Page 334
M. Hardinge. The .8. Diuision.
Nowe, whereas M. Iuel denieth, that Christen people were of olde time taught to beleeue, that Christes Bodie is Really, Substantially, Corporally, Carnally, or Naturally in the Sacrament, I dooe plainely affirme the contrary. Yet I acknowledge, that the learned Fathers (135)* 1.1 whiche haue so taught, woulde not thereby seeme to make it here outwardly sensible, or perceptible. For they confesse al with S. Chrysostome,* 1.2 that the thinge, whiche is here geuen vs, is not sensible, but that vnder visible signes, invisible thinges be deliuered vnto vs. But they thought good* 1.3 to vse the aforesaid termes, to put away al doubte of the beinge of his verie Bodie in these holy Mysteries, and to exclude the one∣ly imagination, phantasie, figure, signe, token, vertue, or signification thereof. For in suche wise the Sacramentaries haue vttered their Doctrine in this pointe, as they may seeme by their manner of speakinge, and writinge, here to represent our Lordes Bodie onely, in deede beinge absent, as Kinges oftentimes are represented in a Tragedie, or meane persons in a Comedie. Verily, the manner, and way, by whiche it is here present, and geuen to vs, and receiued of vs, is secrete, not humaine, ne natural: true for al that. And wee doo not atteine it by sense, reason, or nature, but by faithe. For whiche cause wee doo not ouer basely consider, and attende the visible elementes, but as wee are taught by the Councel of Nice,* 1.4 liftinge vp our minde and spirite,* 1.5 wee beholde by Faithe on that holy Table put, and laide (so for the better signification of the Real presence their terme soundeth) the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde. And here (say they) wee receiue his Pretious Bodie, and Bloud, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, verily, and in deede: whiche is no otherwise, nor lesse, then this terme, Really, importeth.