bloode, is admyxed water, which doth sygnyfye the people that are
redeamed with hys bloode: so that the heade which is Christe, ys not
without hys bodye which is the faythfull people, nor the bodye without
hys heade. Now yf the wyne when it is consecrated, be tourned bodelye in
to Christes bloode, then is it also necessarye that the water which is
admyxed be bodelye tourned in to the bloode of the faythfull people. For
where as is one cōsecracion muste folowe one operacyō. And where as is
lyke reason, there muste folowe lyke mysterye. But what so euer is
sygnyfyed by the water as cōcernynge the faythfull people, is taken
spirytually. Therfore whatsoever is spokē of the bloode in the wyne,
muste also neades be taken spyrytuallye. This reason is not myne, but it
is made by one Bartrame [Sidenote: Bartrame.] vpō a .700. yeares sens,
when this matter was fyrste in dysputacyon. Whervpō at the instaunce of
greate Charles the Emperoure, he made a boke professynge euen the same
thynge that I do, and proueth by the olde doctours & faythfull fathers,
that the sacrament is Christes bodye in a mysterye, that is to saye: a
sygne, figure, or memoryall of hys bodye, whiche was broken for vs, and
not hys naturall bodye. And therfore that doctryne is newe which
otherwyse teacheth, and not myne, which is not myne, but the doctryne of
Christe and of the olde fathers of Christes churche, tyll Antichriste
began to sytte and reigne in the temple of God.
[Sidenote: Cyprianus ad Cecilium.] Besydes that Cypriane sayeth, that
the people is ānexed in the sacramēt through the myxture of water.
Therfor I mervell moche that they are so cōtēcyous ād wyll not see, that
as the water is the people, so the wyne ys Christes bloode, that is to
saye: in a mysterye, because yt represēteth Christes bloode, as the
water doth the people. Furthermore Eusebius sayth. [Sidenote: Eusebius.]
_Dū in sacramētis uino aqua miscetur, Christo fidelis populus
incorporatur & iūgitur & quadā ei copula perfecta charitatis unitur._
That is to saye: whyles in the sacrament water is admyxte with the wyne,
the faythfull people is incorporate ād Ioyned with Christ, ād is made
one with him, with a certayne knotte of perfecte charyte. Now where he
sayeth, that we are Ioyned ād incorporated with Christe, what fondnes
were it to cōtēde, syth we are there onelye in a mysterye, ād not
naturallye. To cōtēde I say with suche pertynacyte that his naturall
bodye must be there: ād not rather that he is Ioyned with vs, as we are
Ioyned with hym, ād both in a mysterye, by the knotte of perfecte
charyte. [Sidenote: More.] ❧ The yōge man perceyueth well ynough that an
allegory vsed in some place is not a cause suffycyēt to leaue the proper
sygnyfycacyōs of Godes worde in euery other place ād seke an allegorye,
ād forsake the playne cōmō sence. For he cōfesseth that he wold not so
do saue for necessyte: because (as he sayeth) that the cōmon lytterall
sence is impossyble. For the thynge he sayeth that is mente therbye can
not be true. That is to saye: that the verye bodye of Christe can be in
the sacrament, because the sacrament ys in many dyuerse places at ones,
and was at the maundye: that is to wete, in the handes of Christe ād in
everye of hys Apostles mouthes. And at that tyme yt was not gloryfyed.
And thē he sayeth that Christes bodye not beynge gloryfyed, could no
more be in two places at ones than hys owne cā. And yet he goth after
furder, ād sayeth, no more yt can whan yt is gloryfyed also. And that he
proueth by the sayenge of S. Austen whose wordes be, that the body with
the which Christ arose muste be in one place. &c.
[Sidenote: Fryth.] ¶ Hetherto hath master More reasoned reasonablye: but
now he begynneth to declyne from the dygnyte of dyuynyte into the dyrty
dregges of vayne sophystry. For where I saye that I muste of necessyte
seake an allegorye, because the lytterall sence is impossyble and can
not be true, meanynge that it can not stonde with the processe of holy
scrypture, but that other textes do of necessyte constrayne me to
cōstrue yt spyrytuallye. There catcheth he thys worde, can, and thys
worde impossyble, and wolde make men beleue that I mente, yt coulde not
be true because reason can not reache yt, but thynketh it impossyble.
And there he triūpheth before the vyctorye, and wolde knowe what artycle
of our fayth I coulde assygne, in which reason shall not dryue awaye the
strengthe of my proue, and make me leaue the lytterall sence wherin my
profe shulde stonde, and sende me to seake an allegorye that myght
stonde wyth reason, and dryue awaye the fayth. But now deare bretherne,
seynge I speake not of the impossybylyte of reason, but of the
impossybylyte to stōde with other textes of scripture, ye maye see that
this royall reasō is not worth a ryshe. Then wolde he fayne knowe the
place where S. Austen so sayeth, which thyng although, yt were harde for
me to tell, syth I haue not hys bokes to loke for it, yet I thanke God
my memorye is not so bad, but I can shewe hym where he shall fynde yt.
And because I thynke that he is more accustomed to the Popes lawes then
to S. Austens workes, syth he is become the prelates proctoure and
patrone: I saye he shall not fayle but fynde it in his lawes de
consecracione. And where as he wolde wreste the wordes of S. Austē,
which sayeth that the bodye in which Christ arose muste neades be in one
place: sayēge, that he myght meane not that hys body myght not be in
dyuerse places at ones, but that yt muste be in one place, that is to
saye: in some one place or other. He speaketh (sayth master More)
nothynge of the sacrament, nor sayeth not that his bodye with which he
rose muste nedes be in one place, & that it cā by no possybylyte be in
any mo. Thys seameth to some a goodly glose, ād yet yt shall proue but a
vayne evasyon. For yf a mā wolde saye that the Kynges graces body muste
be in one place, and then a nother wolde expounde that (notwithstondynge
hys wordes) hys graces bodye myght be in two places at ones, I thynke
men myght soone Iudge that he delyted to delaye, ād myght saye, what
neade he to determyne, that he muste be in one place excepte he thought
in dede, that he myght be in no mo but onely one; And though mē myght so
argue vpō other mens wordes, yet of saynte Austēs wordes thys must
neades folowe, for he bryngeth them in (as God wolde) by a contrarye
antithesis sayenge. [Sidenote: Ad Hieronimū.] _Corpus in quo resurrexit
in uno loco esse oportet, ueritas autem eius ubique diffusa est._ That
is to saye: hys bodye wherin he rose must be in one place, but hys truth
ys dyspersed in all places. Where he playnelye concludeth by the
contrarye antithesis, that as hys truth ys dyspersed in all places, so
muste hys bodye neades be in one place onelye. As by example, yf a mā
shulde saye. The Kynges graces bodye muste neades be in one place, but
hys power is through out hys Realme. Where no man doubteth, but that in
sayenge one place, he meaneth one place onelye: And therfore though in
some place that worde, muste, doth not sygnyfye suche a necessyte as
excludeth all possybylyte, yet in this place yt doth so sygnyfye, as the
contrarye antithesis doth evydently expresse.
And where ye saye, that he speaketh no thynge of the sacrament, I wolde
ye shulde stycke styll to that sayenge. For this is playne, that he
speaketh of hys naturall bodye. And therfore yf he speake not of the
sacrament, then haue you cōcluded that the sacramēte is not hys naturall
bodye: the contrarye wherof you wolde haue men beleue. Thus haue I
shewed evydence, bothe where he shall fynde the wordes of S. Austen and
also that I haue ryght alleaged them.
Notwytstondynge syth he maketh so moche of hys paynted sheth, I shall
alleage hym more auctorytes that Christes naturall bodye is in one place
onely. Which thynge proued doth vtterly conclude that the sacrament ys
not hys naturall bodye, but onelye a memoryall representynge the same.
And fyrste let vs see S. Austēs mynde.
[Sidenote: August. ad Dardanium.] S. Austen wrytynge vnto Dardanius doth
playnly proue that the naturall body of Christe muste neades be in one
place onelye, and also that hys soule can be but in one place at ones.
The occasyon of hys Epystle is this: Dardanius ded wryte vnto S. Austen
for the exposycyon of those wordes that Christe spake vnto the thefe
sayenge: This daye shalt thou be with me in paradyse: & wyste not how he
shulde vnderstonde yt, whether Christe mēte that the thefe shulde be in
paradyse with Christes soule, or with hys bodye, or with hys Godhed.
Thervpon S. Austen wryteth that as towchynge Christes bodye, that daye
it was in the sepulchre. And sayeth that it was not paradyse, although
it were in a gardē that he was buryed. For Christe (he sayeth) mēt of a
place of Ioye. And that was not (sayeth S. Austen) in hys sepulchre. And
as for Christes soule, yt was that daye in hell. And no mā wyll saye,
that paradyse was there. Wherfore (sayeth Austen) the texte muste neades
be vnderstonde, that Christ spake yt of hys godhed. Now marke thys
argumēt of S. Austen, and ye shall see my purpose playnelye proued. For
seynge he expoundeth thys texte vpō Christes Godhed, because hys māhod
as towchynge the body was in the graue, and as towchynge hys soule was
in hell: you may soone perceyue that Austē thought, that whyls hys body
was in the graue, yt was not in paradyse also: & because hys soule was
in hell, yt coulde not be in paradyse also. And therfor he verefyeth the
texte vpon hys dyuynyte. For yf he had thought that Christes bodye or
soule myght haue bene in dyuerse places at ones, he wolde not haue
sayde, that the texte must neades be vnderstōde of his dyuynyte, but it
myght full well, yea and moche better haue bene vnderstōde of hys
manhode. Marke well thys texte whiche doth determyne the doubt of this
matter. Notwithstondynge the faythfull Father leaueth not the matter on
thys fashyō, but also taketh a waye soche fonde ymagynacyons as wolde
cause mē to surmyse, that Christes bodye shulde be in mo places at ones
then one. For he sayeth. _Cauendum est ne ita diuinitatem astruamus
hominis ut ueritatem auferamus corporis. Non est autem consequens ut
quod in deo est, ita sit ubiq;. Nam & de nobis ueracißime scriptura
dicit, quod in illo uiuimus, mouemur & sumus. Nec tamē sicut ille, ubiq;
sumus, sed aliter homo ille in Deo, quam & aliter deus in illo homine,
proprio quodam & singulari modo. Vna enim persona deus & homo est, et
utrumq; est unus Christus Iesus, ubiq; per id quod deus est, in celo aūt
per id quod homo._ That is to saye: we muste beware that we do not so
affyrme the dyuynyte of the man, that we take awaye the truth of hys
bodye. For it foloweth not that the thynge whiche is in God, shulde be
in euery place as God is. For the scrypture doth trulye testyfye vnto
vs, that we lyue, moue, and be in hym. And yet are we not in everye
place as he is. Howbeit, that man is otherwyse in God, and God otherwyse
in that man by a certayne peculyer and synguler waye. For God and man is
one parson, and bothe of them one Christe Iesu, whiche is in euery place
in that he is God, and in heauen, in that he is man. Here Austen doth
saye, that yf we shulde graunte Christe to be in all places as towchynge
hys manhode, we shulde take a waye the truth of hys bodye. For though
hys manhode be in God and God in hys manhode, yet it foloweth not, that
it shulde be in everye place, as God is. And after he concludeth, that
as towchynge hys Godhed he is in euery place, and as towchynge hys
manhode, he is in heauē. What neade he to make these wordes and
antithesis, but because he thought verelye that though hys Godhed were
in euery place, yet his māhode was in heauen onelye.
[Sidenote: Augustinus ibidē.] But yet thys holye doctoure goth furder
(so that they maye be ashamed of their parte) and sayeth. _Secundū
hominē namq; in terra erat, non in cœlo (ubi nunc est) quādo dicebat,
nemo ascendet in cœlum nisi qui descendit de cœlo, filius hominis qui
est in cœlo._ That is to saye; as towchynge hys manhod he was in the
earth and not in heauen (where he now is) when he sayde, no man
ascendeth into heauē but he that descended from heauen, the sone of man
whiche is in heaven. Now I truste ye wyll be content and let the truth
spreade. For I am sure it is not possyble for you to avoyde it, for he
sayeth, that as towchynge hys manhod he was in the earth and not in
heauē, whē he spake those wordes: and so proueth that he was not in mo
places at ones then onelye one place. For els yf S. Austen had thought
that he coulde haue bene in mo places at ones then one wyth hys bodye,
then myght he not haue sayde, that he was in earth and not in heauen.
For then a mā myght soone haue deinded hym and haue sayde. Austen you
can not tell, for he maye be in euery place. But they that so thynke
after Austens mynde, do take awaye the truthe of hys naturall bodye, and
make it a very fantastycall bodye: from the which heresye God delyuer
hys faythfull. Besydes thys S. Austen doth saye. _Christum Dominum
nostrum unigenitum DEI suium equalem patri, eundemq; hominis filium quo
maior est pater, & ubiq; totum presentem esse non dubites tanquam DEVM,
& in eodem templo DEI esse uerum DEVM, & in aliena parte cœli propter
corporis modum._ That is to saye: Doubt not but that Christe our Lorde
the onlye begottē sonne of God equall to the Father, and the same beynge
the sonne of mā wherin the father is greater, is whole present in all
places as to towchynge hys Godhed, and dwelleth in the same temple of
God as God, ād in some place of heauen, for the condycyon of hys very
bodye. Here is it euydent by .S. Austēs wordes, that as towchynge hys
Godhed he is in all places. And as towchynge hys manhod, he is onelye in
heauen: yea and not that onelye, but that he beynge in heauen as
towchynge the measure, nature, condycyon, and qualyte of hys naturall
bodye, is onelye in one certayne place in heauen, and not in many places
at ones. Thus moche is proued out of Saynte Austen.
This truth is not onelye proued by S Austens auctoryte, but also by the
noble clarke Fulgentius, which wryteth on this maner. _Vnus idemq; homo
localis ex homine, qui est Deus immensus ex patre, unus idemq; secundum
humanam substantiam absens cœlo cum esset in terra, et derelinquens
terram cū ascendisset in cœlum. Secundum diuinam uero immensamq;
substantiam, nec cœlum dimittens cum de cœlo descendit, nec terram
deserens, cum ad cœlum ascendit. Quod ipsius Domini certisisimo sermone
potest cognosci, qui ut localem ostenderet suam humanitatem, dicit
discipulis suis: Ascendo ad patrem meum & patrem uestrum, Deum meun &
Deum uestrum. De Lazaro quoq; cum dixisset, Lazarus mortuus est,
adiunxit dicens, & gaudeo propter uos (ut credatis) quoniam non eram ibi
immensitatem uero suæ diuinitatis ostendens discipulis dicit: Ecce ego
uobiscum sum usq; ad consummationen sæculi. Quomodo autem ascendit in
cœlum nisi quia localis & uerus est homo, aut quomode adest fidelibus
suis, nisi quia idem inmensus & uerus Deus est._ That is to saye. The
same one man is locall (that is to saye: conteyned in one place) as
towchynge hys manhod, whiche is also God vnmesurable from the Father.
The same one man as towchynge the substaunce of hys manhod, was absent
frō heauen, whē he was in earth, and forsakynge the earth, when he
ascended in to heauē, but as towchynge hys Godly ād vnmeasurable
substaunce he neyther forsoke heauen whē he descēded frō heauen, nor
forsoke the earth, whē he ascēded vnto heauē, which may be knowē by the
moste sure worde of the Lorde, whiche to shewe hys humanyte to be locall
(that is to saye: contayned in one place onelye) ded saye vnto hys
dyscyples. I ascēde vnto my Father and your Father, my God and your God.
Of Lazarus also when he sayde, Lazarus is ded, he sayde further. I am
gladde for your sake (that you may beleue) for that I was not there. And
agayne, shewynge the vnmeasurablenes of hys Godhed, he sayde vnto hys
discyples. Beholde, I am with you vnto the worldes ende, how ded he
ascende in to heauen, but because he is locall and a verye mā? Or howe
is he present vnto hys faythfull, but because he is vnmeasurable and
verye God? Here maye you conclude by the auctoryte of thys doctoure
also, that Christes bodye is onelye in one place at ones. For he sayeth,
that Christ as towchynge hys manhod is locall: that is to saye:
contayned in one place onelye. And that he proueth by the scrypture euen
of Christes owne wordes. Now yf thys be true (as my conscyence doth
testyfye, how so euer other men shall Iudge) then muste it neades folowe
that this naturall bodye can not be in the sacrament. And the auctorite,
I am sure no man can avoyde, yt is so playne.
[Sidenote: More.] ❧ Now as for hys naturall reasons be not worthye the
reasonynge. For fyrste that the bodye of Christe vngloryfyed coulde no
more be in two places at ones then hys owne can, because he is a
naturall bodye, as he is. I wyll not examyne no comparyson betwene their
two bodyes: but yf Christe wolde tell me that he wolde eche of both
their bodyes to be in fyftene places at ones, I wolde beleue hym, and
wolde neuer aske hym whether he wolde fyrste gloryfye them or not. But I
am sure gloryfyed or vngloryfyed, yf he sayde it, he is able to do it.
For the matter is not impossyble to God.
[Sidenote: Fryth.] ¶ Truthe it is that yf Christe so sayde and in so
sayenge so mente, there is no doubte, but he were able so to do. But
that he in dede so grosselye mēt, ye shall neuer proue. And in dede yf
he had so mēte that hys owne naturall bodye shulde haue contynued in the
sacrament which is the meate of the soule through faythe, and not of the
bodye by eatynge it, and maye as well be eaten through fayth, although
it remayne in heauen, as yf it were here present to our mouthes: yf (I
saye) he had so mente, then wolde he neuer haue geuen vs suche
scriptures as he ded. For I saye that thys grosse ymagynacyon may not
stonde with the processe of the scrypture which is receyued, as it shall
appeare by certayne textes.
Fyrste where our sauyoure sayeth: the fleshe profyteth nothynge. The
wayght of those wordes doth compell vs to vnderstonde our matter
spyrytuallye. For by thys shorte sentence we are no lesse plucked from
the carnall eatynge, then was Nichodemus that he shulde not ones dreame
of the carnall regeneracyon, whē Christe sayde vnto hym: that whatsoeuer
thynge was of the fleshe was fleshe. For this is a playne conclusyon,
that whē Christe sayde the fleshe profyteth nothynge, he ment it euē of
hys owne fleshe, that it coulde not profyte (as they vnderstode hym) to
be eaten with the teth. Albeyt it doth moche profyte to be slayne for
our redemptyon, & eaten through fayth. Which thyng we may do although
hys naturall fleshe be not in the sacrament. For I maye as well beleue
in hym though he be in heauen, as yf he were in earth and in the
sacrament, and before myne eyes. And that Christe spake these wordes of
hys owne bodye, it is playne by S. Austens wordes wrytynge vpon the same
place. [Sidenote: Augustitract. su. 6. Joan.] And therfore he sayeth,
that they muste be vnderstonde spyrytuallye, and addeth: yf thou
vnderstonde them spyrytuallye, they are spyryte and lyfe. And though
thou vnderstonde them carnallye, yet neuerthelesse they are spyryte and
lyfe: But vnto thē, they are not spyryte and lyfe, which vnderstondest
not spyrytuallye those thynges that I haue spoken.
[Sidenote: Athanasius. 3. li. qui dix. verb.] Also Athanasius sayeth.
_Spiritus est qui uiuificat, caro non prodest quicquà: uerba que ego
locutus sum, spiritus sunt & uita. Nam & hoc loco utrumque de seipso
dicit carnem & spiritum, & spiritum ab eo quod est secundum carnem
distinxit, ut non solum uisibile, sed etiam inuisibile quod in ipso erat
credentes discant, quod & ea que dicit non sunt carnalia sed
spiritualia. Quod enim comedentibus suffecisset corpus, ut totius mundi
alimonia fiat? Sed ea propter meminit ascensus filii hominis in cœlum ut
illos a corporali cogitacione auelleret, & post hac discant carnem dictā
cibum cœlestem superne uenientem & spiritualem alimoniam quam ipse det,
nā quæ locutus sum (inquit) uobis spiritus sunt & uita._ That is to
saye: it is the spyryte that quyckeneth, the fleshe profyteth nothynge.
The wordes which I speake vnto you, are spiryte and lyfe. For in this
place also he meaneth both of hys owne fleshe and his owne spyryte, and
he deuyded the spiryte from the fleshe: that they myght knowe through
faythe not onelye the vysyble parte, but also the invysyble parte that
was in hym, and also that the wordes which he spake were not carnall,
but spirytuall. For what bodye shulde haue suffysed to haue bene the
meate of all the worlde? And euen therfore ded he make mencyon of the
ascensyon of the sonne of man in to heauen, that he myght wythdrawe them
from the bodelye ymagynacyon, that they myght hereafter learne, that the
fleshe was called heauēly meate which cōmeth frō a boue, & spirytuall
meate which he wolde geue. For (sayeth Christe) the wordes that I haue
spokē vnto you, are spiryte & lyfe. Here you maye see that Christe spake
yt of his owne fleshe, & playnely that yt ded nothynge profyte as
infideles ded vnderstonde hym: For els yt geueth lyfe, as yt is receyued
of the faythfull in a mystery. [Sidenote: Bartrame.] For as Bartrame
sayeth, in this mysterye of the bodye and bloode, is a spirytuall
operacyon which geueth lyfe. Without the which operacyon those mysteryes
do no thynge profytte, for surelye (sayth he) they may feade the bodye,
but the soule they can not feade.
Besydes that the scrypture sayeth, that that entreth in by the mouth
doth not defyle a man, for as Christe sayeth, it is caste forthe in to
the drawght. And by the same reason it foloweth that it doth not
sāctyfye or make a man holye. But the sacrament entreth in by the mouth:
therfore yt doth folowe that (of it selfe) it doth not sāctyfye or make
holye any mā. And of this texte shulde folowe two incōueniences, yf the
sacramēte were the naturall bodye of Christ. Fyrste it shulde folowe
that the body of Christ shulde not sāctyfye the faythfull because it
ētreth in by the mouth. And agayne yt shulde folowe, that the bodye of
Christe shulde be caste out in to the drawght, whych thynge is
abhominable. Wherfore yt muste neades folowe, that the sacramēt cā not
be his naturall bodye.