A defence of the true and catholike doctrine of the sacrament of the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ with a confutacion of sundry errors concernyng the same, grounded and stablished vpon Goddes holy woorde, [and] approued by ye consent of the moste auncient doctors of the Churche. Made by the moste reuerende father in God Thomas Archebyshop of Canterbury, primate of all Englande and Metropolitane.

The greatest reason and of most importance,* 1.1 and of suche strength (as they thynke) or at the least as they pretend,* 1.2 that all the worlde can not answere therto, is this: Our sauiour Christ, ta∣kyng the bread, brake it, and gaue it to his disci∣ples, saiyng: This is my body. Nowe (say they) assone as Christ had spoken these woordes, the bread was straight way altered and chaunged, and the substaunce thereof was conuerted into the substaunce of his precious body.

But what christian eares can paciently heare this doctryne, that Christe is euery day made a newe, and made of another substaunce, than he was made of in his mothers wombe▪ For where as at his incarnation, he was made of the na∣ture and substaunce of his blessed mother, nowe (by these Papistes opinion) he is made euery

day of the nature and substāce of bread & wyne, whiche (as they say) be turned into the substāce of his body and bloud. O what a meruailous Methamorphosis, and abhominable heresye is this? to say, that Christ is dayly made a newe, & of a newe matter? wherof it foloweth necessari∣ly, that they make vs euery day a newe Christ, and not the same that was borne of the virgyn Mary, nor that was crucifyed vpon the crosse, as it shall be plainly proued by these argumen∣tes folowyng.

Fyrst thus. If Christes body that was cruci∣fyed was not made of bread, but the body that was eaten in the supper was made of bread (as the Papistes say) than Christes body that was eaten, was not thesame that was crucified.

And againe: If Christes body that was cruci∣fied, was not made of bread, and Christes body that was crucified was thesame that was eaten at his last supper, than Christes body that was eaten was not made of bread.

And moreouer: If Christes body that was eaten at the last supper was the same that was crucifyed, and Christes body that was eaten at the supper was made of bread (as the Papistes fayne,) than Christes body that was crucifyed, was made of bread.

And in lyke maner it foloweth: If the body of Christ in the sacrament, bee made of the sub∣stāce of bread and wyne, and thesame body was conceiued in the virgyns wombe, than the body

of Christ in the virgyns wombe, was made of bread and wyne.

Or els turne the argument thus. The body of Christ in the virgyns wombe was not made of bread & wyne, but this body of Christ in the sacrament is made of bread and wyne, than this body of Christ is not the same that was concei∣ued in the virgyns wombe.

Another argument. Christ that was borne in the virgyns wombe, as concernyng his body, was made of none other substance, but of the substance of his blessed mother, but Christ in the sacrament is made of another substance, than he is another Christ.

And so the Antichrist of Rome, the chiefe au∣thor of all Idolatry, would bryng fayfthul chri∣sten people, frō the true worshippyng of Christ, that was made and borne of the blessed virgyn Mary, through the operacion of the holy ghost, and suffered for vs vpon the crosse, to worship another Christ made of bread & wyne, through the consecracion of a Popishe priest.

And thus the Popishe priestes make them selues the makers of God. For (say they) the priest by the woordes of consecracion maketh that thyng whiche is eaten and dronken in the Lordes supper, and that (say they) is Christ him selfe both God and man, and so they take vpon them to make both God and man.

But let all true worshippers worship one god, one Christ, ones corporally made, of one only

corporall substance, that is to say, of the blessed virgyn Mary, that ones dyed, and rose ones a∣gayne, ones ascended into heauen, and there sit∣teth and shall sit at the right had of his father euermore, although spiritually he be eueryday amongest vs, & whosoeuer come together in his name, he is in the myddes among them. And he is the spiritual pasture and foode of our soules, as meate and drynke is of our bodies, whiche he signifieth vnto vs by the institution of his most holy supper in bread and wyne, declaryng that as the bread and wyne corporally comforte and feede our bodyes, so doth he with his fleshe and bloud spiritually comfort and feede our soules.

* 1.3And nowe may be easyly answered the Papi∣stes argument, whereof they do so muche boast. For bragge they neuer so muche of the conuer∣sion of bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christ, yet that conuersion is spirituall, and putteth not awaye the corporall presence of the material bread and wyne. But for asmuche as the same is a moste holy sacrament of our spiri∣tual norishement, (whiche we haue by the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ) there must ne∣des remayne the sensible element, that is to say, bread and wyne, without the whiche there can be no sacrament.

As in our spiritual regeneration there can be no sacrament of baptisme, if there be no water. For as Baptisme is no perfect sacrament of spi∣ritual regeneration, without there be aswell the

element of water, as the holy ghoste, spiritually regenerating the person that is baptised (which is signified by the saide water) euen so the sou∣per of our Lorde can bee no perfecte sacramente of spirituall foode, except there be as well bread and wine, as the body and bloode of our sauiour Christ, spiritually feeding vs, which by the said breade and wine is signified.

And howe so euer the body and bloode of our sauiour Christ be ther presēt, thei may as wel be present ther with the substance of bread & wyne, as with the accidentes of the same, as the schole authors do confesse them selues, and it shall bee well proued yf the aduersaryes will denye it. Thus you se the strongest argumente of the Pa¦pistes answered vnto, and the chiefe foundacion whervpon they buylde their errour of transub∣stantiation, vtterlye subuerted and ouerthro∣wen.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Chap. 8.
• * 1.2

  The first reason of y^e Papistes to proue their tran∣substātia∣tion.

  Math. 26 Mar. 14. Luc. 22. The an¦swere.
• * 1.3

  The an∣swere more directly.