To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
WHen the Paschall Lamb was eaten, and the Disciples* 1.2 feete washed, Christ by taking bread into his hands declared him self to be disposed, to vse it for some one purpose or other: by blessing, and thanksgeuing ouer it, we are
informed he wold make some diuine mysterie of that bread. And when he began to make the mysterie, saying (this is) and ended it, adding thereto (my body) we lern by the two first words (this* 1.3 is) that his mysterie consisteth not of bread and of his body, but of one substance only, which was declared to be so really inten∣ded as well in his mind, as at his tongs end, that hauing once named what it was, to wit (my body) no mā aliue might doubt, but either he both in word and dede made a false signification, (which is with all true Catholikes a thing without al possibili∣tie) or els that it was in dede so, as his words of blessing, and of saying, This is my body, witnessed.
And for asmuch as his word affirmed this to be his body, and his dede of taking bread, and of blessing shewed his words to be* 1.4 directed vnto y• which was in his hand, or lay before him (which was bread before) it must nedes be, that the pronoun (this) so shewed to his Apostles ye thing already subiect vnto their eyes, that much more it serued to teache their vnderstanding verily, this, which appeared to them bread, to be in substance, at the en∣ding of the words, his own body.
Therefore we teache the pronoun (this) to serue both to the* 1.5 eyes and to the vnderstanding of the Apostles. to their eyes, in pointing to the foorm of bread which they saw: to their vnder∣standing, in teaching that substance which was present vnder that they saw, to be his own body streight when it was so na∣med. And in so much as the same forme of bread tarieth after cō∣secration which was there before, the pronoun (this) doth all∣wayes direct their eyes to one and the same forme of wheaten bread, which was there when Christ tooke it first. and also it in∣sinuateth to their vnderstanding, that they must looke (by the nonn that foloweth the verb) to know what proprietie or sub∣stance that visible thing hath. And seing the noun which cometh
after, is not the name of a q•…•…alitie or proprietie, but the name of a substance, and of such a substance as before was not present: Without all question, these words (This is my body) haue accor∣ding* 1.6 to the proper custom of speache, this meaning: The sub∣stance which is conteyned vnder this forme of bread, and vnder the accidents the which I shew you, is the substance of my body. Whereof it foloweth, that the same thing is no longer the sub∣stance of bread, and consequently therevnto, that the substance of the bread is, by the word of Christ, changed into the substance* 1.7 of his body. And likewise when Christ sayd: This is my blood, the sense is: The substance which is conteined vnter the forme of wine (which you sensibly perceaue to be in this cuppe) is my blood, or is the substance of my blood.
Which interpretation is so true, that Christ hath forced vs to* 1.8 seeke it out, in causing S. Luke, and S. Paule to write: This chalice is the new Testament in my blood. For of necessitie we must interpret these words, This chalice, that is to say, the thing conteined inthis chalice, is my blood. As therefore (This) in na ming the chalice doth serue to shew the place & compasse, with∣in which I must looke for that substance, which afterward is de∣fined to be the blood of Christ: euen so (this) being spoken of the bread which was taken into Christes hands, doth first point vnto the eye, within what circuit or quantitie the mind shal seke for that substance or proprietie, which afterward the mouth of Christ wil declare. and when the name is once heard, it sheweth it to be yt substance of Christes body. Out of which discourse we may gather two conclusions: The one, that (this) beginneth most naturally with the sense of man: The other, that it with the rest of yt speache informeth ye vnderstanding of more then the eye saw. To ye sense it sheweth y• outward formes, to ye vnderstā∣dīg it sheweth pr•…•…cipally ye inward substāce vnder those formes.
Now looke by how many degrees the inward substance doth* 1.9 passe the outward formes, and the end of the talk doth passe the beginning thereof: by so many the pronoun (this) rather ap∣perteyneth to the substantiue (body) wherein it endeth, then to the formes, within the which it goeth about to shew an invisible substance. Which being so, Hoc, (this) is in Latin of the neuter gender, because the noune substantiue (corpus) body, wherevn∣to it hasteneth) is of the neuter gender. And in the consecration of the blood Hic, (this) of certeintie is the masculine gender, be∣cause sanguis blood, whereto it belongeth, is of the masculine gender.
Thus the literall sense of Christes words is declared, which ought to be taken for true, vntill the contrarie be proued. But this propriety of words standing (as it ought to stand) marke that whensoeuer any Catholike sayth, The substance of Christes body and blood to be vnder the formes of bread and wine, he speaketh not any other thing, then the natural and proper signi∣fication of Christes words doth geue. For as he that pointing to that kind of beast (which an other cometh to learne) sayeth: This is an Oelephant, in effect sayth: The substance of an Oele∣phant is contemed vnder this visible forme: So Christ hauing taken bread, and saying, This is my body, sayeth in effect: the substance of my body is conteined vnder the forme of this bread.
Only this oddes is betwene Christes naming and ours, that* 1.10 we either must name the thing by his former substance or pro∣prietie, or els we make a lye: But Christ by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 one thing ye name of an other, geueth it also the substance thereof whensoe∣uer* 1.11 he speaketh, not in parables, but in the way of doing some good turn. for he being God, as easily calleth things which are not, as those which are. and by his calling he maketh them to be as he nameth them, and not as them selues were.
The ii•…•…. Chapiter.
Ioan. 13.
This, can be said but of one sub∣stance.
Christes words di∣rected to the bread.
The strēgth of the pro∣noun this.
The pr•…•…∣per sense of Chri∣stes wor∣des.
Transub∣stantiatiō.
1. Co. 11. Luc. 22.
hoc, this, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 the noune (body.)
Christes naming to making.
Rom. 4.