. Et quod in eius distributionis gra∣tia vitam nobis promisit aeternam. Et quod hinc vol∣uit intelligi manducatores carnis & sanguinis sui vt in illo maneant, & ipse in illis. Et quod non intellex∣erunt, qui non crediderunt. Et quod spiritualia car∣naliter sapiendo, scandalizati sunt. Et quod eis scan∣dalizatis, & pereuntibus, consolatio domini affuit discipulis qui remanserant, ad quos probandos inter∣rogauit, Nunquid & vos vultis ire, vt responsio per∣māsionis eorum innotseceret & nobis, nam & ille no∣uerat qui manebant. Hocergo totum, ad hoc nobis valet DILECTISSIMI, vt carnem Christi & sanguinem Christi, non edamus tantum in sacramen∣to, quod & multi mali, sed vs{que} ad spiritus perticipa∣tionem

manducemus & bibamus. Vt in domini cor∣pore tanquam membra maneamus, vt eius spiritu ve∣getemur, & non scandalizemur, etiamsi multi modo nobiscum manducant & bibunt temporaliter sacra∣menta, qui habebunt in fine aeterna tormenta.

That is to say.

All this that our lorde spake, of his fleshe and his blood, And that in the grace of distribucion therof, he promised vnto vs lyfe euerlastynge, and that therof he wolde to be vnderstande, that the eaters and drinkers of his fleshe and blood, should abyde in him and he in them, And that they did not vnderstande, whiche did not beleue, And that they were offended, by vnderstandynge spirituall thinges carnally, And that they beyng offended and perylshynge, the comforte of our lorde was present to the disciples which did abide, vnto the probacion of whom he asked, wil you go away, that the answere of their abiding might be also knowen to vs, for he knew them whiche did abide. All this therefore, most deerely beloued, auayleth vnto vs for this purpose, that we shoulde not eate the fleshe of Christe and the blood of Christe onely in the sacramente (whiche many doth that be nought) but that we shoulde eate and drynke it, vnto the part taking of the spirite, that wee shoulde abyde as membres in the body of our Lorde, that we might be quickned with his spirite, And that we should not be offended, although many now, dooth eate and drynke the sacramentes with vs temporally, whiche shall haue in thende tormentes eternall.

Now what canst thou wishe more plainely spoken, for the reall eatynge and drynkynge of Christes most precious fleshe and blood in the holy sacramente, then when he sayth (as here thou seest) we eate it not onely in the sacrament? that same not onely in the sacramente, dooth moste cleerely declare it to be therin euen verely eaten. for he wolde not haue said,

not onely in the sacrament, but not in the sacrament. For not in the sacrament, and not onely in the sacrament, are two thinges. Not in the sacrament, denyeth it to bee eaten therein, but not onely in the sacrament, confesseth it to bee eaten therein, and also other wise to. Wherefore this very reall eatinge of Christes blessed flesh and blood in the holy sacrament, must nedes be common and generall, when (as here S. Austen saith) many doth it, which be nought, whose eating therof, thou maiest well know commeth not to the perticipacion or partaking of the spirite that quickneth, when those be they, that abyde not in Christe, nor Christe in them.

And therefore the participacion or partakynge of the spirite therin, is and must needes be, the spirituall ea∣tynge, whiche is not generall, but speciall and proper onely to those, that abyde in Christ, and Christ in them. as the noughty and euill sorte dooth not. And yet they in the sacrament (as Saint Austen doth here plainly say) do eate his fleshe, and that must nedes be really, because it is to playne, that it can not be spiritually. Wherfore, here thou hast now of Saint Austen plainely expressed, and distinctlie touched, both the very reall eating, which is common to good and had, and also the spirituall ea∣tyng, whiche perteyneth to none, but onely to them that be good.

HERE.

Yet this place of Saint Austen, al∣though ye make the most of it that ye can, neuerthelesse it doth not so well satisfie me, as you thinke.

CAT.

In that thou shewest of what sorte thou arte, And therfore here him in an other place, where his woordes be these.* 1.1

Illud etiam quod ait. Qui manducat carnem meam & bibit sanguinem meum in me manet & ego in illo,

Quomodo intellecturi sumus? Nunquid etiam illos hic poterimus accipere, de quibus dicit Apostolus, quod iudicium sibi manducent & bibant, cum ipsam carnem manducent & ipsum sanguinem bibant?

Nunquid & Iudas magistri venditor & traditor ipsi∣us, quamuis primum ipsum manibus eius confectum Sacramentum carnis & sanguinis eius cum caeteris discipulis, sicut apertius LVCAS EVANGELIS∣TA declarat, manducaret & biberet, mansit in Chri∣sto, aut Christus in eo? Multi denique qui vel cor∣de ficto carnem illam manducant & sanguinem bi∣bunt, vel cum manducauerint & biberint Apostatae fiunt, nunquid manent in Christo, aut Christus in eis? Sed profecto est quidam modus manducandi illam carnem & bibendi illum sanguinem: quo modo, qui manducauerit & biberit, in Christo manet & Christus in eo. Non ergo quocunque modo quis∣quam manducauerit carnem Christi & biberit sangui∣nem Christi, manet in Christo, & in illo Christus. Sed certo quodam modo, quem modum vtique ipse vi∣debat, quādo ista dicebat.

which may thus be englished.

How shall we vnderstande this whiche he saith, he that eateth my fleshe, and drinketh my blood, bydeth in me, & I in him? may we take those to be vnderstande here, of whom thapostle doth say, that thei eate & drinke their own damnacion, when they eate the same fleshe, and drinke the same blood? Also did Iudas the wicked traytour and sel∣ler of his maister, although he did (as Luke the Euange∣lyste dooth apertlie declare) eate and drynke with the other disciples the same sacrament of his fleshe and blood when it was first made in his owne hands, abide in christ and christe in him? farthermore, there be many, that euen with a feigned hart, do eate that fleshe and drinke that blood, or when they haue eate and drinke it, forsake

ther fayth, abyde they in Christe, and Christe in them? but in very deede ther is a certayne maner of eatyng that fleshe and drynkynge that blood, whereby, he that eateth it and drynketh it, abydeth in Chryste and Christe in him. Therfore not in what so euer maner, anye man eateth the fleshe of Christe, and drinketh the blood of Christe, a∣bideth in christe, and christe in him. But in a certaine ma∣ner which maner he saw, when he spake these woordes.

If thou be not here now euen thorowly satisfyed, both as touching the certeintee and also the difference, of these two eatings and drinkings of Christs most blessed fleshe and blood, that is to say, both of the reall eating, and also of the spirituall eating of it, it is not Saint Austen, nor all the other holy fathers besyde, that therein can satisfy the. For no man can more plainly expresse them, then he doth here distinctly deuyde and show them.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Sermo .1••. de verbis domini