Actes and monuments of matters most speciall and memorable, happenyng in the Church. [vol. 2, part 1] with an vniuersall history of the same, wherein is set forth at large the whole race and course of the Church, from the primitiue age to these latter tymes of ours, with the bloudy times, horrible troubles, and great persecutions agaynst the true martyrs of Christ, sought and wrought as well by heathen emperours, as nowe lately practised by Romish prelates, especially in this realme of England and Scotland. Newly reuised and recognised, partly also augmented, and now the fourth time agayne published and recommended to the studious reader, by the author (through the helpe of Christ our Lord) Iohn Foxe, which desireth thee good reader to helpe him with thy prayer.

¶D. Smith beginneth to oppose.

SMith.

You haue occasioned me to go otherwise to worke with you, then I had thought to haue done. Me seemed you did in your supposition abuse the testimonies of scrip∣ture concerning the Ascension of Christ, to take away hys presence in the Sacrament, as though this were a strong Argument to inforce your matter withall:

* 1.1Christ did ascend vnto heauen.

Ergo, he is not in the Sacrament.

Now therefore I will go about to disproue this reason of yours.

Christes Ascension is no let to his reall presence in the Sacrament.

Ergo, you are deceiued, whereas you do grounde youre selfe vpon those places.

Rid.

You import as though I had made a strong Argu∣ment by Christes going vp into heauen. But howsoeuer mine Argument is made,* 1.2 you collect it not rightly. For it doth not only stay vpon his Ascension, but both vpon hys Ascension, and his * 1.3 abiding there also.

Smith.

Christes going vp to heauen, and his abiding there, hinder not his reall presence in the Sacrament.

Ergo, you are deceiued.

Rid.

Of Christes reall presence there may be a double vnder∣standing, if you take the reall presence of Christ according to the reall and corporal substance which he tooke of the virgine: that presence being in heauen, cā not be on the earth also. But if you meane a reall presence, secūdum rem aliquam quae ad cor∣pus Christi pertinet. i. according to some thing that apper∣taineth to Christes body, certes the Ascension and abiding in heauen are no let at all to that presence. Wherefore Chri∣stes body after that sort is heere present to vs in the Lords supper: by grace I say as Epiphanius speaketh it.

West.

I will cut off from hencefoorth all equiuocation and doubt. For whensoeuer we speake of Christes body, wee meane that which he tooke of the Uirgin.

Rid.

Christes Ascension and abiding in heauen can not stand with this presence.

Smith.

Christ appeared corporally and really on the earth for all his Ascension and continuall abode in heauen vn∣to the day of Dome.* 1.4

Ergo, his Ascension and abiding in heauen, is no let to his reall presence in the Sacrament.

Rid.

* 1.5Maister Doctour, this Argument is nothing worth I do not so straightly tye Christ vp in heauen, that he may not come into the earth at his pleasure. For when he will, he may come downe from heauen, and be on the earth, as it liketh himselfe. Howbeit I do affirme that it is not pos∣sible for him to be both in heauen and earth at one tyme.

Smith.

Marke I pray you my Maisters, diligently that be here, what he aunswereth. First he saith, that the sitting of Christ at the right hande of his father, is a let to the reall presence of his body in the Sacrament: and then afterward he flyeth from it agayne.

Rid.

I woulde not haue you thinke that I do imagine or dreame vpon any such maner of sitting, as these men heere sit in the Schoole.

Smith.

Ergo, it is lawfull for Christ then to be heere present on the earth, when he will himselfe.

Rid.

Yea when he will, it is lawfull indeede.

Smith.

Ergo, his ascending into heauen, doth not restrayne his reall presence in the Sacrament.

Rid.

I do not gaynesay, but that it is lawfull sor hym to appeare on the earth, when he wil: but proue you y^t he wil.* 1.6

Smith.

Then your aunswere dependeth vppon the will of Christ, I perceiue, Therfore I will ioyne agayn with you in this short argument.

Christ, albeit hee doth alway abide in heauen after hys ascension, was seene really and corporally on the earth. Ergo, not withstanding his Ascen••ion and continuall sit∣ting at the right hand of the father, hee may be really and corporally in the sacrament.

Ryd.

If the Notaries should so recorde your Argument, as you haue framed it, you peraduenture woulde be asha∣med thereof hereafter.

Smith.

Christ after his Ascention was seen really and cor∣porally vpon the earth.

Ergo, notwithstanding his Ascention and abiding with his father, he may be corporally in the Sacrament.

Ryd.

I graunt the antecedent: but I deny the consequent.

Smith.

Do you graunt the antecedent?

Rid

Yea I graunt the antecedent. I am content to let you haue so muche. Because I knowe that there be certayne auncient fathers of that opinion. I am well content to let you vse that proposition as true. And I will frame the ar∣gument for you.

He was seene on earth after his Ascension, Ergo &c.

Smith.

Nay, nay, I will frame it my selfe.

Christ after his Ascension was seene really and corpo∣rally on earth, albeit he do abide in heauen continually:

Ergo, notwithstanding his Ascension and continuall aby∣ding at the right hand of the father, he may be really and corporally on the earth.

Rid.

Let vs first agree about the continuall sitting at the right hand of the father.* 1.7

Smith.

Doth he so sit at the right hand of his father, that he doth neuer forsake the same?

Rid.

Nay I do not binde Christ in heauen so straitly. I see you go about to beguile me w^t your equiuocations. Such equinocatiōs are to be distincted. If you meane by his sit∣ting in heauen, to reigne with his father, hee may be both in heauen and also in earth. But if ye vnderstande his sit∣ting to be after a corporall manner of sitting, so is hee al∣wayes permanent in heauen.* 1.8 For Christ to be corporally here on earth, when corporally he is resident in heauen, is cleane contrary to the holy scriptures, as Augustine saith: Corpus Christi est in coelo, sed veritas eius vbi{que} diffusa est. i. The body of Christ is in heauen: but his truth is dispersed in euery place.

Now if continually he abide in heauen after the maner of his corporall presence, then his perpetual abiding there, stoppeth or letteth that the same corporall presence of hym cannot be in the sacrament.

Smith.

Act. 3. We read that Christ shal sit perpetually at the right hand of God, vnto the consummacion of the worlde.

West.

I perceaue you are come here to this issue, whether the bodye of Christ may be together both in earth and in heauen. I will tell you, that Christ in very deede, is both in earth and in heauen together and at one time, both one & the same naturall Christ after the veritie and substaunce of his very body, Ergo, &c.

Rid.

I deny the Antecedent.

West.

I proue it by 2. witnesses. First by Chrisost. hom. 17. ad Hebraeos. Nōnè per singulos dies offerim{us}? Offerimus quidē,* 1.9 sed recordationē facientes mortis eius. Et vna est haec hostia, nō multae. Et quomodo vna, & non multae quae semel oblata est in sancto sanctorum: Hoc autem sacrificium exemplar est illius: id ipsum semper offerimus, nec nunc quidem alium agnum, cra∣stina alium, sed semper eundem ipsum. Proinde vnum est hoc sacrificium: alioqui hac ratione, quoniam in multis locis offer∣tur, multi Christi sunt. Nequaquam, sed vnus vbi{que} est Christus: & hic plenus existens, & illic plenus, vnum Corpus, i. Do we not offer euery day? We do so in deede: but doing it for the remembraunce of his death. And this offering is one and not many. And howe is it one, and not many whiche was offred in the holy place? This sacrifice is a paterne of that: The self same we alwaies offer: Not now as offering one Lambe to day, and an other to morowe, but alwaies one & the same Lambe. Wherfore here is but one sacrifice: for els by this meanes, seeing there be many sacrifices in many places be there many Christes? not so, but one Christ in al places, both perfect here and perfect there, one onely bo∣dy. Now thus I argue.

We offer one thing at all times.* 1.10

There is one Christ in all places, both here compleet, and there complete:

Ergo, by Chrisostome there is one body both in heauen and earth.

Rid.

I remember the place well. These thinges make no∣thing against me.* 1.11

West.

One Christ is in all places, here full and there full.

Rid.

* 1.12One Christ is in all places, but not one bodye in all places.

West.

One body sayth Chrysostome.

Rid.

But not after the maner of bodely substance he is in all places, nor by circumscription of place. For [hic] & [illic] heere and there,* 1.13 in Chrysostome do assigne no place, as Augustine sayth: Sursum est dominus, sed vbi{que} est veritas do∣mini: The Lord is aboue: But the truth of the Lord is in all places.

Weston.

You can not so escape. He sayeth not the veritie of Christ is one: but one Christ is in all places, both heere and there.

Rid.

One sacrifice is in all places, because of the vnitie of him whome the sacrifice doth signifie: not that the sacrifices be all one and the same.* 1.14

West.

Ergo, by your saying it is not Christ, but the sacrifice of Christ.

But Chrysostome sayeth, one body & one Christ is there, and not one sacrifice.

Rid.

I saye that both Christ and the sacrifice of Christ is there: Christ by spirit, grace, and veritie: the sacrifice by si∣gnification. * 1.15 Thus I graunt with Chrysostome, that there is one Host or Sacrifice, and not many: and this our Host is called one by reason of the vnitie of that one, which one onely all our Hostes do represent. That only host was neuer other,* 1.16 but that which was once offered on the aultar of the crosse, of which host all our hostes are but sacramen∣tall examples.

And where you alledge out of Chrysostome, that Christ is offered in many places at once,* 1.17 both here ful Christ, and there full Christ: I graunt it to be true, that is: that Christ is offered in many places at once, in a mystery and sacra∣mentally, and that he is full Christ in all those places, but not after the corporall substance of our flesh which he toke, but after the benediction which geueth life: and he is geuen to the godly receiuers in bread and wine as Cyrill spea∣keth. Concerning the oblation of Christ, whereof Chryso∣stome heere speaketh, he himselfe doth clearely shew what he meaneth thereby, in saying by the way of correction: We alwayes do the selfesame: howbeit by the recordation or remem∣brance of his sacrifice.

West.

The second witnes is Bernard in a Sermon that he made of the Supper of the Lord, who sayth:

Vnde hoc nobis pijssime Iesu, vt nos vermiculi, reptantes su∣per faciem terrae nos inquam qui puluis & cinis sumus,* 1.18 te praesen∣tem habere mereamur prae manibus, prae oculis, qui totus & in∣teger sedes ad dextram patris, qui etiam vnius horae momento, ab ortu solis vsque ad occasum, ab Aquilone vsque ad Austrum, praesto es, vnus in multis, idem in diuersis locis? That is to say:

How commeth this to vs, most gentle Iesu, that wee seely woormes, creeping on the face of the earth, that we (I say) which are but dust and ashes, may deserue to haue thee present in our hands, and before our eyes, who both toge∣ther full and whole doest sit at the right hand of the father, and who also in the moment of one houre, from the rising of the Sunne, to the going downe of the same, art present one, and the selfesame in many and diuers places.

Rid.

These wordes of Bernarde make for you nothing at all. But I know that Bernard was in such a time, that in this matter he may worthely be suspected.* 1.19 He hath many good and fruitefull sayings: as also in that same foresayde place by you alledged. But yet he followed in such an age, when as the doctrine of the holy supper was sore peruer∣ted. Notwithstanding yet I will so expounde him, rather then reiect him, that he shall make nothing for you at all. He sayth that we haue Christ in mysterie,* 1.20 in a sacrament, vnder a veyle or couer, but hereafter shall haue him with∣out all veyle or couer. In the meane time, heere nowe hee sayth, that the verity of Christ is euery where. The verity of Christ is both heere and there, and in all places.

West.

What do you call verity? He sayeth not the verity of Christ, but the verity of the body of Christ.

Rid.

The verity of the body of Christ is the true faith of the body of Christ:* 1.21 after that verity he is with them whiche truly beleeue vpon him.

West.

Christ is one and the same in diuers places. I vrge these words [in diuersis locis] in diuers places, and yet I am not satisfyed.

Smyth.

Christ was seene really and corporally on the earth after his ascension, and continually sitting at the right hand of the Father.

Ergo, the ascension and perpetual sitting in heauen, hin∣der nothing, but that he may be really and corporally in the Sacrament.* 1.22

Rid.

If by perpetuall sitting, you meane the residence of his body in heauen, your reason conteineth manifest con∣tradiction.

Smith.

These two haue no contradiction in them at all, both to sit continually at his Fathers right hand, and also to be sene here really in earth after his ascension. First, you wil geue me that Christ sitteth in heauen at y^e right hand of his father. For so it is written. Act. 5. Heauen must needes re∣ceyue hym vnto the tyme of the restoring of all, &c. Secondly, he was also seene of Paule heere corporally on earth: Wherfore these two do import, as ye see, no contradiction.

Rid.

What setteth, but that Christ, if it please him, and when it pleaseth him, may be in heauen and in earth, and appeare to whome he will? and yet notwithstanding you haue not yet proued, that he will so do. And though Christ continually shall be resident in heauen vnto the iudge∣ment, yet there may be some intermission, that notwyth∣standing.* 1.23 But this controuersie (as I sayd) is amongst all the auncient Doctours and Writers. And that Christ hath bene heere seene, that they graunt all: but whether then he being in earth or in heauen, that is doubtfull.

Smith.

I will proue, that he would appeare in earth.

He so would, and also did appeare heere in earth after his ascension. Ergo, &c.

Rid.

He appeared, I graunt: but how he appeared,* 1.24 whe∣ther then being in heauen or in earth, that is vncertayne. So he appeared to Steuen, being then corporally sitting in heauen. For speaking after the true maner of mans bo∣dy, when he is in heauen, he is not the same time in earth: and when he is in earth, he is not the same time corporally in heauen.

Smith.

Christ hath bene both in heauen and in earth all at one time.

Ergo, you are deceiued in denying that.

Rid.

I do not vtterly deny Christ heere to haue bene seene in earth. Of vncertayne things I speake vncertaynely.

Smith.

He was seene of Paule, as being borne before hys time, after his ascending vp to heauen. 1. Cor. 15.* 1.25

But his vision was a corporall vision:

Ergo, he was seene corporally vpon the earth after hys ascending into heauen.

Rid.

He was seene really and corporally in deede: but whe∣ther being in heauen or earth, it is a doubt. And of doubt∣full things we must iudge doubtfully. Howbeit you must proue that he was in heauen in the same time, whē he was corporally on earth.

Smith.

I would know of you, whether this vision may in∣force the resurrection of Christ?

Rid.

I accompt this a sound and firme Argument to proue the resurrection. But whether they saw him in heauen or in earth, I am in doubt: and to say the truth,* 1.26 it maketh no greate matter. Both wayes the Argumente is of lyke strength. For whether he were seene in heauen, or whether he were seene on earth, either of both maketh sufficiently for the matter. Certaine it is, he rose againe: for he coulde not haue bene seene, vnlesse he had risen againe.

Smith.

Paule sawe hym as he was heere conuersaunt on earth, and not out of heauen as you affirme.

Rid.

You runne to the beginning agayne: that you take for graunted, which you should haue proued.

Smith.

You make delayes for the nonce.

Rid.

Say not so, I pray you. Those that heare vs, be lear∣ned: they can tell both what you oppose, and what I aun∣swere well enough, I warrant you.

Tresh.

He was seene after such sort, as y^t he might be heard.

Ergo, he was corporally on the earth, or else how could he be heard?* 1.27

Rid.

He that found the meanes for Steuen to beholde him in heauen, euen hee could bring to passe well enough,* 1.28 that Paule might heare him out of heauen.

Da- Smith. As other saw him, so Paule saw him.

ti- Other did see him visibly and corporally on earth:

si. Ergo, Paule saw him visibly and corporally on earth.* 1.29

Rid.

I graunt he was sene visibly and corporally: but yet haue you not proued that he was seene in earth.* 1.30

Smith.

He was seene so of him, as of other.

But he was seene of other being on earth, and appeared visibly to them on earth:

Ergo, he was seene of Paule on earth:

Rid.

Your controuersie is about [existens in terra] that is, being on earth: if Existere, to be, be referred as vnto y^• place, I deny that Christ after that sort was on the earth. But if it be referred as to the veritie of the body, then I graunt it. Moreouer, I say that Christ was seene of men in earth after his ascension, it is certayne. For he was sene of Ste∣uen: he was seene also of Paule. But whether he descen∣ded vnto the earth, or whether he being in heauen, did re∣uele or manifest himselfe to Paule, when Paule was rapt into the third heauen, I know that some contend about it: & the Scripture, as far as I haue read or heard, doth not determine it. Wherfore we cannot but iudge vncertainly of

those things which be vncertayne.

Smith.

* 1.31Wee haue Egesippus and Linus agaynste you, whiche testifie that Christe appeared corporally on the earth to Peter after hys Ascension. Lib. 3. cap. 3. Peter o∣uercome with the requestes and mournings of the people, whiche desired him to ge•• hym out of the Citie because of Nero his lying in waite for him, began without company to conuey hymselfe away from thence: and when he was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the gate, he seeth Christ come to meete him, and worshipping him, he sayd: Maister, whether walke you? Chr••st aunswered,* 1.32 I am come againe to be crucifyed. Li∣nus writing of the passion of Peter, hath the selfesame sto∣ry. Saint Ambrose hath the same likewise, and also Abdi∣as,* 1.33 scholer to the Apostles, which saw Christ before his as∣cending into heauen. With what face therefore dare you affirme it to be a thing vncertaine, which these men do ma∣nifestly witnes to haue bene done?

Rid.

I sayd before that y^e Doctors in that matter did vary.

Smith.

Do you thynke thys story is not certayne, beeyng approued by so auncient and probable authoritie?

Rid.

I do so thinke, because I take and esteeme not theyr words, for the wordes of Scripture. And though I dyd graunt you that story to be certayne, yet it maketh not a∣gainst me.

Smith.

Such things as be certayne, and approued of them, you do reiect as things vncertayne.

Rid.

The story of Linus is not of so greate authoritie: al∣though I am not ignorant that * 1.34 Eusebius so writeth al∣so in the story of the Church. And yet I accompt not these mens reports so sure as the Canonicall scriptures.* 1.35 Albeit if at any time he had to any man appeared heere on the earth after his Ascension, that doth not disprooue my say∣ing. For I goe not about to tye Christ vp in fetters (as some do vntruly report of vs) but that he may be sene vpō the earth according to his Diuine pleasure, whensoeuer it liketh him. But we affirme that it is contrary to the na∣ture of his manhoode and the true maner of his body, that he should be together and at one instant both in heauen and earth, according to his corporall substaunce. And the perpetuall sitting at the right hand of the father, may (I graunt) be taken for the stabilitie of Christes kingdome, and his continuall or euerlasting equalitie with his father in the glory of heauen.

Smith.

Now where as you boast that your faith is the ve∣ry fayth of the auncient Church: I will shew heere that is not so, but that it doth directly striue against the fayth of the old Fathers. I will bring in Chrysostome for this poynt. Hom. 2. ad populum Antiochenum. Tanquam maximam haeredi∣tatem,* 1.36 Elisaeus melotem suscepit. Etenim verè maxima fuit hae∣reditas, omni auro praetiosior: & erat duplex Helias ille: & erat sursum Helias, & deorsum Helias. Noui quòd iustum illum bea∣tum putatis, & velletis quisque esse vt ille. Quid igitur, si vobis demonstrauero quid aliud, quod illo multo maius omnes sacris m••sterijs imbuti recipimus. Helias quidem melotem discipulo reliquit: Filius autem dei ascendens suam nobis carnem dimisit. Sed Helias quidem exutus: Christus autem & nobis reliquit, & ipsam habens ascendit. That is: Eliseus receiued the man∣tell, as a right great inheritaunce. For it was in deede a right excellent inheritaunce, and more precious then any gold beside. And the same Helias was a double Helias: He was both Helias aboue, and Helias beneath. I know well you thinke that iust man to be happy, and you would gladly be euery one of you as he is, what will you then say if I shall declare to you a certayne other thing, whych all we that are indued with these holy mysteries, do re∣ceiue much more then that? Helias in deede left his man∣tell to his scholer. But the sonne of God ascending, dyd leaue heere his flesh vnto vs. Helias left it putting off the same. But Christ both left it to vs, and ascended also to heauen hauing it with him.

Rid.

* 1.37I graunt that Christ did both: that is, both tooke vp his fleshe wyth hym, ascending vp, and also did leaue the same behynde him with vs, but after a diuers manner and respect. For he tooke his flesh with him, after the true and corporall substance of his body and flesh: againe, he left the same in mysterie to the faithfull in the supper to be receiued after a spirituall communication and by grace. Neither is the same receiued in the Supper onely, but also at other times, by hearing the Gospell and by fayth. For, the [bread] which we breake, is the communication of the body of Christ: And generally: vnles ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, ye shall haue no life in you.

Smith.

* 1.38Chrysostome in his booke de dignitate Sacerdotij. lib. 3. cap. 3. sayth: O miraculum, O Dei beneuolentiam. Qui sursum sedet, tempore sacrificij, hominum manibus continetur. Or, as other haue translated it: O miraculum, O Dei benignitatem, qui cum patre sursum sedet, in illo ipso tēpore articulo, omniū manibus pertractatur, ac seipse tradit volentibus ipsum accipere & complecti That is: O miracle, O good will of God. He that sitteth aboue, at the sacrifice time, is conteyned in the handes of men. Or els as other haue translated, thus: Oh myracle, Oh the gentlenes of God. Hee that sitteth aboue with the father, is handled with the handes of all men at the very same moment of time, and doth himselfe deliuer hymselfe to them that are desirous to take him and em∣brace him.

Rid.

He that sitteth there, is here present in mistery and by grace, and is holden of the godly, suche as communicate him, not onely sacramentally with the hand of the bodye, but much more holesomely with the hand of the hart, and by inward drinking is receaued: but by the sacramentall signification he is holden of all men.

Seton▪

Where is then the miracle if hee be onely present thorough his grace and in mistery onely?

Rid.

Yes, there is a miracle, good sir,* 1.39 Christ is not idle in his sacraments. Is not the miracle great (trow you) when bread, which is wont to susteine the body, becommeth food to the soule? He that vnderstandeth not that miracle, hee vnderstandeth not y^e force of that misterye. God graūt we may euery one of vs vnderstād his truth, & obey the same.

Smith.

Chrisostome calleth it a miracle, that Christ sitteth at the right hand of God in heauen, and at the same tyme is held in the handes of men: not that he is handled wyth the handes of men onely in a misterye, and is with them through grace. Therfore while you deny that, you are al∣together deceiued, and stray far from the truth.

Harps.

The former place of Chrisostome is not to bee let slip. Let me before I begin, aske this one question of you. Is it not a great matter that Elias left his cloke or man∣tell, and the gift of his prophecy to his Scholer?

Rid.

Yes surely, it is a great matter.

Harps.

Did not Elias then leaue great grace?

Rid.

He did so.

Harps.

But Christ left a farre greater grace then Helias: for he could not both leaue his cloke and take it with hym: Christ doth both in his flesh.

Rid.

I am well content to graunt, that Christ lefte muche greater thinges to vs, then Helius to Eliseus,* 1.40 albeit he be sayde to haue left his double spirite with him: for that the strength and grace of the body of Christ, whiche Christ as∣cending vp, here left with vs, is the onely saluation & lyfe of all men which shalbe saued: which life Christ hath here left vnto vs, to be receaued by fayth through the hearyng of y^e word, and the right administration of the sacraments. This vertue and grace Chrisostome, after the phrase and maner of Iohn the Euangelist, calleth Christes flesh.

Harps.

But Christ performed a greater matter.* 1.41 He caryed vp and left behinde. You vnderstand not the comparison. The comparison is in this, that Elias left his mantel, and carryed it not with him, Christ left his flesh behind him & caryed it with him also.

Rid.

True it is, and I my selfe did affirme no lesse before. Now where you seeme to speake many thinges, in deede you bring no new thing at all. Let there be a comparison betweene grace and grace, & then Christ gaue the far grea¦ter grace, when he did inserte or graffe vs into his fleshe.

Harps▪

If you wil geue me leaue, I will ask you this que∣stion. If Chrisostome would haue ment so, that Christ left his body in the Eucharist, what playner woordes thincke you, or more euident could he haue vsed then these?

Kid.

These things be not of so great force as they beare a great shewe outwardly. Hee might also haue vsed grosser wordes if he had listed to haue vttered his minde so grose∣ly: for he was an ••loquent man. Now he speaketh after y^e maner of other Doctors, which of misticall matters speake mistically, and of Sacramentes Sacramentally.

Harps.

The comparison lyeth in this: That which was im¦possible to Elias, is possible to Christ.

Rid.

I graunt. It was possible to Christ, which was to y^e other impossible. Helias left his cloke: Christ both left hys flesh and tooke it with him.

Harps.

Helias left behinde him, & could not take with him: Christ both left behinde him, and also tooke with hym. Ex∣cept you wil say: the comparison here made to be nothing.

Rid.

He tooke vp his flesh with him to heauen, and lefte here the communion of his flesh in earth.* 1.42

West.

You vnderstand in the first place his flesh for verye true flesh: and in the second place for grace, & communion of his flesh: and why do you not vnderstand it in y^e second place also for his true fleshe? I will make it euident, howe blockish and grosse your answere is.

Rid.

These be tauntes and reproches, not beseeming (as I thinke) the modesty of this Schole.

West.

Elias left his cloke to his disciple:* 1.43 but the sonne of God, going vp to heauen, left his fleshe. But Elias cer∣teinely left his cloke behinde, and Christ likewise his flesh,

and yet ascending, he carryed the same with him to. By which words we make this reason.

Christ left his flesh to his Disciples, and yet for all that he tooke the same vp with him:

Ergo, he is present heere with vs.

Heere Doctour Weston crying to the people, sayd vnto them: Maister Doctour aunswereth it after this fashion:

* 1.44He caried his flesh into heauen, and he left here the com∣munion of his flesh behinde. Assuredly the aunswere is to vnlearned.

Rid.

I am glad you speake in Englishe. Surely I wishe that all the whole world might vnderstand your reasons and my aunsweres. Reliquit nobis carnem suam. i. He left vs his flesh. This you vnderstande of his flesh, and I vnder∣stand the same of grace. He caried his fleshe into heauen, and left behind the communion of his flesh vnto vs.

West.

Ye Iudges, what thinke ye of this aunswere.

Iudges.

* 1.45It is ridiculous and a very fond aunswere.

Rid.

Well, I take your words paciētly for Christes cause.

West.

Weston heere citeth a place: Spargimur sanguine Chri∣sti: We are sprinkled with the bloud of Christ.

Rid.

M. Doctor, it is the same bloud, but yet spiritually receiued.* 1.46 And in deede all the Prophetes were sprinkled with y^e same bloud, but yet spiritually I say, and by grace. And whatsoeuer they be that are not sprinckled with thys bloud, they can not be partakers of y^e euerlasting saluatiō.

West.

* 1.47Here I bring Bernard vnto you againe. Euen from the West vnto the East, from the North vnto the South, there is one and the selfesame Christ in many and diuers places.

Rid.

The aunswere is soone made, that one Christe is here and in diuers places. For God according to hys Maiestie, and according to his prouidence, as S. Austen sayeth, is e∣uery where with the godly, according to his indiuisible and vnspeakeable grace.* 1.48 Or else, if we should vnderstande Bernard according to the corporall presence, how mon∣strous or huge, & giantlike a body would you then make Christes body to be, which should reach euen from North to South, from West to East.

West.

Nay, nay, you make a monstrous aunswer and vn∣learned.

Ward.

Before I come in with those reasons which I had purposed to bring against you,* 1.49 I am minded to come again to M. Doctours argument, by which you being brought into the briers, seemed to doubt of Christes presence on the earth. To y^e proofe of which matter I will bring nothyng else, then that which was agreed vpon in the Catechisme of the Synode of London, set out not long ago by you.

Rid.

Syr, I geue you to witte, before you goe any farther, that I did set out no Catechisme.

West.

* 1.50Yes, you made me subscribe to it when you were a Byshop in your ruffe.

Rid.

I compelled no man to subscribe.

Warde.

Yes by roode, you are the very author of that he∣resie.

Rid.

I put foorth no Catechisme.

Cole.

Did you neuer consent to the setting out of those things, which you allowed?

Rid.

* 1.51I graunt that I sawe the booke. But I deny that I wrote it. I perused it after it was made, and I noted ma∣ny things for it. So I consented to the booke: I was not the author of it.

Iudges.

* 1.52The Catechisme is so set foorth, as though the whole conuocation house had agreed to it. Cranmer sayd yesterday that you made it.

Rid.

I thinke surely that he would not say so.

Ward.

The Catechisme hath this clause: Si visibiliter & in terra, &c. i. If visibly on the earth, &c.

Rid.

I aunswere that those articles were set out, I both witting and consenting to them. Myne owne hand will testifie the same, and M. Cranmer put hys hand to them likewise, and gaue them to other afterward. Now, as for the place which you alledge out of it, that may easely be ex∣pounded, and without any inconuenience.

Ward.

Christ is the power and vertue of his Father.

* 1.53Ergo, he was not of so little strength, that he coulde not bring to passe whatsoeuer he would himselfe.

Rid.

I graunt.

Ward.

Christ was the wisedome of the father.

Ergo, that he spake, he spake wisely, and so as euery man might vnderstand: neither was it hys mynde to speake one thing in steede of another.

Rid.

All this I graunt.

Ward.

Christ was likewise the very truth: Ergo, he made and perfourmed in deede,* 1.54 that which he intended to make. And likely it is, that he doth neither deceiue, nor coulde be deceiued, nor yet would go about to deceiue other.

West.

Hilarius in Psalmum 118. hath these words. Vera omnia sunt, & neque ociosè, neque inutiliter constituta dei verba, sed extra omnem ambiguitatem superfluae inanitatis, ignita, & ignita vehementer, ne quid illic esse quod non perfectum ac proprium sit, existimetur. That is: All Gods wordes or sayings are true, and neither idlely placed, nor vnprofitably, but fiery, and wonderfull fiery without all doubtfulnes of superflu∣ous vanitie, that ther may be nothing thought to be there, which is not absolute and proper.

Ward.

He is the truth of the father: Ergo, he can neyther de∣ceiue, nor yet be deceyued, especially, I meane, when he spake at his latter end, and his testament.

Rid.

Christ is the very truth of the father: and I perceyue well to what scope you driue your reason.* 1.55 This is but a farre set compasse of words. If that these words of Christ: This is my body, which you meane, be rightly vnderstoode, they are most true.

Ward.

He tooke, he brake, he gaue, &c. what tooke he?

Ridley.

Bread, his body.

Ward.

What brake he?

Ridley.

Bread.

Ward.

What gaue he?

Ridley.

Bread.

Ward.

Gaue he bread made of wheate, & materiall bread?

Rid.

I know not whether he gaue bread of wheate: but he gaue true and materiall bread.

Ward.

I will proue the contrary by Scriptures.

He deliuered to them that which he had them take.* 1.56

But he had not them take materiall bread, but his owne body.

Ergo, he gaue not materiall bread, but his owne body.

Rid.

I deny the Minor.* 1.57 For he bad them take his body Sa∣cramentally in materiall bread: and after that sort it was both bread, which he bad them take, because the substaunce was bread, and it was also▪ his body, because it was the Sacrament of his body, for the sanctifying and the com∣ming to of the holy Ghost, which is alwayes assistentio those mysteries which were instituted of Christ, and law∣fully administred.

Harps.

What is he that so sayeth: By the comming vnto of the holy spirite?

Rid.

I haue Theophilact for mine author for this maner of speaking. And heere I bring him,* 1.58 that ye may vnderstand that phrase not to be mine, vpon Mathew. 26. Further∣more, the said Theophilact writing vppon these wordes: This is my body, sheweth, that the body of the Lord is bread, whih is sanctifyed on the aultar.

Ogle.

That place of Theophilact maketh openly agaynst you. For he sayth in that place, that Christ sayd not: This is a figure of my body, but my body. For sayeth he, by an vn∣speakeable operation it is transformed, although it seeme to vs to be bread.

Rid.

It is not a figure,* 1.59 that is to say non tantum est figura. i. it is not only a figure of his body.

West.

Where haue you that word [tantum] onely?

Rid.

It is not in that place, but he hath it in another & Au∣gustine doth so speake many times, & other Doctours mo.

West.

Heere Weston repeating the words of Theophilact in English, sayd: He sayth it is not a figure, and you say it is a figure.

And the same Theophilact sayth moreouer: that the cō∣uersiō or turning of the bread is made into the Lords flesh.

* 1.60 That which Christ gaue, we do geue.

But that which he gaue was not a figure of his body, but his body:

Ergo, we geue no figure, but his body.

☞As concerning the authoritie of Theophilactus, what hee thought and might haue spoken of that Author, D. Ridley dyd not then speake, nor could conueniently (as he himselfe after∣ward declared, reporting and writing with his owne hande the disputations in the prison) because of the vproares and clamours which were so great, and he of so many called vpon, that he could not aunswere as he would, and what he thought touching the au∣thoritie of Theophilactus, but aunswered simply to that, whych was brought out of that author, on this sort.

I graunt (quoth he) the bread to be conuerted and tur∣ned into the flesh of Christ, but not by transubstantiation,* 1.61 but by a Sacramentall conuersion or turning. It is trans∣formed saith Theophilactus, in the same place, by a mysti∣call benediction, and by the accession or comming of the holy Ghost vnto the flesh of Christ. He sayeth not: by ex∣pulsion or driuing away the substance of bread, and by sub∣stituting or putting in his place the corporall substaunce of Christes flesh. And where he sayth: It is not a figure of the body: we shoulde vnderstande that saying, as he himselfe doth elsewhere adde onely, that is: it is no naked or bare figure only. For Christ is present in his mysteries, neither at any time (as Cyprian sayeth) doth the diuine Maiestie absent himselfe from the diuine mysteries.

West.

You put in onely, and that is one lye. And I tell you

farther, Peter Martyr was fayne to denye the Author, be∣cause the place was so playne agaynst him.* 1.62 But marke his wordes, how he sayth: It is no figure, but his flesh.

Rid.

To take his wordes, and not his meaning, is to doe iniury to the author.

H••rd.

No other Doctour maketh more agaynst you. For the wordes in Greeke are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.63 which is in La∣tine, transelementatur, y^t is, turned from one elemēt into an other. And shewing the cause why it is in forme of breade, he sayth: Quoniam infirmi sumus, & horremus crudas carnes cō∣medere, maximè hominis carné: ideo panis quidem apparet, sed caro est. That is: Because wee are infirme, and abhorre to eate raw flesh, specially the flesh of man: therefore it appeareth bread, but it is flesh.

Rid.

That word hath not that strength which you seeme to geue it. You strayne it ouermuch, and yet it maketh not so much for your purpose.* 1.64 For the same Author hath in an o∣ther place, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, That is, We are transele∣mented, or transformed and chaunged into the body of Christ: & so by that word, in such meaning as you speake of, I could proue as well that we are transformed in deed into the ve∣ry body of Christ.

Ward.

Learned M. Doctour, thus you expound the place, Hoc est corpus meum: This is my body. i. a figure of my body.

Rid.

Although I know there be that so expound it, yet that exposition is not full to expresse the whole.

Da- Ward. My sheepe here my voyce, and folow me.

ti- But all the sheepe of Christ heare this voice:* 1.65 This is my body, without a figure:

si. Ergo, the voyce of Christ here hath no figure.

Rid.

The sheepe of Christ folow the voyce of Christ, vnles they be seduced and deceiued through ignorance.

Ward.

But the Fathers tooke this place for no figuratiue speach.

Rid.

Yet they do all number this place among figuratiue & tropicall speaches.

Ward.

Iustinus Martyr in his Seconde Apology hath thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.* 1.66

Ne{que} verò haec pro pane potuue communi sumimus: Imo quemadmodum verbo Dei Iesus Christus, Seruator noster in car∣natus, habuit pro salute nostra carnem & sanguinem: ita per ora∣tionem illius verbi consecratum hoc alimentum, quo sanguis & carnes nostrae perimmutationem enutriuntur, eiusdem incarna∣ti carnem & sanguinem esse sumus edocti.

This place Cramner hath corrupted. Thus it is En∣glished.

☞For wee doe not take this for common breade and drinke, but like as Iesus Christ our Sauiour, incarnate by the word of God, had flesh and bloud for our saluation: euen so we bee taught the foode wherewith our fleshe and bloud is nourished by alteration, when it is consecrated by the prayer of his word, to be the fleshe & bloud of the same Iesus incarnate.

* 1.67Doctor Cranmer hath thus translated it: Breade, wa∣ter and wine, are not to be taken as other common meats and drinkes be, but they bee ordeined purposedly to geue thankes to GOD, and therefore bee called Eucharistia, and be called the bodye and bloud of Christ: and that it is lawfull for none to eat and drinke of them but that professe Christ, and liue according to the same: and yet the same meat and drinke is chaunged into our flesh and bloud, and nourisheth our bodyes.

Rid.

O good Mayster Doctor, goe sincerely to worke: I know that place, and I know how it is vsed.

Ward.

Warde here repeated the place agayne out of Iustine: We are taught. &c. as aboue.

Rid.

O what vnright dealing is this? I haue the selfe same place of Iustine here copyed out. You know your selfe whi∣che are skilfull of Greeke,* 1.68 howe the wordes here be remo∣ued out of the right place, and that without any iust cause.

Ward.

I stand still vpon mine argument. What say you?

Rid.

If you will that I should aunswere to Iustine, then you must hears. I haue but one tongue, I can not aun∣swere at once to you all.

West.

* 1.69 Christ gaue vs his very and true flesh to be eaten.

But he neuer gaue it to be eaten, but in his last supper, and in the sacrament of the aultar.

Ergo, there is the very true flesh of Christ.

Rid.

If you speake of the very true fleshe of Christ, after the substance of his flesh, taken in the Wombe of the Uir∣gine Mary, and not by grace and spiritually, I then do de∣ny the first part of your reason. But if you vnderstand it of the true flesh, after grace and spirituall communication, I then graunt the first part, and deny the second. For he ge∣ueth vnto vs truly his flesh, to be eaten of al that beleue in him. For he is the very & true meat of the soule, wherewith we are fed vnto euerlastinge life, according to this saying: My flesh is meat indeed. &c.

Ward.

Desiderio desideraui hoc pascha manducare vobiscum. i.* 1.70 I haue desired with my harty desire to eat this Paschall with you. What Paschall I pray you desired he to eate? If you stand in doubt, you haue Tertullian. Lib. 4. Contra Martionem•• Pro∣fessus ita{que} se concupiscentia concupiscere edere pascha suum (in∣dignum enim vt alienum concupisceret Deus) acceptum panem & distributum discipulis suum corpus illum fecit: Hoc est corpus meum, dicendo. &c. i. He therfore protesting a great desire to eat his Paschall, his owne Paschall I say (for it was not meete that he shoulde desire any other then his owne) ta∣king bread and distributing it to his Disciples, made it his body, saying: This is my body.

What say you? did he vnderstand by this Paschall the Iudaicall Lambe, or by that whiche afterward he gaue in his Supper.

Rid.

I suppose that the first he vnderstoode of the Iudaicall Passeouer, and afterward of the Eucharist.

Ward.

Nay, then Tertullian is agaynst you, which sayth.

Ba- He desired to eate his Passeouer.

ro- But the Iudaical Passeouer was not his, but straūge from Christ.* 1.71

co. Ergo, he meant not of the Iudaicall Passeouer.

Rid.

The Iudaicall Passeouer was not straunge from Christ, but his owne: insomuch as hee is the Lord of all:* 1.72 and as well the Lord of the Iudaicall Passeouer, as of his owne supper.

Ward.

What aunswere you then to Tertullian, the which sayth: He desired to eate his owne Passeouer, and not the Iuish Passeouer, which stood vpon wordes without flesh.* 1.73

Rid.

Tertullian may here dallye in sense Anagogicall. I know that Cyprian hath these wordes: Tunc instituit quidē Eucharistiam, sed vtrum{que} erat Christi. i. He began th•• to institute the holy Eucharist, but both were Christes.

Ward.

Augustine the Psalme. 96. Writing vppon these wordes: Adorate scabellum pedum eius. i. Worshipp his foote∣stoole. &c. Quaero inquit, quid sit scabellum pedum eius. Et dicit mihi Scriptura, Terra scabellum pedum meorum: Fluctuans con∣uerto me ad Christum, quia ipsum quaero hic,* 1.74 & inuenio quomo∣do sine impietate adoretur scabellum pedum eius. Suscepit enim de terra terram, quia caro de terra est, & de carne Mariae carnem accepit▪ & quia in ipsa carne hic ambulauit, & ipsam carnem no∣bis manducandam ad salutem dedit: nemo autem illam carnē mā∣ducat nisi prius adorauerit. Inuentum est, quo modo tale scabel∣lum pedum Domini adoretur, vt non solum non peccemus ado∣rādo, sed peccemus non adorando ipsum. &c. i. I aske (sayth he) what is the footstoole of his feete,* 1.75 and the Scripture telleth me: The earth is the footstoole of my feete. And so in searching therof I turne my selfe to Christ, because I seeke him here in the earth, and I find how, without impiety, the footstole of his feete may be worshipped: for he tooke earth of earth, in that he is flesh of the earth, and of the fleshe of Marye he tooke flesh, and because that in the same flesh here he wal∣ked and also he gaue the same flesh to vs, to be eaten vnto saluation. But no man eateth that fleshe excepte hee haue worshypped before. And so it is found, how such a foote∣stoole of the feet of the Lord is to be worshipped, so that, not only we sinne not in worshipping, but also do sinne in not worshipping the same.

Da- He gaue to vs his flesh to be eaten,* 1.76 y^e which he tooke of the earth, in which also here he walked. &c.

ti- But he neuer gaue his flesh to be eaten, but when hee gaue it at his Supper, saying: This is my body.

si. Ergo, in the Eucharist he gaue vs his flesh.

Rid.

You do alledge the place of Austen vpon the Psalme. 98. Where he sayth: that Christ gaue his fleshe to be eaten which he tooke of the earth, and in whiche here he walked inferring hereupon that Christ neuer gaue the same hys fleshe to be eaten, but onely in the Eucharist, I deny your Minor, for he gaue it both in the Eucharist to be eaten and also otherwise, as wel in the word, as also vpon the crosse.

Smith.

What if Augustine say, that Christ did not onelye

geue himself to vs in a figure, but gaue his own very flesh in deed and really?

Rid.

I neuer sayd that Christ gaue onely a figure of his bo¦dy. For in deed he gaue himselfe in a reall communication, that is, he gaue his flesh after a communicatiō of his flesh.

West.

Here Weston read the place of Augustine in Eng∣lish,* 1.77 and afterwardes sayd: Ye say, Christ gaue not his bo∣dy, but a figure of his body.

Rid.

I say not so, I say he gaue his own body verely. But he gaue it by a reall, effectuall, and spirituall cōmunicatiō.

☞After this, Doctour Glinne began to reason, who (notwyth∣standinge Mayster Ridley hadde alwayes taken him for his olde frend) made a very contumelious Preface agaynst him. This pre∣face Mayster Ridley therefore did the more take to hart, because it proceeded from him. Howbeit he thought that Doctour Glins minde was to serue the turne. For afterwarde hee came to the house wherein Mayster Ridley was kept, and as farre as Mayster Ridley could call ro remembraunce, before Doctor Young and Doctour Oglethorpe he desired him to pardon his wordes. The whiche Mayster Ridley did euen from the very hart, and wyshed earnestly, that God would geue, not onely to him, but vnto all o∣ther, the true and euident knowledge of Gods Euangelicall sin∣cerity, that all offences put a part, they being perfectly and fullye reconciled, might agree and meete together in the house of the heauenly father.

Glin.

I see that you elude, or shift away all scriptures and fathers,* 1.78 I will go to worke with you after an other sort.

Christ hath here his Church known in earth, of which you were once a child, although now you speake contume∣liously of the Sacramentes.

Rid.

This is a greuous contumely, that you call me a shif∣ter away of the Scriptures, and of the Doctours. As tou∣ching the Sacraments, I neuer yet spake contumeliously of them. I graunt that Christ hath here his Churche in earth: but that Church did euer receiue & acknowledge the Eucharist to be a sacrament of the body of Christ, and not the body of Christ really, but the body of Christ by grace.

Clin.

Then I aske this question, whether the Catholicke Churche hath euer or at any time bene Idolatrous?

Rid.

The Church is the piller and stay of trueth, that ne∣uer yet hath bene idolatrous in respect of y^e whole: but per∣aduenture in respect of some part therof, which sometimes may be seduced by euill Pastors and through ignoraunce.

Glin.

* 1.79 That Churche euer hath worshipped the fleshe of Christ in the Eucharist.

But the church hath neuer bene idolatrous:

Ergo it hath alwayes iudged the flesh of Christ to be in the Eucharist.

Rid.

And I also worshippe Christ in the Sacrament: but not because hee is included in the Sacrament: like as I worship Christ also in the Scriptures, not because hee is really included in them. Notwithstanding I say that the body of Christ is present in the Sacrament: but yet Sa∣cramētally and spiritually, according to his grace geuing life, and in that respect, really, that is, according to hys be∣nediction geuing life.

Furthermore I acknowledge gladly the true body of Christ to be in the Lordes Supper, in such sort as y^e church of Christ (which is the spouse of Christ, and is taught of the holy ghost, and guided by Gods word) doth acknowledge the same. But the true church of Christ doth acknowledge a presence of Christes body in the Lords Supper to be cō∣municated to the godly by grace and spiritually, as I haue often shewed, and by a Sacramental signification, but not by the corporall presence of the body of his flesh.

Glin.

* 1.80Austen contra Faustum Lib. 20. cap. 13. Non nulli propter panem & calicem, Cererem & Bacchum nos colere existimabāt. &c i. Some there were which thought vs in stead of bread and of the cup, to worship Ceres and Bacchus.

Upon this place I gather that there was an adoratiō of the sacramēt amōg the fathers. And Erasmus in an E∣pistle to the brethren of low Germany, sayth that the wor∣shipping of the sacrament was before Austen & Cyprian.

Rid.

We do handle the signes reuerently: but we worshyp the Sacrament as a Sacrament, not as a thing signified by the Sacrament.

Glin.

What is the Symbole or Sacrament?

Rid.

Bread.

Glin.

Ergo we worship bread.

Ridley.

There is a deceipte in this worde [Adoramus.] Wee worship the Symboles when reuerently we handle them.* 1.81 We worshippe Christ wheresoeuer we perceiue his bene∣fites. But we vnderstand his benefite to be greatest in the Sacrament.

Glin.

So I may fall down before the bench here, and wor: ship Christ: and if any man aske me what I doe, I may aunswre I worship Christ.

Rid.

We adore and worship Christ in the Eucharist. And if you meane the externall sacrament, I say, that also is to be worshipped as a Sacrament.

Glin.

So was the fayth of the primitiue Church.* 1.82

Rid.

Would to God we woulde all folow the fayth of that Church.

Glin.

Thinke you that Christ hath now his Church?

Rid.

I do so.

Glin.

But all the Church adoreth Christ, verely and real∣ly in the Sacrament.

Rid.

You know your selfe that the Easte Churche woulde not acknowledge transubstantiatiō,* 1.83 as it appeareth in the Councell of Florence.

Cole.

That is false. For in the same they did acknowledge transubstantiation, although they would not entreat of y^e matter, for that they had not in theyr commission so to doe.

Rid.

Nay, they would determine nothing of that matter, when the Article was propounded vnto them.

Cole.

It was not because they didde not acknowledge the same, but because they had no commission so to do.

Curtop.

Reuerend Syr, I will proue and declare, that the body of Christ is truly and really in the Eucharist: & wher¦as the holy Fathers,* 1.84 both of the West and Easte Churche haue written, both manye thinges and no lesse manifest of the same matter, yet I will bring forth onelye Chrisostome. The place is in cap. 10. Corinth. 1. Homel. 24.

* 1.85 That which is in the cup, is the same that flowed frō the side of Christ.

But true and pure bloud didde flowe from the side of Christ:

Ergo, his true and pure bloud is in the cup.

Rid.

It is his true bloud which is in the Chalice (I graūt) & the same which sprang from the side of Christ. But how? It is bloud in deede, but not after the same maner, after which maner it sprang from his side. For here is the bloud but by the way of a Sacrament.

Agayne, I say, like as the bread of the Sacrament and of thankes geuing is called the bodye of Christ geuen for vs: so the cup of the Lord is called the bloud which sprang from the side of Christ. But that Sacramentall breade is called the body, because it is the Sacrament of his body: e∣uen so likewise the cuppe is called the bloud also, whiche flowed out of Christes side, because it is in the Sacrament of that bloud which flowed out of his side, instituted of the Lord himselfe for our singuler commodity, namely for our spirituall nourishment, like as Baptisme is ordeined in water to our spirituall regeneration.

Cur.

The Sacrament of the bloud is not the bloud.

Rid.

The Sacrament of the bloud, is the bloud, and that is attributed to the Sacrament, which is spoken of the thing of the Sacrament.

Weston.

Here Weston repeateth Curtoppes argument in English.

* 1.86That which is in the Chalice, is the same which flow∣ed out of Christes side.

But there came out very bloud:

Ergo, there is very bloud in the Chalice.

Rid.

The bloud of Christ is in the Chalice in deed, but not in the reall presence, but by grace and in a Sacrament.

West.

That is very wel. Then we haue bloud in y^e chalice.

Rid.

It is true, but by grace and in a Sacrament.

Here the people hissed at him.

Rid.

O my maysters, I take this for no iudgement: I will stand to Gods iudgement.

Wat.

Good Syr, I haue determined to haue respect of the time, and to abstayne from all those thinges whiche maye hinder the entraunce of our disceptation: and therfore first I aske this question: When Christ sayd in the vi. of Iohn Qui manducat carnem meam. i. He that eateth my flesh. &c. doth he signify in those wordes the eating of his true and natu∣rall flesh, or els of the bread and Symbole?* 1.87

Rid.

I vnderstand that place of the very fleshe of Christ to be eaten, but spiritually: And farther I say, that the sacra∣ment also perteineth vnto the spirituall manducation. For without the spirit to eat the Sacrament, is to eate it vn∣profitably. For who so eateth not spiritually, he eateth hys owne condemnation.

Wat.

I aske them whether the Euchariste be a Sacra∣ment.

Rid.

The Eucharist taken for a signe or symbole, is a Sa∣crament.

Wat.

Is it instituted of God?

Rid.

It is instituted of God.

Wat.

Where?

Rid.

In the supper.

Wat.

With what wordes is it made a Sacrament?

Rid.

By the words and deedes which Christ sayd and did, and commaunded vs to say and do the same.* 1.88

Wat.

It is a thing commonly receiued of all, that the Sa∣cramentes of the new law geue grace to them that worthi∣ly receiue.

Rid.

True it is that grace is geuen by the Sacrament, but as by an instrument. The inward vertue & Christ geue the grace through the sacrament.

Wat.

What is a sacrament?

Rid.

I remember there be many definitions of a sacra∣ment in Austine: but I will take that whiche semeth most fit to this present purpose. A sacrament is a visible signe of inuisible grace.

Wat.

Ergo, grace is geuen to the receiuers.

Rid.

The society or coniunction with Christ through the holy Ghost, is grace, and by the Sacrament we are made the members of the mystical body of Christ, for that by the sacrament the part of the body is ingrafted in the head.

Wat.

But there is a difference betwene the mysticall body, and naturall body.

Rid.

There is (I graunt you) a difference, but the head of them both is one.

Wat.

*The Eucharist is a sacrament of the new testamēt, Ergo, it hath a promise of grace:

But no promise of grace is made to bread and wine:

Ergo, bread and wine be not the sacramentes of y^e new Testament.

Rid.

I graunt that grace perteineth to the Eucharist, ac∣cording to this saying: The bread which we breake is it not the communication or partaking of the body of Christ? And like as he that eateth, and he that drinketh vnworthely the sacra∣ment of the body and bloud of the Lord, eateth & drinketh his owne damnation: euen so he that eateth and drinketh worthy, eateth life, and drinketh life. I graunt also that there is no * promise made to bread and wyne. But in as much as they are sanctified and made the Sacramentes of the body & bloud of the Lord, they haue a promise of grace annexed vnto them, namely of spirituall partaking of the body of Christ to be communicated and geuen, not to the bread and wine, but to them which worthily do receiue the Sacrament.

Wat.

If the substaunce of bread and wine do remayne, thē the society betwixt Christ and vs, is promised to them that take bread and wine.

But that society is not promised to bread and wine, but to the receiuers of his fleshe and bloud. Iohn. 6. Qui man∣ducat. &c.

Ergo, the substance of bread and wyne remayneth not.

Rid.

The promise vndoubtedly is made to the flesh and the bloud, but the same be receiued in y^e sacramēt through faith.

Wat

Euery Sacrament hath a promise of grace adnexed vnto it.

But bread and wine haue not a promise of grace adnex∣ed vnto it.

Ergo, the bread and wine are not sacramentes.

Rid.

True it is, euery sacrament hath grace adnexed vnto it instrumentally. But there is diuers vnderstandyng of this word [Habet] hath. For the sacrament hath not grace in¦cluded in it: but to those that receiue it well, it is turned to grace. After that maner the water in Baptisme hath grace promised, and by that grace the holy spirite is geuen, not that grace is included in water, but that grace commeth by water.

Wat.

This promise is made to the flesh & bloud of Christ, and not to bread and wine.

Ergo, the sacrament is not bread and wyne, but the bo∣dy and bloud of Christ.

Rid.

There is no promise made to him that taketh commō bread and common wine: but to him that receiueth the san∣ctified bread, and bread of the communion, there is a large promise of grace made: neither is the promise geuen to the symboles, but to the thing of the sacrament. But the thing of the sacrament is the flesh and bloud.

Wat.

Euery sacrament of the new testament geueth grace promised of God, to those that worthely receiue it.

Rid.

This sacramēt hath a promise of grace, made to those that receiue it worthely, because grace is geuen by it, as by an instrument, not that Christ hath transfused grace into the bread and wyne.

Wat.

But this promise which is made, is not but to those that worthely receiue the flesh & bloud: not y^e bread & wine.

Rid.

That proposition of yours hath a diuers vnderstan∣ding. There is no promise made to thē that receiue cōmon bread, as it were: but to those that worthely receiue the sā∣ctified bread, there is a promise of grace made, like as Ori∣gen doth testify.

Wat.

Where is that promise made?

Rid.

The bread which he brake,* 1.89 is it not a communication of the body of Christ? [And] we being many are one bread, one body of Christ?

Wat.

What doth he meane by bread in that place?

Rid.

The bread of the Lordes table, the Communiō of the body of Christ.

Wat.

Harken what Chrysostome sayth vpō that place:* 1.90 Pa∣nis quem frangimus, nonne communicatio corporis Christi est? Quare non dixit participatio? Quia amplius quid significare vo∣luit, & multam inter haec conuenientiam ostendere. Non enim participatione tantum & acceptione, sed vnitate communica∣mus. Quemadmodum enim corpus illud vnitum est Christo, ita & nos per hūc panē vnione coniungimur. That is: The bread which we break, is it not the Communication of Christes bodye? Wherefore did he not say participation? because hee would signify some greater matter, and that he would de∣clare a great conuenience and coniunction betwixt y^e same. For we do not communicate by participation onely and re¦ceiuing, but also by conniting. For likewise as that body is connited to Christ, so also we by the same bread are con∣ioyned and vnited to him.

Rid.

Let Chrisostome haue his maner of speaking and his sentence. If it be true, I reiect it not.* 1.91 But let it not be pre∣iudiciall to me to name it true bread.

Wat.

All (saith Chrysostome) which sit together at one boord,* 1.92 do cūmunicate together of one true body. What do I call (sayth he) this cōmunicating▪ we are all the selfe same body. What doth bread signify? The body of christ. What be they that receiue it?* 1.93 The body of Christ For many are but one body. Chrysostome doth interpret this place agaynst you: All we be one bread, & one mysticall bodye, whiche doe participate together one breade of Christ.

Rid.

All we be one mysticall body,* 1.94 which do communicate of one Christ in bread, after the efficacy of regeneration or quickning.

Wat.

Of what maner of bread speaketh he?

Rid.

Of the bread of the Lordes table.

Wat.

Is that bread one?

Rid.

It is one, of the Church being one, because one bread is set forth vpō the table: and so of one bread altogether do participate which communicate at the table of the Lord.

Wat.

See how absurdly you speake. Do you say all which be from the beginning to the end of the world?

Rid.

All, I say, which at one table together haue commu∣nicated in the mysteryes, might well so do. Albeit the hea∣uenly and celestiall bread is likewise one also, whereof the Sacramentall bread is a mystery: the which being one, all we together do participate.* 1.95

Wat.

A peruerse aunswere. Which all? Meane you all chri∣stian men?

Rid.

I do distribute this word [All]: for all were wont to∣gether to communicate of one bread deuided into parts. Al (I say) which were one cōgregatiō, and which all did com∣municate together at one table.

Wat.

What? do you exclude then from the body of Christ, all them which did not communicate being present▪

Feck.

But Cyprian sayth: panis quem nulla multitudo consu∣mit. i. Bread which no multitude doth consume.* 1.96 Which cannot be vnderstanded, but onely of the body of Christ.

Rid.

Also Cyprian in this place did speake of the true body of Christ, and not of materiall bread.

Feck.

Nay, rather he did there intreat of the Sacrament in that tractation De Coena domini,* 1.97 writing vpon the Supper of the Lord.

Rid.

Trueth it is, and I graunt, hee intreateth there of the Sacrament: but also he doth admixt something there with all of the spirituall manducation.

Smith.

When the Lorde sayth: This is my bodye, he vseth no tropicall speach:

Ergo, you are deceiued.

Rid.

I deny your antecedent.* 1.98

Smith.

I bring here Augustine in Psal. 33. Conc. 1. expoun∣ding these wordes: Ferebatur in manibus suis. He was caried in his owne handes. 1. Regum.

Hoc quomodo possit fieri in homine, quis intelligat? Manibus enim suis nemo portatur, sed alienis. Quomodo intelligatur de Dauid secundum literā, non inuenimus: de Christo autē inueni∣mus. Ferebatur enim Christus in manibus suis cū diceret: Hoc est corpus meum. Ferebat enim illud corpus in manibus suis. &c. That is. How may this be vnderstāded to be done in mā? For no man is caryed in his owne handes, but in the han∣des of other. How this may be vnderstanded of Dauid af∣ter y^e letter, we do not find. Of Christ we find it. For Christ was borne in his own hands when he sayth: This is my bo∣dy: for he caried that same body in his owne handes. &c.

Augustine here did not see how this place after y^e letter

could be vnderstāded of dauid, because no man cā cary him selfe in his owne handes. Therfore saith he, this place is to be vnderstāded of Christ after the letter. For Christ caried himselfe in his owne hands in his Supper, when he gaue the Sacrament to his Disciples, saying: This is my body.

Rid.

* 1.99I deny your argument, and I explicate the same. Au∣stine could not find after his own vnderstanding, how this could be vnderstand of Dauid after the letter. Austine go∣eth here from other in this exposition, but I goe not from him. But let this exposition of Austine be graunted to you: although I know this place of scripture be otherwise red of other men, after the verity of the Hebrew text, and also otherwise to be expounded. Yet to graūt to you this expo∣sition of Austine, I say yet notwithstanding it maketh no∣thing agaynst my assertion: for Christ did beare himselfe in his owne handes, when he gaue the sacrament of his body to be eaten of his disciples.

Smith.

Ergo, it is true of Christ after the letter, that he was borne in his owne handes.

Rid.

He was borne literally, & after that letter which was spoken of Dauid: but not after the letter of these woordes Hoc est corpus meum.

I graunt that S. Austine sayth, that it is not found lite∣rally of Dauid,* 1.100 that he caryed himselfe in his own hands, and that is found of Christ. But this word [ad literam] lite∣rally, you do not well referre to that which was borne, but rather it ought to be referred to him that did beare it. S. Au∣stines meaning is this: that it is not read any where in the Bible, that this carnal Dauid, the sonne of Iesse, did beare himselfe in his handes, but of that spirituall Dauid which ouerthrew Goliah the deuill: that is, of Christ our sauior, the sonne of the virgine it may well be found literally, that he bare himselfe in his owne handes after a certayne ma∣ner,* 1.101 namely in carying y^e Sacrament of himselfe. And note that S. Austen hath these wordes [quodam modo] after a certain maner: whiche manifestly doth declare howe the Doctours meaning is to be taken.

Smith.

When then was he borne in his owne handes, and after what letter?

Rid.

He was borne in the supper sacramentally, when he sayd: This is my body.

Smith.

Euery man may beare in his own hands a * 1.102 figure of his body.

But Augustine denyeth that Dauid could cary himselfe in his handes.

Ergo, he speaketh of no figure of his body.

Rid.

It Austen could haue founde in all the Scripture that Dauid had caryed the sacramēt of his body, then he would neuer haue vsed that exposition of Christ.

Smith.

But he did beare himselfe in his owne handes:

Ergo he did not beare a figure onely.

Rid.

He didde beare himselfe, but in a Sacrament: and Austen afterward addeth [quodam modo] that is, Sacramen∣tally.

Smith.

* 1.103You vnderstand not what Austen meant when hee sayd [quodam modo:] For he ment that he did beare his ve∣ry true body in that supper, not in figure and forme of a bo∣dy, but in forme and figure of bread.

Ergo, you are holden fast, neither are ye able to escape out of his labirinth.

Doctor Weston repeated this place agayne in English. Which done, then Doct. Tresham thus began to speake, moued (as it seemed to M. Ridley) wyth great zeale, and desired that he might be in sted of Iohn Baptist in conuer∣ting the hartes of the fathers, and in reducing the sayde B. Ridley agayne to the mother church. Now at the first, not knowing the person, he thought he had bene some good old man, which had the zeale of God, although not acording to knowledge, and began to aunswere him with mansuetude and reuerence. But afterwarde hee smelled a foxe vnder a sheepes clothing.

* 1.104GOd almightye graunt that it may be fulfilled in me, that was spoken by the Prophet Malachy of Iohn Baptist, which maye turne the hartes of the Fathers to the children, and the hartes of the children to theyr fathers, that you at length may be conuer∣ted. The wise man sayth: Sonne, honour thy father and reuerence thy mother. But you dishonor your father in heauen, and pollute your mother the holy church here on earth, while ye sette not by her.

Rid,

These by wordes do pollute your schoole.

Tres.

If there were an Arrian whiche had that subtle wit that you haue,* 1.105 he might soone shift of the authority of the scriptures and fathers.

West.

Either dispute, or els hold your peace, I pray you.

Tres.

I bring a place here out of the Councell of Laterane, the which Counsell representing the vniuersall Churche, wherein were congregated 300. Bishops & 〈◊〉〈◊〉.* 1.106 Metropo∣litans, besides a great multitude of other, decreed y^e bread & wine, by the power of Gods word, was trāsubstātiate in∣to the body & bloud of y^e Lord. Therefore whosoeuer sayth contrary cannot be a childe of the church, but an hereticke.

Rid.

Good Syr, I haue heard what you haue cited out of the Councell of Laterane, and remember that there was a great multitude of Bishops and Metropolitanes, as you sayde: but yet you haue not numbred how many Abbots, Priors, and Friers were in that councell, who were to the number of 800.

One of the Scribes.

What,* 1.107 will you denye then the authori∣ty of that Counsell for the multitude of those Priors?

Rid.

No syr, not so much for that cause, as for that especial∣ly, because the doctrine of that Councell agreed not wyth the word of God as it may well appere by the actes of that Councell which was holdē vnder Innocentius the third,* 1.108 a man (if we beleue the historyes) moste pernitious to the church and common wealth of Christ.

Tres.

What, doe you not receiue the Councell of Lateran? Whereupon he with certayne other cryed, Scribite, scribite, Write, write.

Rid.

No syr, I receiue not that Councell: Scribite, & rescri∣bite: Write, and write agayne.* 1.109

Tres.

Euill men do eat the naturall body of Christ:

Ergo the true and naturall body of Christ is on the aul∣tare.

Rid.

Euill men do eate the very true and naturall bodye of Christ sacramētally, and no further, as S. Augustine saith: but good men do eat the very true body both sacramental∣ly and spiritually by grace.

Tres.

I proue the contrary by S. Austen, Lib. 5. contra Do∣natistas Cap. 8. Sicut enim Iudas, cui buccellulam Dominus tra∣didit, non malum accipiendo, sed malè accipiendo peccauit. &c. Like as Iudas, to whome the Lorde gaue the morsell did offend, not in taking a thing that was euill, but in recei∣uing it after an euil maner. &c. And a litle after, Quia aliquis non ad salutem manducat, non ideo non est corpus. i. Because some do not eate vnto saluation, it foloweth not therefore that it is not his body.* 1.110

Rid.

It is the body to them, that is, the sacrament of the bo¦dy: and Iudas tooke the sacrament of the Lord to his con∣demnation. Austen hath distincted these thinges well in an other place, where he sayth: Panem Domini, & panem Do∣minum. Mali manducant panem Domini, non panem dominum: boni autem manducant & panem Domini, & panem Dominum. That is. The bread of the Lord, the bread the Lorde. Euill men eate the breade of the Lord, but not breade the Lorde. But good men eate both the breade of the Lord and breade the Lord.

West.

Paule sayth, the body, and you say, the sacrament of the body.* 1.111

Rid.

Paule meaneth so in deed.

Wat.

You vnderstand it euill concerning the signe: for the Fathers say, that euill men doe eat him which descen∣ded from heauen.* 1.112

Rid.

They eate him indeede, but sacramentally. The Fa∣thers vse many times the sacrament, for the matter of the sacrament, and al that same place maketh agaynst you: and so here he cited the place.

West.

I bring Theophilacte, which sayth, that Iudas dyd taste the bodye of the Lord. Ostendit Dominus crudelitatem Iudae, qui cum argueretur, non intellexit, & gustauit carnem Do∣mini. &c. id est. The Lord did shewe the cruelty of Iudas, whiche, when he was rebuked, did not vnderstand, and tasted the Lordes flesh. &c.

Rid.

This phrase to Diuines is well knowne,* 1.113 and vsed of the Doctors. He tasted the flesh of the Lord Insensibiliter, In∣sensibly, that is the sacrament of the Lordes flesh.

West.

Chrysostome sayth, that the same punishmēt remai∣neth to them whiche receiue the body of the Lorde vnwor∣thily, as to them which crucified him.* 1.114

Rid.

That is, because they defile the Lordes body: for euill menne doe eate the body of Christ sacramentally,* 1.115 but good men eate both the sacrament, and the matter of the Sacra∣ment.

Wat.

You reiecte the Councell of Laterane,* 1.116 because (you say) it agreeth not with Gods worde. What say you then to the Councell of Nice? The wordes of the Councell be these:

Ne humiliter spectemus propositum panem & potum, sed ex∣altata mente fideliter credamus iacere in illa sacra mensa agnum Dei tollentem peccata mundi à sacerdotibus sacrificatum. Let vs not not looke alow by the grounde vpon the bread and the drinke set before vs, but lifting vppe our minde, let vs faithfully beleue, there vpon y^e holy table to lye the Lambe of God taking away the sinnes of the world, being sacrifi∣ced of the priestes.

Rid.

That Councell was collected out of an••ient Fathers and is to me of great authority, for it sayth: Positum esse pa∣nem in alt••ri, & exaltata mente considerandum eum qui in coelis est. i. That breade is set vpon the aultare, and hauing our mindes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vp, we must consider him which is in heauen. The words of the Councell make for me.

Wat.

(Exaltata mente) with a minde exalted: That is, not as brute beastes at the racke or maunger, hauing an eye onely vpon the thing that is set before them. Agnus Dei ia∣cet in mensa: the * 1.117 Lambe of God lieth on the table, sayeth the Councell.

Rid.

The Lambe of God is in heauen, accordyng to the verity of the body: and here he is with vs in a mistery, ac∣cording to his power, not corporally.

Wat.

But the Lambe of God lyeth on the table.

Rid.

It is a figuratiue speach, for in our minde we vnder∣stand him which is in heauen.

Wat.

But he lyeth there, the Greeke word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Rid.

He lyeth, there that is, he is there present, not corpo∣rally, but he lyeth there in his operation.

Wat.

He lyeth, but his operation lyeth not.

Rid.

You thinke very grossely of the sitting or lying of the Celestiall Lambe on the Table of the Lorde. For we may not imagine any such sitting or lying on y^e table, as the rea∣son of man would iudge: but all thinges are here to be vn∣derstand spirituallye. For that heauenly Lambe is (as I confesse) on the table, but by a spirituall presence, by grace, and not after any corporall substance of his flesh taken of y^e virgin Mary.

And indeed the same Canon doth very playnly teach, that the bread which is set on the table, is materiall bread, and therefore it (the Canon I meane) commaundeth that we shoulde not creepe on the ground in our cogitation,* 1.118 to these thinges which are set before vs, as who shoulde say, what other things are they (as much as perteineth to their true substaunce) then breade and wine? but rather (sayth the Canon) lifting vp our mindes into heauen, let vs con∣sider w^t fayth the Lambe of God, which taketh awaye the sins of y^e world, sitting or lying vpon y^e table. For a lifted vp fayth sayth he seeth him, which sitteth on the right hande of God the father, after y^e true maner of a body, set by grace on the Lordes Table, and taking away the sinnes of the worlde. For I thinke you meane not so, as though the Lambe did lye there prostrate with his members spreade upon the table.

Smith.

I bring an other place out of the Councell of Nice, Nullus Apostolorum dixit,* 1.119 haec est figura corporis Christi, Nul∣lus venerabilium praesbyterorum dixit incruentum altaris sa∣crificium figuram: Ergo. &c. That is. None of the Apostles sayd, this is a figure of the body of Christ: None of the re∣uerend Elders sayd, the vnbloudy sacrifice of the aultar to be a figure.

Ergo, you are deceiued.

Rid.

This Chanon is not in the Councell of Nice. For I haue read ouer this Councell many times.

Then came in an other whom M. Ridley knew not, & sayd,* 1.120 the vniuersall church both of the Greekes & Latines of the East and of the West, haue agreed in the Councell of Florence vniformably in y^e doctrine of the sacrament, that in the Sacrament of the Aultar there is the true and reall Body.

Rid.

I denye the Greeke and the East Churche to haue a∣greed either in the Councel at Florence, or at any time els with the Romish Church in the doctrine of Transubstan∣tiation of bread into the body of Christ. For there was no∣thing in the Councell of Florence, wherein the Greekes would agree with the Romanistes: albeit hitherto I con∣fesse it was left free for euery Churche to vse, as they were wont, leuened or vnleauened bread.

Here cryed out D. Cole, & sayde, they agreed together concerning transubstantiation of breade into the bodye of Christ. M. Ridley sayd, that could not be.

* 1.121Here start vp an other vnknowne to M. Ridley, but thought to be one of the Scribes, who affirmed with him, y^t in deed there was nothing decreed cōcerning trāsubstāti¦ation, but the Councell left that, as a matter not meete nor worthy to disturbe the peace and concord of the church. To whom M. Ridley answered agayne, saying: that he sayd y^e trueth.* 1.122

Pie.

What say you to that councell, where it is sayde, that the Priest doth offer an vnbloudy sacrifice of the Bodye of Christ?

Rid.

I say, it is well sayd, if it be rightly vnderstand.

Pie.

But he offereth an vnbloudy sacrifice.

Rid.

It was called vnbloudy, and is offered after a certain maner, and in a misterye, and as a representation of that bloudy sacrifice, and he doth not lye which sayth, Christ to be offered.

West.

I with one argument will throw downe to y^e groūd your opinion, out of Chrysostome,* 1.123 Homi. 24. in. 1. ad Corinth. and I wil teach, not onely a figure or signe, or grace onely▪ but the very same body which was here conuersant in the earth, to be in the Eucharist.

We worship the selfe same body in y^e Eucharist, whiche the wise men did worship in the maunger.

But that was his naturall & reall body, not spirituall:

Ergo the reall body of Christ is in the Eucharist.

Agayne, the same Chrysostome sayth: We haue not here the Lord in the maunger, but on the aultare. Here a woman hol∣deth him not in her handes, but a priest.

Rid.

We worship I confesse, the same true Lord and Sa∣uiour of the world, which the wise men worshipped in the maunger, howbeit we do it in mystery, and in the sacramēt of the Lordes supper, and that in spiritual liberty, as sayth S. Aust Lib: 3. de doctrina Christiana: not in carnall seruitude: that is, we do not worship seruilely the signes for the thin∣ges: for that shuld be, as he also sayth, a part of a seruile in∣firmity. But we behold with the eyes of fayth, him present after grace and spiritually sette vppon the Table: and we worship him which sitteth aboue, & is worshipped o•• the Aungels, For Christ is alwaies assistant to his mysteries, as the sayd August. sayth. And the diuine maiesty, as sayth Cyprian, doth neuer absent it selfe from the diuine myste∣ries, but this assistaunce and presence of Christ, as in Bap∣tisme is wholy spirituall, and by grace, and not by any cor∣poral substaunce of the flesh: euen so is it here in the Lords supper, being rightly & according to the word of God due∣ly ministred,

West.

That which the woman did hold in her wombe, the same thing holdeth the priest.

Rid.

I graunt the prieste holdeth the same thing, but after an other maner. She did holde the natural body:* 1.124 the priest holdeth the mystery of the body.

West.

Weston repeated agayne his argumēt out of Chry∣sostome in English.

Rid.

I say that the author meant it spiritually.

West.

Weston here dissoluing the disputations, had these wordes: Videtis praefractum hominis animum, gloriosum, va∣frum, inconstantem: videtis hodie veritatis vires inconcussas, Ita que clamate: Vicit veritas: that is, Here you see, the stubborne, the glorious the crafty, the vnconstant minde of this man.* 1.125 Here you see this day, that the strength of the trueth is with our foyle. Therefore I beseech you all most earnestly to blow the note, and he beganne, and they folowed. Verity hath the victory: Veritye hath the victory.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Smithes ar∣gument.
• * 1.2

  Aunswere.
• * 1.3

  The veritie of M. Ridleyes answere tou∣ching the reall being of Christ in earth to be restrained by his ascending and abiding in heauen, standeth vpon a necessitie, whiche we call [Necessitas consequentiae] by thys demonstration:

  Da- Euery naturall body must necessarily be contayned in his pecular and cer∣taine place.

  ••i•• Christes body is a naturall body:

  ••. Ergo, Christes body not to be in one certaine place at once contayned, it is impossible according to the rule: Om∣ne, propositiones de impossibili & de neces••e equipollent dicto dissimiliter se habenti, & modō similiter.
• * 1.4

  Argument▪
• * 1.5

  Aunswere.
• * 1.6

  Christes abo••e in heauen is no let for him to appeare on earth when he will, but whe∣ther he wil, that must be proued. Againe it is one thing to appeare on earth, an o∣ther still in the Sacrament, and to be present the same time with his body in heauen, whē he is bodely present in earth
• * 1.7

  Christes conti∣nuall sitting in heauen expen∣ded.
• * 1.8

  Christ cannot be both corpo∣rally here, and corporally also in heauen at one tyme.
• * 1.9

  Chrisost Hom. 17. ad Hebraeos.
• * 1.10

  Argument.
• * 1.11

  Aunswere.
• * 1.12

  One Christ but not one body, nor after on bo∣dely substance in all places.
• * 1.13

  Aunswere to Chrysost.
• * 1.14

  One Christ and one sacrifice in all places, and how: to wit, christ by veritie the sacrifice by, signification.
• * 1.15

  Ex libro Rid∣lei ipsius manu descripto.
• * 1.16

  Sacrifice why it is called one.
• * 1.17

  How one christ is offered in ma∣ny places at once.
• * 1.18

  Bernard.
• * 1.19

  The time of Ber¦nard considered.
• * 1.20

  Bernard rather expounded then reiected.
• * 1.21

  What is the ve∣rity of the body of Christ.
• * 1.22

  To be resident & not resident, import contra∣diction.
• * 1.23

  To be he•••• & not her•• importeth contradict••••on in res∣pect of so••••dry 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.24

  Christes appearing on the earth som••••time, take•• not away his residē•• in heauen▪ How 〈◊〉〈◊〉 appeared earth.
• * 1.25

  This argu••ment hold••eth rather ratione m••••teriae, th•• ratione fo••••mae.
• * 1.26

  Whether Paule sa•••• Christ in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 heauen o•• in earth, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is one to proue his resurrecti•••• Petitio Principi••▪
• * 1.27

  Argument▪
• * 1.28

  Aunswere▪
• * 1.29

  Argumen••▪
• * 1.30

  Aunswere▪
• * 1.31

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.32

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.33

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.34

  Th•••• ••d∣dition is ta∣ken out of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of B. Ri••••leys owne writ••••g.
• * 1.35

  The credite of Linus story.
• * 1.36

  Chrysost. alleaged ••om 2. ad populū Antioch.
• * 1.37

  Here at this aunswere great 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of taun∣ting, spite∣full 〈…〉〈…〉 vpon this good Bi∣shop.
• * 1.38

  Chrysost. De 〈◊〉〈◊〉 de Sacerdo∣tij. lib. 3. cap. 3.
• * 1.39

  The miracle in the Sacrament wherein it con∣sisteth.
• * 1.40

  How Christ tooke vp his bo∣dy, and left it with vs. The phrase of Chrysost consi∣dered.
• * 1.41

  Comparison be∣tweene Elias mantell, and Christes fleshe. Elias tooke his mantell, & left neither mantel, nor Sacrament▪ of his mantell behind him. Christ tooke his fleshe and left a Sacramēt of his fleshe, which was more then Elias did: & yet the sayd Elias after∣ward cast down his mantell.
• * 1.42

  Harpsfield aun∣swered.
• * 1.43

  Quam sit ••tu∣pida & crassa re∣sponsio tua.
• * 1.44

  D. Weston spea∣king to the au∣diēce in English.
• * 1.45

  But where were these Iudges in K. Edwardes tyme.
• * 1.46

  How ye are sprinckled with Christes bloud.
• * 1.47

  This he repea∣ted in Englishe to the people also.

  Aunswere to Bernard.
• * 1.48

  The Papistss make Christ to haue a monste∣rous body.
• * 1.49

  Here they re∣turne agayne to Latin.

  B. Ridley falsly charged to set forth the Cate∣chisme.
• * 1.50

  D. Weston in K. Edwards dayes subscribed.
• * 1.51

  Of this Cate∣chisme read be∣fore pag. 1357.
• * 1.52

  The Iudges geue an vntrue verdite: for D. Cranmer mea∣ning by the Counsell, spake no word of Ridley.
• * 1.53

  A possibili ad esse non valet consequentia.
• * 1.54

  Argument of the wisedome & truth of Christ. Hillar. in Psal. 118.
• * 1.55

  Aunswer•• to Master Wardes ar••gument.
• * 1.56

  This argu∣ment is no•• formall in the 2. figur••
• * 1.57

  Aunswere••
• * 1.58

  Theophi∣lact. in Math. 26.
• * 1.59

  The word of Theo∣phil. (he sayd not this is a fi∣gure of my body) aun••swered.
• * 1.60

  This ar∣gument is without perfect mode and forme, ha∣uing the Minor ne∣gatiue in the 2. fi∣gure.
• * 1.61

  Conuersio•• after what sorte in th•• Sacrament••
• * 1.62

  Anno 1554. Aprill
• * 1.63

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.64

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.65

  Argument in the 3. fi∣gure.
• * 1.66

  Iu••tinus Martyr. A∣polog. 2.
• * 1.67

  D. Cran∣mer ch••r∣ged with 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a place of ••ustine Read his aunswere to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be∣fore pag. 13••9.
• * 1.68

  Sumptum exe••pl••••i 〈…〉〈…〉 descrip∣to.
• * 1.69

  In this argu∣ment if the Mi∣nor be a nega∣tiue, the forme is false: if it be affirmatiue a••∣quipollenter. The Maior is to be denyed.
• * 1.70

  Tertull contra Martion. lib. 4.
• * 1.71

  Argument.
• * 1.72

  Aunswere.
• * 1.73

  Anagogicall sense is that which hath a high and misti∣call vnderstan∣ding that lyeth abstruse & pro∣found vnder the externall letter.
• * 1.74

  August. in Psal. 98.
• * 1.75

  Esay. 66.
• * 1.76

  If the Minor of this argument (as is sayd be∣fore) be equi¦pollent to affir∣matiue, then it commeth next to the Mode Datisi.

  How Christ gaue his flesh to be eaten and when.
• * 1.77

  Christ gaue himselfe not only in a figure, but in deede by a reall and ef∣fectuall com∣munication of his fleshe.

  D. Glinne dis∣puteth.

  D. Glinne B. Ridleys old frend desireth him of Pardon. B Ridley for geueth D. Glin.
• * 1.78

  B. Ridley pur∣geth himselfe against D. Glin.
• * 1.79

  This argumēt hauing the Mi∣nor a negatiue neyther is for∣mable in the 3. figure, neyther doth it conclude rightly but should conclude thus: Ergo to worship the flesh of Christ in the Eucharist is no Idolatry. Sumptum ab autographo Ridlei manu de∣scripto.
• * 1.80

  August. contra Faustum lib. 20. cap. 13.
• * 1.81

  ••quiuocation of this word w••rship, dis∣tincted.
• * 1.82

  We wor∣ship Chri•••• in the Eu∣charist: but we worship not the Eu••charist for Christ.
• * 1.83

  This Coū∣cell of Flo∣rence was but of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 yeares in the tyme 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Coun••cell of 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.84

  Chrisost. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cap. 10. Cor. 1. Hom. 24.
• * 1.85

  The Ma∣ior should be thus: Whatsoe∣uer did flow from the side of Christ is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the cup. &c. or els the argument being in the 2 figur•• is affirma∣tiue and false.
• * 1.86

  This ar∣gument concludeth not directly and being in the 2. figure affir∣matiue it is not formall
• * 1.87

  Spirituall eating of the flesh of Christ.
• * 1.88

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sacra∣•••••••• geue grace 〈…〉〈…〉 in∣••••••mentes. ••••crament 〈◊〉〈◊〉. ••he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be 〈…〉〈…〉 Sacra∣•••••••• of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Testa∣•••••••• hath a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of 〈…〉〈…〉 and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 promise 〈…〉〈…〉, bread 〈◊〉〈◊〉 witness 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sacra∣••••••t of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Testa∣••e••t. No pro∣••••se made 〈◊〉〈◊〉 bread & 〈◊〉〈◊〉, as ••••ey be 〈…〉〈…〉 and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 wine, but as they be sanctified & made sacra∣mēts of the Lords body and bloud, they are not now called bread n••r wine, haue a promise annexed to them, or rather (to say the 〈◊〉〈◊〉) an∣••exed to the recea∣••ers of the••. Argument. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a pro∣••••se of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 annex 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not ab∣••••••utely but 〈…〉〈…〉 are not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in ••••crament•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of 〈…〉〈…〉 to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 came 〈◊〉〈◊〉 them. 〈…〉〈…〉 not 〈…〉〈…〉, but 〈…〉〈…〉 of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sacra∣••••nt. ••••••raments 〈…〉〈…〉.
• * 1.89

  1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.90

  Chrisost. in 1. Cor cap. 10.
• * 1.91

  Aunswere to Chrisostome.
• * 1.92

  In 1. Cor. cap. 10.
• * 1.93

  Bread signifieth the body after Chrisostome.
• * 1.94

  One bread, one misticall body.
• * 1.95

  Watson cauil∣leth about this word all.
• * 1.96

  Cyprianus de Coena Domini.
• * 1.97

  M. Fecknam•• reason.
• * 1.98

  August. in Psal. 33. Concio. 1.
• * 1.99

  The place of Augustine aun∣swered.
• * 1.100

  The place of Austen how Christ was ca∣ryed in his handes ad literā i. litterally.
• * 1.101

  Ferebatur, quo∣dam modo in manibus suis. Aug. i. Christ was borne in his owne handes sacramentally.
• * 1.102

  A figure he may beare but not a sacrament.
• * 1.103

  Quodam modo.
• * 1.104

  D. Tresham prayeth for con∣uerting Ridley.
• * 1.105

  The decree of Latera••e Coū∣cell alleaged for transubstātiatiō.
• * 1.106

  Of thi•• Counc•••••• read 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.107

  One o•• Scribes 〈…〉〈…〉 B. Ridl••••
• * 1.108

  Of thi•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 read 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.109

  B. Rid•••••• reiecte•• the Co••••••cell of terane. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Good 〈◊〉〈◊〉 do eate 〈◊〉〈◊〉 very tru•• body of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Christ b•• sacramēt••••ly and sp••••ritually. August. 5. contra Donatist cap. 8.
• * 1.110

  Manduca•• panem D••••mini. & ••••••nem Do••••••num▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.111

  This 〈◊〉〈◊〉 spoke in Englishe••
• * 1.112

  The olde Doctors vse many tymes th•• Sacrame•••• for the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of th•• Sacrame•••• Theophi••lact. allea••ged.
• * 1.113

  Aunswe••••
• * 1.114

  Chrisost▪ alleaged▪
• * 1.115

  Chrisost▪ expound••••
• * 1.116

  The Cou••••cell of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 alleaged.
• * 1.117

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.118

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.119

  An other place of Nicene Coun••ell alleaged.
• * 1.120

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.121

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.122

  〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉
• * 1.123

  Sacrifice called vnbloudy is no∣thing els but a representation of the bloudy Sacrifice of Christ.

  Weston playeth Golyah with Dauid.

  This argument after the dispo∣sition & termes, as it standeth, i•• not formall.
• * 1.124

  The same thing but the maner diuers.
• * 1.125

  D. Weston bloweth vp the triumph.