A boke made by John Fryth, prysoner in the Tower of London / answerynge unto M. Mores letter, which he wrote agaynst the fyrste lytle treatyse that John Fryth made, concernynge the sacramente of the body and bloude of Christ

by John Frith

Here begynneth the preface of Master Mores boke.

|Master. More.| In my moste hartye wyse I recommende me vn to you, & sende you by thys brynger the wrytynge agayne whyche I receyued from you. Wherof I haue bene offered a cople of copyes mo, in the meane whyle, as late as ye wote well yt was.

|Fryth.| ¶ Deare bretherne consyder these wordes & prepare you fo the crosse that Christe shall laye vpon you, as ye haue ofte bene counselled. For even as whan the wolue |1. Pet. 2.| howleth the shepe hadde neade to gather |Luc. 22.| them selues to their shepharde, to be delyuered from the assaulte of the blodye beaste, lykewyse hadde you neade to flye vnto the shepharde of your soules Christe Iesus, and to sell your cootes and bye hys spirituall sworde |Ephe. 6.| (whiche is the worde of God) to defende and delyuer you in thys present necessyte. For now is the tyme that Christ tolde vs of, |Mat. 10.| Math. 10. that he was come (by hys worde) to sette varyaunce betwene the sonne and hys father, betwene the doughter and her mother, betwene the doughter in lawe & her mother in lawe, |Mich. 3.| and that a mans owne housholde shalbe hys enemyes. But be not dysmayed nor thynke it no wonder, for Christ chose .12. and one of them betrayed hys master. |Ioan. 6.| And we that are hys dyscyples may loke for no better than he hadde hym selfe: |Mat. 10.| For the scoler is not a boue hys master.

Saynt Paul protesteth that he was in |2. Cor. 11.| parell amonge the false bretherne, and surely I suppose that we are in no lesse Ieopardye. For yf it be so that hys mastershype receyved one copye and hadde acople of copyes mo offered in the meanewhyle, then may ye be sure that there are many false bretherne which pretende to haue knowlege, and in dede be but pyke thākes, prouydynge for their belye. Prepare ye therfore clokes, for the wether wexeth clowdye, and rayne is lyke to folowe. I meane not false excuses and forswerynge of your selfes: but that ye loke substancyally vpon Goddes worde, that you may be able to answere their sotle obectyons. And rather chose māfully to dye for Christe and hys worde, than cowardly to denye hym, for this vayne and transytory lyfe, consyderyng that they haue no further power but ouer this corruptible bodye, which yf they put it not to deathe, muste yet at the length peryshe of yt selfe. |2. Cor. 10.| But I truste the Lorde shall not suffer you to be tēpted a boue that you may beare, but accordynge to the spirite that he shall poure vpon you, shall he also sende you the scourge, ād make hym that hath receyued more of the spyryte, to suffer more, ād hym that receyueth lesse therof, to suffer accordynge to hys talent. I thought it necessarye fyrst to admonyshe you of thys matter, and now I wyll recyte more of master Mores boke.

|More.| ❧ Whereby men may see how greadely these newe named bretherne wryte it out, and secretely spreade it a brode.

|Fryth.| ¶ The name is of great antiquite, althoughe you lyste to iest. For they were called bretherne before our Byshoppes were called Lordes, ād had the name gyuē thē by Christe sayenge, Mat. xxiij. All ye are bretherne. And Luc. xxij. Cōfyrme thy bretherne. And the name was cōtynued by the Apostles, & is a name that norysheth loue ād amyte. And very gladde I am to heare of their greadye affectyon in wrytynge out the worde of God, for by that I do perceyue the prophesye of Amos |Amos. | to haue place, which sayth in the person of God. I wyll sende hōger ād thurste in to the earth, not honger for meate nor thurste for drynke. But for to heare the worde of God. Now begynneth the kyngdome of heuē to suffer vyolēce: |Mat. 11.| Now rōne the poore Publicanes whiche knowelege them selfes synners, to the worde of God, puttynge both goodes and bodye in |Luc. 18.| Ieoperdye for the soule health. And though our Byshopes do calle it heresye, and all them heretyques that honger after yt, yet do we knowe that it is the Gospell of the leuynge God, for the health and saluacyon of all that beleue. |Rom. 1.| And as for the name doth nothynge offende vs, though they call it heresy a thousande tymes.|Act. 24.| For saynte Paule testyfyeth that the Pharysees and Prestes whyche were counted the very churche in hys tyme, ded so call it, and therfore it forseth not though they, rulyng in their rowmes, vse the same names.

|More.| ❧ Which yonge man I here say hathe latelye made dyuers other thynges that yet ronne in hoker moker so close amonge the bretherne that there cometh no copyes abrode.

|Fryth.| ¶ I answere, that surely I can not spynne, and I thynke no man more hateth to be ydle than I do. Wherfor in suche thynges as I am able to do, I shalbe dylygent as longe as God lendeth me my lyfe. And if ye thynke I be to busye, you may rydde me the sooner, for euen as the shepe is in the bochers hādes ready bounde & loketh but euen for the grace of the bocher when he shall shedde hys blode: Euen so am I bounde at the Byshoppes pleasures, euer lokynge for the day of my deathe. In so moche that playne worde was sent me, that the chaunceloure of London sayde, it shulde coste me the best bloode in my body, which I wolde gladly were shedde tomorowe, yf so be it myght open the Kynges graces eyes.

And verely I maruell that any thynge can ronne in hoker moker or be hydde frō you. For seynge you myght haue suche store of copyes, concernynge the thynge which I moste desyred to haue bene kepte secrete, how shuld you than lacke a copye of those thynges wich I moste wolde haue publyshed? And hereof ye maye be sure, I care not though you and all the Byshoppes within England loke vpon all that euer I wrote, but rather wolde be gladde that ye so ded. For yf there be any sparcle of grace in your breastes, I trust it shulde be an occasyon somwhat to kyndle it, that you may consyder and know your selfes, which is the first poynte of wysdome.

❧ And wolde God for hys mercye |More.| (sayeth M. More) that syth there can nothynge refrayne their studye, from devyse and compassynge of euill ād vngracyous wrytynge, that they wolde ād coulde keape it so secretely that neuer man shulde see it. But suche as are so farre corrupted, as neuer wolde be cured of their canker.

|Fryth.| ¶ It is not possyble for hym that hath hys eyes and seeth hys brother which lacketh syght in Ieoperdye of peryshynge at a perellous pytte, but that he muste come to hym ād guyde hym, tyll he be past that Ieoperdye, and at the least wyse, yf he can not come to hym, yet wyll he call and crye vnto hym to cause hym chose the better waye, excepte hys harte be cankered with the contagyon of suche hatred that he can reioyse in hys neyghbours dystructyon. And euē so is it not possyble for vs which haue receyued the knowelege of Goddes worde, but that we muste crye and call to other, that they leaue the perellous patthes of their owne folyshe fantasyes. |Deut. 12.| And do that onely to the Lorde, that he commaundeth them, neyther addynge any thynge nor dymynyshynge. And therfor vntyll we see some meanes founde, by the which a reasonable reformacyon may be had on the one partye, and suffycyent instructyon for the poore cōmons, I insure you, I neyther wyll nor can cease to speake. For the worde of God boyleth in my bodye, lyke a fervente fyre, & wyll neades haue an yssue and breake out, whā occasyon is geuē.

But this hath bene offered you, is offered, and shall be offered. Graunte that the worde of God, I meane the texte of scrypture, maye go abrode in oure Englyshe tonge, as other nacyons haue it in their tōges, and my brother Wyllyā Tyndall ād I haue done, & wyll promyse you to wryte no more. Yf you wyll not graunte this condycyō, then wyll we be doynge whyle we haue breathe, and shewe in fewe wordes that the scripture doth in many: and so at the least saue some.

|More.| ❧ But a lacke this wyll not be. For as S. Paule sayeth, the contagyō of heresye creapeth ou lyke a cāker. For as the cāker corrupteth the bodye forthere and forther, & tourneth the hole partes in to the same deadly sycknes, so doth these heresyes crepe forth amonge good symple soules, tyll at the laste it be almost past remedye.

|Fryth.| ¶ Thys is a very true sayēge ād maketh well agaynst hys owne purpose. For in dede thys contagyō begā to sprynge euē in S. Paules tyme. In so moche that the Galathyans were in a maner wholy seduced from hys doctryne. And he sayde to the Thessalonyans, |1. The. 2.| the mystery of iniquyte euen now begynneth to worke. |1. Ioā. 4.| And saynt Iohn testyfyeth that there were all readye many Antichrystes rysen in hys dayes. And also Paule prophesyed what shulde folowe after hys tyme. |Act. 20.| Actes. xx. sayenge: Take ye hede to your selues and to all the flocke, ouer whyche the holye Gost hath put you overseers, to feade the congregacyon of God whyche he purchased wyth hys owne bloode. For I knowe thys well, that after my departynge shall enter in greuouse wolues amonge you, which shall not spare the flocke. And euen of your selues shall aryse men, speakynge perverse thynges, to drawe dyscyples after them, and therfore watche, & ce. Thys canker then began to sprede in the congregacyon, and ded full sore noye the bodye, in so moche that within .iiij. C. yeare there were very many sectes scatered in euerye coste. Notwithstandynge there were faythfull fathers that dylygently subdued thē wyth the swerde of Goddes worde. |Siluest.| But surely sens Siluester receyued suche possessyons, hath the canker so crepte in the churche, that it hath almoste lefte neuer a founde member. And as Cistercensis wryteth in the .viij. boke, that day that he receyued revennues, was a voyce harde in the ayre cryeng ouer the courte which sayde, Thys daye is venome shed in to the churche of God. Before that tyme there was no Byshope greadye to take a cure. For it was no honoure & profytte as it is now, but onely a carefull charge which was lyke to cost hym his lyfe at one tyme or other. And therfore no man wolde take it, but he that bare suche a loue and zele to God and his flocke, that he coulde be content to shedde hys bloode for them. But after that it was made so honorable and profytable, they that were worste bothe in lernynge and leuynge, moste laboured for it. For they that ware vertuous wolde |Mat. 7.| not entangle them selues with the vayne pryde of thys worlde, ād weare .iij. |Mar. 15.| Crownes of golde, where Christe ded weare one of thorne. |Ioā. 19.| And in conclusyon it came so farre, that who so euer wolde geue moste money for it or beste coulde flatter the Prynce (which he knewe well all good mē to abhorre) had the prehemynence and gotte the best Byshopryke, and then in steade of Goddes worde, they publyshed their owne commaundemētes, and made lawes to haue all vnder them, and made men beleue they coulde not erre what so euer they ded or sayde, ād euē as in the rowines ād stede of Moses, Aarō, Eliazer, Iosue, Calib, and other faythfull folke, came Herode, Annas, Caiphas, Pylate and Iudas, which put Christ to death: So now in the steade of Christe, Peter, Paule, Iames, ād Iohn, and the faythfull folowers of Christe, we haue the Pope, Cardynalles, Archebyshoppes, Byshoppes, and proude prelates, with their proctoure the malycyous mynyster of their master the Deuyll, which not withstondynge transforme thē selues in to a lykenes, |1. Cor. 11.| as though they were the mynysters of ryghtuousnes, whose ende shalbe acordyng to their workes. So that the bodye is cākered longe agone, ād now are lefte but certayne small mēbres, which God of hys puyssante power hath reserued vncorrupted. And because they see that they can not be cankered as their owne fleshe is, for pure anger they burne them, leaste yf they cōtynued there myght seame some deformyte in their owne cankered carcase, by the comparynge of these whole membres to their scabbed body.

|More.| ¶ Techeth in a fewe leaues shortely all the poyson that Wyclefe, Ecolāpadius, Tyndall, & Zwynglius haue taught in all their bokes before, cōcernynge the blessed Sacramente of the aulter: not onelye affyrmynge it to be verye breade styll (as Luther doth) but also (as these other beastes do) sayeth it is nothynge els. And after the same syr Thomas More sayeth. These dregges hath he dronken of Wyclefe, Ecolāpadius, Tyndall, and Zwynglius, and so hath he all that he argueth here besyde, whych .iiij. what maner folke they be, is metely well perceyued and knowen, and God hath in parte, wyth hys open vengeaunce declared.

|Fryth.| ¶ Luther is not the prycke that I ronne at, but the scrypture of God. I do neyther affyrme nor denye any thynge, because Luther so sayeth but be cause the scrypture of God doth so conclude and determe. I take not Luther for soche an autoure that I thynke he cānot erre, but I thynke verely that he both may erre and doth erre in certayne poyntes, although not in suche as concerne saluacyon and dampnacyō. For in thē (blessed be God) all these whome ye call heretykes do agre ryght well. And lykewyse I do not alowe thys thynge because Wyclefe, Decolampadius, Tyndall, and Zwinglius so saye, but because I see them in that place more purely expounde the scrypture, and that the processe of the texte doth more fauoure their sentence.

And where you saye that I affyrme yt to be breade styll as Luther doth, the same I saye agayne, not be cause Luther so sayeth, but because I can proue my wordes true by scrypture, reason of nature, and doctours. Paule calleth it breade saynge: |1. Cor. 10.| The breade which we breake, is it not the felowshyppe of the bodye of Christe: For we though we be manye, are yet one bodye and one breade: as manye as are pertakers of one breade. And agayne he sayeth. |1. Cor. 11.| As often as ye eate of this breade, or drynke of this cuppe, you shall shewe the Lordes death vntyll he come. Also Luke calleth it breade in the actes sayenge: |Act. 2.| they contynued in the felowshyp of the Apostles and in breakynge of breade, & in prayer. |Luc. 22.| Also Christe called the cuppe, the frute of vyne, sayenge. I shall not from hence forthe drynke of the frute of the vyne, vntyll I drynke that a newe in the kyngdome of my Father.

Furthermore nature doth teche you that both the breade and wyne contynue in their nature. For the breade mouldeth yf it be kepte longe, yea, and wormes breede in it. And the poore mouse wyll ronne away with it, and desyre none other meate to her dyner, whiche are euydēt ynough that there remayneth breade. Also the wyne yf it were reserued wolde wexe sower, as they confesse thē selues, and therfore they howsell the laye people but wyth one kynde onely, because the wyne can not contynue nor be reserued, to haue readye at hande when neade were. And surely as yf there remayned no breade it coulde not moulde nor wexe full of wormes: Euē so yf there remayned no wyne, it coulde not wexe sower, and therfore it is but false doctryne, that our Prelates so lōge haue publyshed. Fynallye that there remayneth breade myght be proued by the auctoryte of many doctours, which call it breade and wyne, as Christ and hys Apostles ded. And thoughe some sophysters wolde wreste their sayenges and expounde them after their fantasye, yet shall I alledge thē one doctoure (which was also Pope of Rome) that maketh so playne wyth vs that they shalbe compelled with shame to holde their tonges. For Pope Gelasius wryteth on this maner. Certe sacramenta quæ sumimus corporis et sanguinis Christi diuinæ res sunt & propterea per illa, participes facti sumus diuinæ naturæ, & tamen non desinit esse substantia uel panis & uini, sed permanēt in suæ proprietati naturæ. Et certe imago & similitudo corporis & sanguinis Christi in actione misteriorum celebrantur. That is to saye, surely the sacramentes of the bodye and bloode of Christe, are a godly thynge, and therfore through them are we made partakers of the Godly nature. And yet doth it not cease to be the substaunce, or nature of breade and wyne, but they contynue in the propertye of their owne nature. And surely the Image and symylytude of the bodye and bloode of Christe, are celebrated in the acte of the mysteryes. Thys I am sure was the olde doctryne which they cā not avoyde. And therfor wyth the scrypture, nature, ād fathers, I wyll conclude that there remayneth the substaunce, and nature, of breade and wyne.

|More.| And where ye saye that we affyrme it to be nothynge els, I dare saye that ye vntrulye reporte of vs all. And here after I wyll shewe you what it is more then breade. And where ye saye that it is meately well knowen what maner of folke they be, and that GOD hath in parte wyth hys open vengeaunce declared.

|Fryth.| ¶ I answere that Master Wyclefe was noted whyle he was lyuynge, |Wiclefe.| to be a man not onely of moste famous doctryne, but also of a very syncere lyfe and conversacyon. Neuerthelesse to declare your malycyous myndes and vengeable hartes (as men saye) xv. yeares after he was buryed, you toke hym vp and brente hym, whiche facte declared your furye, although he felte no fyre. |Mat. 10.| But blessed be GOD whiche hath geuen suche tyrauntes no further power, but over thys corruptyble bodye. For the soule ye can not bynde nor burne, |Mal. 2.| but God maye blesse where you curse, and curse where you blesse.

|Ecolampadius.| ¶ And as for Oecolampadius, that notable learned man, hys moste aduersaryes haue euer commended hys conversacyon and Godlye lyfe, which when God has appoynted hys tyme, gaue place vnto nature (as euery man muste) and dyed of a canker.

|Tyndal.| And Tyndall I truste lyueth, well contente with suche a poore Apostles lyfe, as GOD gaue hys sone Christe, and hys faythfull mynysters in thys worlde, whiche is not sure of so many mytes, as ye be yearly of poundes, although I am sure that for hys learnynge and Iudgement in scripture, he were more worthye to be promoted, then all the Byshoppes in Englande. I receyued a letter from hym, whiche was wrytten sens Chrystmas, wherin amonge other matters he wryteth thus. I calle GOD to recorde agaynst the daye we shall appere before our Lorde Iesus to geue a rekonynge of our doynges, that I neuer altered one syllable of Godes worde agaynste my conscyēce, nor wolde do this daye, yf all that is in earth, whether it be honoure, pleasure, or ryches, myght be geuen me. Morover I take GOD to recorde to my conscience, that I desyre of GOD to my selfe in this wurlde no more then that without whiche I can not keape hys lawes, & ce. Iudge Christen reader whether these wordes be not spokē of a faythfull clere innocent harte. And as for hys behauyoure is suche, that I am sure no man can reproue hym of any synne, howbeit no man is innocent before God which beholdeth the harte.

|Zwynglius.| Fynallye Zwinglius was a man of suche learnynge and grauyte (besyde eloquence) that I thynke no man in Christendome myght haue compared with hym, notwithstondynge he was slayne in battayle in defendynge hys cytye, and cōmōwelth, agaynste the assaulte of wycked enemyes, whiche cause was moste ryghtuouse.

And yf hys mastershyp meane, that that was the vēgeaunce of God, and declared hym to be an euyll parson because he was slayne: I maye say nay, and shewe euydēt examples of the contrarye. For somtyme God geueth the vyctorye agaynst them that haue moste ryghtuouse cause, as it is evydent in the boke of Iudicum, |Iudi. 20.| where all the chylderne of Israell were gathered together to punyshe the shamefull sodometrye of the trybe of Beniamyn, whyche were in nōbre but .25. thousande. And the Israelytes were .CCCC. thousāde fyghtynge men, whiche came in to Silo, and asked of God who shulde be their capytayne agaynst Beniamyn. And they beynge but .xxv. thousāde slewe of the other Israelytes .12. thousande in one day: Thē fledde the chylderne of Israell vnto the Lorde in Silo, and made greate lamentacyon before hym euen vntyll nyght. And asked hym counsell sayenge. Shall we go any more to fyght agaynste the trybe of Beniamyn oure brotherne or not? God sayde vnto them yes, go vp and fyght agaynste them. Then went they the nexte day and faught agaynste them, and there were slayne agayne of the Israelites .18. thousande men: Then came they backe agayne vnto the house of God, and sate downe and wepte before the Lorde, and fasted that daye vntyll euen, and asked hym agayne whether they shulde anye more fyght agaynste theyr bretherne or not. God sayde vnto them yes, to morow I wyll delyuer thē in to your hādes. And the nexte day was the trybe of Bēiamyn vtterly dystroyed, sauynge .600. men which hydde themselues in the wyldernes. Here yt is evydent that the chylderne of Israell loste the vyctorye twyse, and yet not withstondynge had a iuste cause, and faught at Godds commaundement. Besydes that, Iudas Machabeus, was slayne, in a ryghtuouse cause, as yt is manyfest in the fyrst boke of the Machabees. |Machabe. 9.| And therfore yt can be no evydent argument of the vēgeaunce of God, that he was slayne in battayle in a ryghtuouse cause, and therfore me thynketh that this manne ys to malaperte so bluntly to enter in to Goddes Iudgement, ād geue sentence in that matter before he be called to counsell. Thus haue I suffycyētly touched hys preface, for those poyntes that he afterwarde towched more largely haue I wyllyngly passed, because I shall towche them earnestly hereafter. Nowe lette vs see what he proueth.

|Master More.| ❧ It ys a greate wonder to see vpon how lyght and sleyght occasyons, he ys fallen vnto these abhomynable heresyes. For he denyeth not nor can not say nay, but that our sauyour sayde hym selfe, my fleshe ys verely meate and my bloode ys verely drynke. He denyeth not also that Christ hym selfe at his last souper, takynge the breade in to hys blessed handes, after that he had blessed yt sayde vnto hys discyples. Take you thys and eate yt, thys is my bodye, that shall be geuen for you. And lykewyse gaue them the chalyce after hys blessynge and consecracyon, and sayde vnto them, thys ys the chalyce of my bloode of the newe testament, whyche shalbe shedde out for manye, do ye thys in remembraunce of me.

|Fryth.| ¶ It is a greate wonder to see howe ygnoraunte their proctoure ys, in the playne textes of scrypture. For yf he had any iudgement at all he myght well perceyue that when Christe spake these wordes, my fleshe ys verely meate and my bloode ys verely drynke, he spake nothynge of the sacramēte. For yt was not instytuted vntyll hys laste souper. And these wordes were spoken to the Iewes longe before, and ment them not of the carnall eatynge or drynkynge of hys bodye or bloode, but of the spirytuall eatynge, which is done by faythe and not wyth tothe, ād bellye. Wherof Saynt Austen sayeth vpon thys Gospell of Iohan, why preparest thou other tothe or bellye? beleue and thou haste eaten hym. So that Christes wordes must here be vnderstonde spirytually. And that he calleth hys fleshe verymeate, is because that as meate by the eatynge of yt & digestynge yt in our body dothe strengthen these corruptyble membres, so lykewyse doth Christes fleshe (by the beleuynge that yt taketh our synne vpon yt selfe and suffered the death to delyuer vs) strengthen our immortall soule. And lykewyse as drynke when yt is dronken, doth comforte and quycken our frayle nature, So lykewyse both Christes bloode by the drynkynge of yt in to the bowells of our soule, that ys by the belevynge and remembrynge that yt ys shedde for our synnes, comforte and quycken our soule vnto euerlastynge lyfe. And thys is the eatynge and drynkynge that he speaketh of in that place. And that yt is so you may perceyue by the texte folowynge which sayeth. He that eateth my bodye & drynketh my bloode dwelleth in me and I in hym, which ys not possyble to be vnderstonde of the Sacrament. For it is false to saye, that he that eateth the Sacrament of hys bodye and drynketh the sacrament of hys bloode, dwelleth in Christe and Christe in hym. For some man receyueth yt vnto hys condempnacyō. And thus doth .S. Austen expounde yt sayenge. Hoc est enim Christum manducare, in illo manere, & illum manentem in se habere. Thys is the very eatynge of Christe, to dwell in hym, and to haue hym dwellynge in vs. So that who so euer dwelleth in Christ (that ys to saye) beleueth that he is sent of God to saue vs from our synnes doth verely eate ād drynke hys bodye and bloode, although he neuer receyued the sacrament. Thys ys the spirytuall eatynge necessarye for all that shalbe saued. For there ys no man that cōmeth to God without this eatynge of Christ, that is the beleuynge in hym. And so I denye not but that Christ speaketh these wordes, but surelye he ment spyrytually. As S. Austen declareth, ād as the place playnely proueth.

And as towchynge the other wordes |Mat. 26.| that Christe spake vnto hys dyscyples at hys laste souper, I denye not but that he sayde so, but that he so steshely mēt as ye falsely fayne, I vtterly denye. For I saye that hys wordes were then also spyrite and lyfe, and were spyritually to be vnderstonde. And that he called yt hys bodye, |Ioan. 6.| for a certayne propertye, euen as he called hym selfe |Ioan. 15.| a very vyne, and hys dyscyples very vyne braunches, and as he called hym selfe a dore: |Ioan. 10.| not that he was so in dede, but for certayne propertyes in the symylytudes. |Gen. 35.| As a man for some propertye sayeth of hys neyghbours horsse, this horsse is myne vp and downe, meanynge that yt is in euery thynge so lyke. |Gen. 32.| And lyke as Iacob buylded an aulter and called yt the God of Israel, and as Iacob called the place where he wrasteled with the Angell, the face of God, and as the pascall lambe was called the passynge bye of the Lorde. |Ezech. 5.| And as a broken potsherde was called Hierusalem, not for that they were so in dede, but for certayne symylytudes in the propertyes, and that the very name yt selfe myght put men in remembraunce what ys ment by the thynge, as I suffycyently declared in my fyrste treatyse.

|More.| He muste neades confesse, that they that beleue that yt ys the very bodye and hys very bloode in dede, haue the playne wordes of our sauyoure hym selfe vpon their syde, for the grounde and foundacyon of their faythe.

|Fryth.| ¶ That is very true, and so haue they the very wordes of God, whiche saye a broken potsherde ys Hierusalem, and that Christe is a stone, and that Christe is a vyne and a dore. And yet yf they shuld beleue or thynke that he were in dede any of these thynges, they were neuerthelesse deceyued. For though he so sayde, yet I saye hys wordes were spirituall ād spiritually to be vnderstonde.

|More.| ❧ And where you saye that I flye from the faythe of playne and open scryptures, and for the allegorye destroye the true sence of the letter.

|Fryth.| ¶ I answere that some textes of scripture are onelye to be vnderstonde after the letter: As when Paule sayeth, Christ |Rom. 4.| dyed for our synnes & rose agayne for ourre iustificacyō. And some textes are onely to be vnderstonde spirytually or in the way of an allegory: As whē Paule sayth, |1. Cor. x.| Christe was the stone. And when Christe sayeth hym selfe. |Johā. xv.| I am a very vyne. |Johan. x.| I ā the doore. And some must be vnderstōde both lytterallye, and spirytuallye: As when God sayde, out of Egypte called I my sonne, |Ozee. 11.| whyche although it were lytterallye fulfylled in the chylderne of Israel when he brought them out of Egypte with greate power and wōders, yet was yt also mente ād veryfyed in Christ hym selfe, |Math. 2.| hys very spyrytuall sonne, which was called out of Egygte after the death of Herode. And agayne yt is very spiritually fulfylled in vs whyche through Christes bloode are delyuered from the Egypte of synne, and from the power of Pharao the devyll. And I say that this texte of scripture, this is my bodye, ys onely spirytually to be vnderstonde, ād not lytterallye. And that doth S. Austen also confyrme, which wryteth vnto Adamantus and sayeth. These sentences of scripture, Christ was the stone, the bloode ys the soule, and thys is my bodye, are fyguratyuelye to be vnderstonde (that is to say) spiritually, or by the way of ā allegorye, & thus haue I. S. Austē whollye vpon my syde, whiche thynge shall yet hereafter more playnely appere.

|More.| ❧ Nowe hys example of hys brydgromes rynge I very well alowe. For I take the blessed sacramēt to be left with vs for a very token and a memoryall of Christe in dede. But I say that the whole substaūce of the same token & memoryall, is hys owne blessed bodye. And so I saye that Christe hathe lefte vs a better token then this man wolde haue vs take yt for. And therin he fareth lyke a mā, to whō a brydgrome had delyuered a goodly golde rynge with a ryche Rubye therin, to delyuer to hys bryde for a token. And then he wolde lyke a false shrewe, keape a waye that golden rynge and geue the bryde in steade thereof, a proper rynge of aryshe, and tell her that the brydgrome wolde sende her no better. Or els lyke one that when the brydgrome hadde geuen soche a rynge of golde to hys bryde for a tokē, wyll tell her playne, ād make her beleue, that the rynge were but coper or brasse, to mynyshe the brydgromes thanke.

|Fryth.| ¶ I am ryght gladde that ye admytte myne exāple, ād graūte that the sacramēt is lefte to be a very tokē and memoryall of Christe in dede. But where you saye, that the whole substaunce of the same token ād memoryall is hys owne blessed bodye, that is sooner sayde than proued. And where you saye that we fare lyke a false shrewe that wolde keape the golde rynge from the bryde, and geue her a rynge of a ryshe, or tell her that her golde rynge were coper or brasse, to mynyshe the brydgromes thāke. I answere that we deny not but that the ryng ys most fyne golde, and is sette wyth as ryche Rubyes as can be gotten. For that rynge (I meane the Sacrament) ys not onely a moste perfecte token and a memoryall of the brydegromes benefyttes ād vnfayned fauoure on hys partye, but yt is also on the other partye a thankes geuynge for the gracyous gyftes which she vndoubtedly knowlege her selfe to haue receyued. For as verely as that breade ys broken amōge thē, so verely was Christes bodye broken for their synnes. And as verely as they receyue that breade in to their bellye through eatynge yt, so verelye do they receyue the frute of hys death in to their soules by beleuynge in hym. And therfor they assemble to that souper, not for the valoure of the breade, wyne, or meate, that ys there eate, but for the intent to geue hym thankes commonly a monge them all, for hys inestymable goodnes. But to procede vnto our purpose, yf a man wolde come vnto the bryde, and tell her that thys goodly golde rynge were her owne brydgrome, both fleshe bloode ād bones (as you do) then I thynke yf she haue anye wytte, she myght answere hym, that he mocked, and the more he sayde yt, the lesse she myght beleue hym, and saye that yf that were her owne brydgrome, what shulde she thē neade any remēbraunce of hym, or why shulde he geue it her for a remembraunce. For a remembraunce presupposeth the thynge to be absent, and therfore yf thys be a remembraunce of hym, than can he not here be present.

|More.| ❧ I meruell therfore moche, that he is not a frayde, to affyrme that these wordes of Christe, of hys bodye and of hys bloode, muste neades be vnderstonde by waye of a symylytude or an allegorye, as the wordes be of the vyne and the doore. Nowe this he knoweth well, that though some wordes spokē by the mouthe of Christe be to be vnderstonde onely by waye of a symylytude or an allegorye, yet foloweth it not thervpon, that euery lyke worde of Christe in other places was non other but an allegorye, for suche was the shyfte and cauyllacyon that the wycked Arryans vsed which toke from Christes parson hys omnypotent Godhed.

|Fryth.| ¶ I graunte that the Arryans erred, for as Master More sayeth, though in some place a worde betakē fyguratyuely, it foloweth not therfor that in euery other place, it shulde lykewyse be takē. But one questyō muste I aske hys mastershyppe, how doth he knowe that there is any worde or texte in scripture that muste be takē fyguratyuely, that is by the waye of a symylytude, or as he calleth yt a necessarye allegory? I thynke (though some mē may assygne other good causes ād euydences) that the fyrst knowelege ys by other textes of scrypture. For yf other textes be cōferred vnto yt, and wyll not stonde with the litterall sence, then I thynke yt muste neades be taken spirytually or fyguratyuelye, as there are infynyte textes in scripture. Now when I see that .S. Thomas whiche felte Christes woundes ād put hys fynger in hys syde, called hym hys Lorde and God, and that no texte in scrypture repugneth vnto the same, but that they may well stonde together, me thynketh yt were foly to affirme that this word, God, in that texte shulde be taken fyguratyuely or by waye of an allegorye: But nowe in our matter the processe of scripture wyll not stonde with the lytterall sence, as shall here after appeare. And therfor necessyte compellethe vs to expounde yt fyguratyuelye, as doth also S. Austen and other holy doctours, as hereafter shall playnely appeare.

|More.| ❧ If euery man that can fynde out a newe fonde fantasye vpon a text of holy scrypture, may haue his owne mynd takē, and hys owne exposicyon beleued agaynste the exposycyons of the olde connynge doctours and sayntes, then may you surely see that none artycle of the Christen fayth, can stonde and endure longe. And then he alleageth .s. Hierome, which sayth, that yf the exposycion of other interpretours, and the consent of the common catholycke churche, were of no more strēgth but that euery mā myght be beleued that coulde brynge some textes of scrypture for hym, expounded as it pleaseth hym selfe, then coulde I (sayth this holy mā) brynge vpe a newe secte also, and saye by scrypture, that no man were a true Christen man, nor a membre of the churche, that keapeth two cootes. And in good fayth (sayth master More) yf that waye were alowed I were able my selfe to fynde out fyftene newe sectes in one fore none.

|Fryth.| ¶ Saynte Peter sayeth that the scripture is not expounded after the appetyte of any pryuate parson, but euē as yt was geuen by the spyrite of God, and not by mānes wyll: so muste yt be declared by the same spiryte. And therfore I wyll not that any mā shalbe beleued, by bryngynge hys owne mynde and fantasye. But yf he wyll be beleued, let hym brynge eyther an other playne texte, which shall expounde the fyrste, or els at the leaste he muste brynge suche a manyfest sentence, as wyll stonde wyth the processe of the scripture. Whye was Saynt Hierome alowed agaynst the determynacyon of the counsell of Meldeley, syth he was alone, and they a greate multytude, but onely because he brought euydent scrypture, which at the tyme of their sentence, none of them remembred ād yet when yt was brought, they coulde not auoyde yt. And lykewyse excepte I brynge euydent scripture which they all shall expounde as I do, I desyre not to be beleued. And where master More sayeth, that in good fayth he were able to fynde out fyftene newe sectes in one fore none, he may thanke GOD that he hathe suche a pregnaunte wytte: But yet I truste he shulde not fynde one (yf there were any parell of dāpnacyō therin) but that we wolde with a playne texte confute yt, which he shulde not be able to avoyde.

|More.| ❧ And ouer this, the very cyrcumstaunces of the places in the Gospell in which our sauyour speaketh of that sacramente, may well make open the defference of hys speache in this matter, and of all the other, and that as he spake all those but in an allegorye, so spake he this, playnely meanynge that he spake of hys very bodye and hys very bloode, besyde all allegoryes. For when our Lorde sayde, he was a very vyne, and when he sayd he was the dore, there was none that harde hym, that any thynge merueled therof. And whye: For because they perceyued well, that he ment not that he was a materyall vyne in dede, nor a dore neyther: But when he sayde that hys fleshe was very meate, and hys bloode very drynke, and that they shulde not be saued but yf they ded eate hys fleshe and drynke hys bloode, then were they all in suche a wonder therof, that they coulde not abyde. And wherfor, but because they perceyued well by hys wordes and hys maner of circumstaunces, that Chryste spake of hys very fleshe and hys very bloode in dede.

|Fryth.| ¶ It is openly knowen and confessed amonge all learned men, that in the |Ioan. 6.| .6. chapytre of Ioan, Christe spake not one worde concernynge the sacrament of hys bodye and bloode (which at that tyme was not yet instytuted) but all that he there spake was of the spyrytuall eatynge ād drynkynge of hys bodye, and bloode, as I haue towched before. And the circumstaunces of this place do in dede proue that they were fleshly mynded, and vnderstoode not the spirytuall wordes of our sauyoure Christ, and therfor wondered and mourmured. In so moche that Christe sayde vnto them, doth this offende you: What wyll ye say then whē ye shall see the sone of man ascendynge thyther where he was before: Thē (addeth S. Austen) you shall knowe that he ment not to geue hys fleshe to eate with your teth: for he shall ascende whole. And Christ addeth, it is the spirite that quyckeneth, the fleshe profyteth nothynge, the wordes that I speake, are spirite ād lyfe: that is to say, sayeth S. Austen, are spirytually to be vnderstonde. And where Christ sayeth, that the fleshe profyteth nothynge (meanynge of hys owne fleshe, as S. Austē sayeth) he meaneth that it profyteth not, as they vnderstoode hym, that is to saye, it profyteth not, if it were eatē. But it doth moche profyte to be slayne, that through it and the shedynge of hys blode, the wrath of God our Father is pacyfyed, ād our synnes forgeuen. And where his mastershyp sayeth that the people perceyued well what he ment, and therfor wōdered so sore ād coulde not abyde, because they perceyued well by hys wordes ād maner of cyrcumstaunces what hys meanynge was. I wyll say as I ded before, that they vnderstoode hym not. Nowe here he wyll saye vnto me, if it be but your naye and my yea, then I wolde thynke to be beleued as soone as you, and surelye that were but reason. Not withstondynge (thankes be to God) I am able to brynge in auctoryte to Iudge betwene vs bothe, whose Iudgemēt I truste hys mastershyp wyll admytte. Thys autoure is .S. Austen which sayeth. |Augusti in sermo ad infan.| Discipuli enim eius qui cum sequebantur expauerunt & exhorruerunt sermonem non intelligentes. That is to saye, his dyscyples whiche folowed hym, were a stoyned, and abhorred hys wordes, ād vnderstoode thē not. And because your mastershype shall not thynke that he over schotte hym selfe, and spake he wyste not what, we shall alledge hym sayenge the same wordes in an other place. |Aug. 54.| Cum diceret. Nisi quis manducauerit carnem .& c. Illi non intelligentes dixerunt ad inuicē. Durus est hic sermo, quis potest eum audire? That is, when Christ sayde, excepte a man eate my fleshe and drynke my bloode, he shall haue no lyfe in hym, they because they vnderstoode hym not, sayde to eche other, this is an harde sayenge, who can heare hym? Thus I truste you wyll geue place (although not to me) yet at the leaste vnto Saynte Austen, and receyue the truth whiche is so playnelye proved.

And where hys mastershyp alleageth this texte for the Sacramente, that excepte they ded eate hys fleshe and drynke hys blode they coulde not be saued, yt seameth that he is fallen in to the erroure of Pope Innocēt, which lykewyse vnderstōdynge this texte vpon the Sacrament (as master More doth) caused yonge chylderne and infantes to receyue the Sacrament, as though they had all bene dampned which dyed and had not receyued it. And of thys Carnall mynde were many mo Byshoppes a greate whyle (as are now the Bohemes, whome he after dysprayseth, and yet expoundeth the texte as they do) but afterward they loked more spirytually vpō the matter and confessed their ignoraunce, as I truste master More wyll. But now wyll I shew you .S. Austens mynde vpō this texte, which shall helpe for the exposycyon of all thys matter. |Augustinus libro 3 de doctrina christiana.| S. Austen in the thyrde boke de doctrina christiana the .16. chapytre, teachynge how we shall knowe the tropes, fygures, allegoryes, and phrases of the scrypture sayeth. Si aūt flagitium aut facinus iubere uidetur, figurata locutio est. Nisi manducaueritis (inqt) carnem filij hominis et biberitis eius sanguinē, non habebitis uitam in uobis. Facinus uel flagitium uidetur iubere. Figura est ergo precipiens passionis dominicæ esse comunicandū et suauiter atque utiliter in memoria recondendum, quod pro nobis caro eius crucifixa & uulnerata sit. That is to saye: when so euer the scrypture or Christe seameth to commaunde any fowle or wycked thynge, than muste that texte be taken fyguratyuelye, and that it is a phrase, allegorye, and maner of speakynge, ād muste be vnderstonde spyrytually and not after the letter. Excepte (sayeth Christ) ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of man and drynke hys bloode ye shall haue no lyfe in you. He seameth (sayeth S. Austen) to cōmaunde a fowle and a wycked thynge. It ys therfore a fygure, commaundyng vs to be partakers of hys passyon, and swetely ād profytablye to prynte in our mynde that hys fleshe was crucyfyed and wounded for vs. This truth (thankes be to God) doth S. Austen declare vnto vs, which thynge besyde the openyng of thys texte agaynst master Mores mynd, doth playnely shew what he thought in the holye wordes of Christes souper. For syth he called yt a fowle and wycked thynge to eate hys fleshe, than may you soone perceyue, that he thought yt ys fowle and as wycked a thynge to eate hys bodye, seynge hys bodye ys fleshe, and then consequently yt shall folowe, that eyther thys worde eate (where Christe sayde take thys and eate yt) muste be taken spirytually, or els that thys sayēge of Christe, thys is my body, muste be fyguratyuely spoken, but this worde, eate, ys taken after the letter (for they ded in dede eate the breade) therfore yt muste neades folowe, that thys sentēce (thys is my bodye) muste be fyguratyuely spoken. Or els ys .S. Austen not to be approued in thys place, which thynge our Byshoppes I thynke, wyll not saye naye.

Besydes that .S. Austen sayeth. |Augustinus in sermone ad infantes.| Quando loquebatur dominus noster Iesus Christus de corpore suo, nisi (inquit) quis manducauerit carnem meam et biberit sanguinè meum, non habebit in se uitam. Caro enim mea uere est cibus, & sanguis meus uere est potus. Intellectus spiritualis credentem saluum facit, quia littera occidit, spiritus est qui uiuificat. That is to saye: when our Lorde Iesus Christe spake of hys bodye, excepte (sayeth he) a man eate my fleshe and drynke my bloode, he shall haue no lyfe in hym selfe, for my fleshe is verye meate, and my bloode is very drynke. The spyrytuall vnderstondynge saueth hym that beleueth, for the letter kylleth, but the spirite quyckeneth. Here may you playnlye perceyue, that thys texte muste onely be taken spyrituallye. For he sayeth, that to take it after the letter it kylleth and profyteth nothynge at all, & therfor I wonder that we haue bene ledde so longe in this grosse erroure.

|Orig. in leuiti. homi .7.| This sayenge doth that famous clarke Origene, confyrme sayēg. Agnosce, figuræ sunt que in uoluminibus Domini scriptæ sunt: & ideo tanquā spirituales & non tanquam carnales, examinate & intelligite quæ dicuntur. Si enim secundum litteram sequaris hoc ipsum quod dictum est, Nisi manducaueritis carnē &c. Occidit hæc littera. That is to saye: Marke that they are fygures which are wrytē in the scrypture of God. And therfore examyne them as spyrytuall men and not as Carnall, ād vnderstonde those thynges that are spoken. For if thou folowe after the letter, this thynge that is spokē: excepte ye eate the fleshe of the sone of man and drynke hys bloode, you cā haue no lyfe in you, this letter kylleth. Alas deare bretherne why shulde any mā be offended with thys doctryne, seynge it is approued so playnelye, by suche auncyent and holy Fathers.

|Augusti sermo circa sacraferia pasche.| Agayne .S. Austē sayeth. Qui manducat carnem meā & bibit meum sanguinem in memanet & ego in illo. Hoc est ergo manducare illā escam & illū bibere potum, in Christo manere & illum manentē in se habere, ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo & in quo non manet Christus proculdubio non manducat eius carnem nec bibit sanguinē, etiā si tanterei sacramentum ad iudicium sibi manducet & bibit. That is to saye, he that eateth my fleshe and drynketh my bloode, abydeth in me, and I in hym. This is therfore the eatynge of that meate and drynkynge of that bloode, to abyde in Christe and haue hym abydynge in vs. And therfor he that abydeth not in Christe, and in whome Christe abydeth not, without doubte he eateth not Christes fleshe nor drynketh not hys bloode, although he eate and drynke that sacramēt of so greate a thynge vnto hys dampnacyon. And euē the same wordes |Idē Beda super Cor. 10.| hath Bede vpon the Corynthyās 1. Corin. 10. Thys one place is suffycyent for to proue my purpose though he sayde not one worde more. For here he doth playnelye determyne, that he whiche abydeth not in Christe: that is to saye: he that is wycked or vnfaythfull, doth not eate hys fleshe nor drynke hys bloode, although he eate and drynke the Sacramēt of so greate a thynge. And so muste it neades folowe, that the Sacramente is not the verye naturall bodye of Christ. For then the vnfaythfull shulde eate hys fleshe, seynge he eateth the Sacrament of hys bodye. But that doth S. Austen denye, wherfor it muste neades folowe, that it is but onely a token of a remembraunce, ād a sygne of hys bodye breakynge, and a representacyon of hys passyon, |Rom. 5.| that we myght keape hys facte in memorye, and geve hym thankes for hys tender loue and kyndenes, whiche when we were hys enemyes toke vpon hym to suffer moste vyle death, to reconcyle vs vnto his Father, and make vs hys frendes. Thys sayenge hath S. Austen in a nother place also, |Augusti deciuita: dei lib. 21.| where he wryteth on this maner. Qui non in me manet, & in quo ego non maneo, non se dicat aut existimet māducare corpus meum, aut bibere sanguinem meum. |capi. 25.| Non itaq; maneat in Christo qui non sunt eius membra: non sunt autem membra Christi qui se faciunt membra meritricis. That is to saye, he that abydeth not in me, and in whome I abyde not, let hym not saye or thynke that he eateth my bodye or drynketh my bloode. They abyde not in Christe which are not hys mēbers. And they are not hys membres whiche make them selues the membres of an harlote. And these are also the verye wordes of Bede. Here is it playne proued agayne by the auctoryte of S. Austen and Bede, |Beda super. 1. Cor. 6.| that the wycked and vnfaythfull (whiche are not the membres of Christe) do not eate hys bodye nor drynke hys bloode, and yet they do eate the Sacramēt as well as the other. Wherfore you muste neades, graunte, that the Sacramēt is not the naturall bodye of Christ but a fygure, tokē, or memoryall therof. Now good Christē people counte not thys new learnynge which is confyrmed by suche olde doctoures and faythfull fathers.

Now were thys ynough for a Christē man that loued no contencyon. But because there are so manye sophysters in the worlde whiche care not what they saye, so they holde not their peace, I muste neades sette some bulwarke by this holy doctoure, to helpe to defende hym, for els they wyll shortelye ouer rone hym (as they do me) ād make hym an heretyck also. Therfore I wyll alleage hys master saynt Ambrose. Saynte Ambrose sayeth |Ambrosi de sacra.| Non iste panis qui uadit in corpus a nobis tā anxie queritur, sed panis uitæ æterne que anime nostre substanciam fulscit, qui autem discordat a Christo non manducat carnem eius, nec bibit sanguinem eius, & si tante rei sacramentum iudicium sue perdicionis accipit. That is, this breade that goeth in to the bodye ys not so gredelye sought of vs, but the breade of euerlastynge lyfe which vpholdeth the substaunce of our soule. For he that dyscordeth from Christ, doth not eate hys fleshe, nor drynke hys bloode, although he receyue the sacramente of so greate a thynge vnto hys dampnacyon and destruccyon. Furthermore, the greate clarke Prosper confyrmeth the same, sayenge. |Prosper in libro sentenciarum.| Qui discordat a Christo nec carnem Christi manducat, nec sanguinem bibit, etiam si tantæ rei sacramentum ad iudicium sue presumptionis quotidie indifferenter accipiat. That is, he that dyscordeth from Christ, doth neyther eate hys fleshe, nor drynke hys bloode, although he receyueth indyfferently euery daye the sacrament of so greate a thynge vnto the condempnacyon of hys presumpcyon. And these are also the very wordes of Bede |Idē Beda super 1. Cor. 11.| vpō the xi. Chapiter of the fyrste Epystle to the Corynthyans.

Now you may see, that it ys not saynt Austens mynde onely, but also the sayēge of many mo. And therfore I truste you wyll be good vnto hym. And yf ye cōdempne not these holye Fathers, then am I wrongfullye punyshed. But, yf you condempne them, then muste poore Iohan Fryth be contente to beare the burthen wyth them.

The mynde & exposiciō of the olde doctours upon the wordes of Christes maundye.

|More.| And where master More sayeth, that yf Chryste had not ment after the playne litterall sense, that both the hearers at that tyme, and the expositours sens, and all Christen people besyde thys xv.c. yeare wolde not haue taken onelye the litterall sens beynge so straunge and mervelous that yt myght seame impossyble, ād declyne from the letter for allegoryes in all suche other thynges, beynge (as he sayeth) and as in dede they be, so manye farre in nombre mo.

|Fryth.| ¶ As towchynge the hearers they were deceyued and vunderstoode hym not (I meane as manye as toke hys wordes fleslye as you do). And they had their answere of Christe (when they mourmured) that hys wordes were spyrite and lyfe: that is (as S. Austen sayeth) spirytually to be vnderstonde & not fleslye, as ys before declared. And as for the exposytours, I thynke he hath not one of the olde fathers for hym, but certen newe felowes: as Dominicus, S. Thomas, Occam, ād suche other which haue made the Pope a God. And as I haue shewed S. Austen maketh full for vs, and so do all the olde fathers. As Oecolompadius hath well declared in hys boke. Quid ueteres senserint de sacramento eucharistiæ. And some of their sayenges I shall alleage a none. And where you saye that all Christen people haue so beleued this .1500. yeares, that is very false. For there ys no doubte, but that the people thought as holye Saynt Austen and other faythful fathers taught thē. Which as I sayde, make with vs. Notwithstondynge in dede syth oure prelates haue bene made lordes and haue sette vp their lawes and decrees contrarye to the prerogatyue of all Prynces, and lyke moste subtle traytours, haue made all men beleue that they may make lawes & bynde mens cōscyences to obeye them: and that theyr lawes are Gods lawes, blyndynge the peoples eyes wyth two or thre textes wrongfully wrested, to avaunce their pryde, where they ought to obeye Kynges & Princes & be subiect to their lawes, as Christ & hys Apostles were euē vnto the death. Syth that tyme I say, they haue made mē beleue what they lyst, & make artycles of the faythe at their pleasure. One artycle must be that they be the church, ād cā not erre. And this ys the grounde of all their doctryne. But the truth of this artycle ys now suffycyently knowē. For yf quene Katheryne be Kynge Hēryes wyfe, thē they do erre, & yf she be not, they haue thē erred. It is nowe become an artycle of our fayth that the Pope of Rome must be the hede of the churche ād the vycar of Christe: & that by Gods lawe. It is an artycle of our fayth, that what soeuer he byndeth in earth, is boūde in heauē, in so moche that yf he curse wrōgfully, yet yt must be feared, ād infynite suche other which are not in our crede, but blessed be god that hath geuē some lyght in to oure Prynces harte. For he hath lately put forth a boke called the glasse of truth, which proueth many of these artycles very folysh fātasyes, ād that euē by theyr owne doctours, and so I truste you shall be proued in this poynt of the sacramēt. For though it be an artycle of our fayth, yt is none artycle of our Crede in the .xij. artycles, whiche are suffycyent for our saluacyon. And therfore we may thynke that you lye without all Ieoperdye of dampnacyon.

Neuerthelesse seynge hys mastershyp sayeth that all make for hym, & I say cleane contrarye, that allthe olde fathers make agaynste hym, it were necessarye that one of vs shulde proue hys purpose. But in dede in this poynte he wolde loke to haue the vātage of me. For he thynketh that mē wyll sooner beleue him which is a greate mā, thē me which am but a poore mā, ād that therfor I had more neade to proue my parte true, thē he to proue hys. Well, I am content, and therfor geue eare dere reader and iudge betwene vs.

|Tertullianus libro. 2. cōtra Marcionem. Tertullianus libro 4. cōtra Marcionem.| First I wyll begynne with Tertulyan, because he is of moste antiquyte. Tertullyan sayeth. Ipse (Christus) nec panem reprobauit quod ipsum corpus suum representat. That is to saye: Christ hym selfe ded not reproue or discōmēde breade which doth represent hys bodye. For the vnderstōdynge of thys place, you must know that there was an heretyke called Marcyō, which ded reproue creatures, & sayde that all maner of creatures were euell. This thynge doth Tertullyā improue by the sacramēt & sayeth. Christ ded not reproue or dyscōmende breade the which doth represēt his bodye: as though he shulde say, yf Christ had counted the breade euell, then wolde he not haue lefte yt for a sacrament to represent hys bodye, meanynge that it is a sacramente, sygne, token, and memoryall of hys bodye, and not the body ytselfe. And that this is hys mynde, doth playnly appeare in his fourth boke, where he sayeth. Christus acceptū panē et distributū discipulis, corpus suū illud fecit: hoc est corpus meū dicēdo, id est figura corporis mei. Figura autē non fuisset, nisi ueritatis e ēt corpus. Vacua res quod est phātasma, figuram capere non posset.

That ys to saye: Christe takynge breade and dystrybutynge vnto hys discyples made yt hys bodye, sayēge. This ys my body. But thys breade coulde not haue bene a figure of yt, excepte Christ had had a true bodye. For a vayne thynge or a fantasye can take no fygure. For the vnderstondynge of this place, you muste marke that this heretycke Marcyō agaynst whome thys auctoure wryteth, ded holde opynyon that Christ had no naturall bodye, but onelye a fantastycall bodye, ād this opynyon doth thys doctoure improue by the sacrament of the aulter sayenge. The sacrament ys a fygure of hys bodye: ergo Christ had a true bodye, ād not a fantastycall bodye: For a vayne thynge or fantasye can take no fygure. Loo, here doth this olde father which was longe before .S. Austen or .S. Hierome, expounde these wordes of Christe. This is my bodye: that is to saye, a fygure of my bodye. Therfor ye are to blame to call it new lernynge. Nowe because they shall not of temeraryous presumpcyon reiecte this olde father, I shall establyshe hys wordes by S. Austen, which commendeth Christes meruelous pacyence for sufferynge so lōge that traytour Iudas, as though he had bene a good man, and yet was not ignorāt of hys wycked thoughtes. |Augusti.| Adhibuit (inquit) ad cōuiuium in quo corporis & sanguinis sui figura discipulis commendauit ac tradidit. That is to saye: |in prefa. Psalm. 3.| he admytted hym sayeth S. Austē vnto the mandye wherin he dede be take and delyuer vnto the dyscyples the fygure of hys bodye and bloode. Here doth thys holye father .S. Austē call yt the fygure of hys body. And I am sure there is no mā so chyldyshe, but that he knoweth that the fygure of Christe ys not Christe hym selfe, the fygure of .S. Peter ys not saynt Peter hym selfe. And yet we do neuerthelesse commōly call those fygures by the name of the thynge that they do represente. As I maye saye when I see the fygure of .S. Peter, thys ys S. Peter to whome Christe delyuered the keyes of the kyngdome of heauē. And yet he were a foole that wolde thynke that fygure to be S. Peter hym selfe. For yt is onelye a representacyon of hym. Besydes that S. Austen sayeth. |Augusti in prefa. Psalm. 98.| Non hoc corpus quod uidetis estis manducaturi, nec bibituri illum sanguinem quem effusuri sunt qui me crucifigent. Sacramentum aliquod uobis commendaui, spiritualiter intellectum uiuificat nos, caro autem non prodest quicquam. That ys to saye: you shall not eate thys bodye that you see, nor drynke that bloode which they that crucyfye me shall shedde out. I haue geuen a certayne sacramente vnto you, yf yt be spirytually vnderstonde, yt quyckeneth you: but the fleshe profyteth nothynge. What thynges can be more playnely spoken?

Furdermore S. Austen sayeth. Sepe ita loquimur ut Pascha appropinquante crastinam uel perendinam Domini passionem dicamus: cum ille ante tam multos annes passus sit, nec omnino nisi semel illa passio facta sit. Nempe ipso die dominico dicimus bodie dominus resurrexit cum ex quo surrexit tot anni transierunt. Quare nemo tam ineptus est, ut nos ita loquentes arguat esse mentitos, quia istos dies secundum illorum quibus hæc gesta sunt similitudinem nuncupamus: ut dicatur ipse dies qui non sit ipse, sed reuolucio ne temporum similes eius: & dicatur illo die fieri propter sacramenti celebrationem, quod non illo die, sed iam olim factum est. Nonne semel immolatus est Christus in seipso? & tamen in sacramento non solum per amnuas Paschæ solennitates, sed omni die pro popuslis immola tur: nec utique mentitur qui interrogatus, responderit eum immolari. Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem earum rerum quarum sunt sacramenta non haberent, omnino sacramenta non essent. Ex hac autem similitudine plerumque etiam ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt. Sicut ergo secundum quendam modum sacramētum corporis CHRISTI corpus CHRISTI est. Et sacramentum sanguinis CHRISTI sanguis CHRISTI est, ita sacramenta fidei fides est, Nihil est autem aliud ud credere, quam fidem habere, ac per hoc respondetur fidem habere propter fidei sacramenta. Et conuertere se ad Deum propter conuersionis sacramentum. Quia & ipsa responsio pertinet ad celebrationem sacramenti. Sicut de ipso baptismo Apostolus dicit. Consepulti (inquit) sumus Christo per baptismum in mortem, Non ait sepulturam significauimus, sed prorsus ait, consepulti sumus. Sacramentum ergo tantæ rei non nisi eiusdem rei uocabulo nuncupauit.

That is to saye: We often vse to saye, when Easter draweth nyghe, that to morow or the nexte day is the Lordes passyō, ād yet yt is many yeares sens he suffered, and that passyon was neuer done but ones. And vpon that sondaye we saye, thys daye the Lorde ded ryse agayne, and yet yt ys many yeares sens he rose. Now ys there no man so folyshe to reproue vs as lyers for so sayenge, because we name these dayes after the symylytude of those in which these thynges were done, so that yt is called the same daye, which is not the verye same, but by the reuolucyon of tyme lyke it. And yt is named to be done the same daye through the celebracyon of the sacramēt (through kepynge the memoryall of the thynge ones done) which ys not done that daye, but was done lōge before. Was not Christe ones crucyfyed in hys owne parson? ād yet in a mysterye (which is the remembraunce of hys very passyon) he ys crucyfyed for the people not onely euery feaste of Easter, but euery daye. Neyther doth he lye which (whē he is asked) answereth that he is crucyfyed. For yf the sacramentes, had not certayne symylytudes of those thynges wherof they are sacramentes, then shulde they be no sacramentes at all. And for thys symylytude for the most parte they take the names of the very thynges, and therfore after a certayne maner the sacramente of Christes bodye ys Christes bodye, & the sacramēte of Christes bloode, is christes bloode, so the sacramēt of faythe, is fayth. For yt ys nō other thyng to beleue, thē to haue fayth, & therfore whē a mā āswereth that the infante beleueth which hath not the affecte of fayth, he answereth that yt hath faythe for the sacramēt of fayth: And that yt turneth yt selfe to GOD, for the sacrament of conuersyon. For the answere yt selfe perteyneth vnto the mynystrynge of the sacrament. As the Apostle wryteth of Baptyme: we are buryed (sayeth he) wyth Christ through Baptyme vnto death. He sayeth not, we sygnyfye buryenge, but vtterlye sayeth, we are buryed. He called therfore the sacrament of so greate a thynge euen wyth the propre name of the verye thynge it selfe. & ce. If a man wolde avoyde contencyon and loke soberly vpon those wordes of Saynte Austen, he shall soone perceyue the mysterye of thys matter. For euē as the nexte good frydaye shalbe called the daye of Christes passyon: and yet he shall not suffer death a gayne vpon that daye, for he dyed but ones and is nowe immortall, euē so is the Sacrament called Christes bodye. And as that daye is not the verye daye that he dyed vpon, but onelye a remembraunce therof: So the Sacrament is not hys very naturall bodye, but onelye a remembraunce of hys bodye breakynge and bloode sheadynge. And lykewyse, as the nexte Easter daye shall be called the daye of hys resurrectyon, not that it is the very same daye that Christe ded ryse in, but a remembraunce of the same: Euen so the Sacrament is called hys bodye: not that it is hys bodye in dede, but onely a remembraunce of the same. And furdermore, euē as the Preste doth offer hym, that is to saye, crucyfye hym at Masse, euē so is the sacramēt hys bodye. But the Masse doth but onely represent hys passyon. And so doth the Sacrament represent hys bodye. And yet though the Masse dothe but represent his crucyfyēge, we maye trulye saye he is crucyfyed, euen so though the Sacrament do but sygnyfye or represent hys bodye, yet may we trulye saye that it is hys bodye. Why so? verely (sayeth he) for the sacramentes haue a certayne symylytude of those thynges wherof they are sacramentes. And for thys symylytude for the moste parte, they take the names of the verye thynges. Blessed be God which hathe so clearelye dyscussed this matter by thys faythfull Father. Notwithstondynge he doth yet expresse it more playnelye sayēg: After a certayne maner the sacrament of Christes bodye is Christes bodye. Beholde deare bretherne he sayeth, after a certayne maner the sacramēt is Christes bodye. And by that you maye soone knowe that he neuer mēte that it shulde be hys verye naturall bodye in dede, but onelye a token and memoryall to keape in memorye the death of hys bodye, and so to nouryshe our fayth. Besydes that, hys symylytude which he after allegeth of Baptyme, doth througlye expoūde this matter, for (sayeth he) the Apostle sayeth not, we sygnyfye buryenge: but he sayeth, we are buryed, & yet in dede the Baptyme doth but sygnyfye it. And therevpon .S. Austen addeth, that he called the sacrament of so greate a thynge euen with the name of the verye thynge it selfe. And lykewyse it is in our sacrament. Fynallye to be shorte, I wyll passe ouer many places which I haue gathered out of this holye father, and wyll towche but this one more. Saynte Austē sayeth. |Augusti cōtr. adamantū.| Non enim Dominus dubitauit dicere, Hoc est corpus meum, cum daret signum corporis sui. Et in eoden capite exponit. Sic est enim sanguis anima, quomodo petra erat Christus, nec tamen petra (ait) significabat Christū, sed ait petra erat Christus. That is to saye: The lorde doubted not to saye, this is my bodye, whē he gaue a sygne of hys bodye. And after in the same chapyter he expoundeth it. For trulye so the bloode is the soule, as Christe was the stone. And yet the Apostle sayeth not, the stone ded sygnyfye Christ, but he sayeth the stone was Christ.

Here S. Austen sayeth playnelye, that Christe called the sygne of hys bodye, his bodye, and in this chapyter doth compare these thre textes of scrypture, this is my bodye, the bloode is the soule, and Christe was the stone: And declareth them to be one phrase, and to be expounded after one fashyō. Now is there no mā so madde, as to saye, that Christe was a naturall stone (excepte he be a naturall foole) whose Judgemēt we neade not greately to regarde. Therefore we may well cōclude that the sacrament is not his naturall bodye, but is called his bodye, for a symylytude that it hath, wherin it sygnyfyeth & representeth his bodye. And that the sacramēt of so greate a thynge is called euē with the name of the very thynge it selfe. As s. Austē sayde. Thys were prove ynough to conclude that all the olde Fathers ded holde the same opynyon, for who wolde ones surmyse (seynge we haue. S. Austen so playne for vs which is the cheafest amonge thē all) who wolde ones surmyse I say, that they dyssented in thys greate matter frō the other faythfull fathers, or they from hym? Neuerthelesse I dare not lett hym stōde post alone, leaste ye dyspyse hym. And therfore I wyll shewe you the mynde of certayne other also: and fyrste of hys master Saynt Ambrose.

|Ambrosi super illud mortē domini annuncia.| S. Ambrose wrytynge vpon the Epystle of Paule to the Corynthyans in the .xi. Chapter sayeth. Quia enim morte Domini liberati sumus, huius rei in edēdo & potādo, carnem & sanguinem qui pro nobis oblata sunt, significamus. That is to saye: because we be delyuered by the death of the Lorde, in eatynge and drynkynge of thys thynge, meanynge of the Sacrament, we sygnyfye the fleshe and bloode which were offered for vs. Here doth S. Ambrose saye ynough, yf men were not sophysters, but wolde be content with reason. For he sayeth that in eatynge and drynkynge the Sacramēt of Christes bodye, we sygnyfye or represent the fleshe and bloode of our sauyoure Iesus. Notwithstondynge be cause you are so slyppery, we shall bynde you a lytle better by thys mās wordes.

|Ambrosi de sacra.| S. Ambrose sayeth. Sed forte dices speciem sanguinis non uideo, sed habet similitudinem. Sicut enim mortis similitudinem sumpsisti, ita etiam similitudinem preciosi sanguinis bibis. That is to saye. But perauenture thou wylte saye, I see no apperaunce of bloode, but it hathe a symylytude. For euē as thou haste taken the symylytude of death, euen so thou drynkest the symylytude of the precyous bloode. Here maye ye see by the conferrynge of these two Sacramentes, what .S. Ambrose iudged of it. For he sayeth, euen as thou haste taken a symylytude of hys death in the sacramēt of baptyme, so doste thou drynke a symylytude of hys precyouse bloode in the Sacrament of the Aulter. And yet as S. Austen sayde before, the Apostle sayeth, not we sygnyfye buryenge, but sayeth, we are buryed. And lykewyse here Christe sayde, not this sygnyfyeth my bodye, but this is my bodye, callynge the Sacrament, a sygne, token, and memoryall of so greate a thynge, euen with the name of the verye thynge it selfe. Thus doth S. Ambrose choke our sophysters.

Neuerthelesse I wyll alleage one place more out of Ambrose, where he sayeth. |Ambrosi lib .3. de sacramē.| Dicit sacerdos fac nobis hanc oblationē scriptam rationabilem, quod est figura corporis Domini nostri Iesu Christi. That is: the Preste sayeth, make vs this oblacyon acceptable. & ce. For it is a fygure of the bodye of our Lorde Iesus Chryst. Here he calleth it playnelye a fygure of Christes bodye, which thynge you can not avoyde. Therfore geue prayse vnto God and lette hys trouth sprede, which is so playnelye testyfyed, by these holye Fathers. Now lette vs see what S. Hierome sayeth.

|Hieronimus super eccle.| Saynte Hierome wrytynge vpon Ecclesiastes sayeth on this maner. Caro Domini uerus cibus est, & sanguis eius uerus potus est, hoc solum habemus in presenti sæculo bonum, si uescamur carne eius cruoreque potemur, nō solum in misterio, sed etiam in scripturarum lectione, uerus enim cibus est & potus, qui ex uerbo Dei sumitur scientia scripturarum. That is to saye: the fleshe of the lorde is verye meate, and his bloode verye drynke. This is onelye the pleasure or profytte that we haue in this worlde, that we maye eate hys fleshe and drynke his bloode, not onely in a mysterye, but also in the readynge of scryptures. For it is very meate and drynke, which is taken out of Godes worde, by the knowelege of scryptures. Here maye ye see S. Hieroms mynde in fewe wordes. For fyrste he sayeth that we eate hys fleshe and drynke hys bloode in a mysterye, whiche is the sacrament of hys remembraunce, and memoryall of his passyon. And after he addeth, that we eate his fleshe ād drynke hys bloode in the readynge ād knowelege of scriptures, ād calleth that very meate ād very drynke. And yet I am sure ye are not so grosse, as to thynke that the letters whiche you reade are tourned in to naturall fleshe ād blode. And lykewyse it is not necessarye that the breade shulde be tourned in to hys bodye, no more than the letters in scrypture are tourned in to his fleshe. And neuerthelesse through faythe we may as well eate hys bodye in receyuynge of the sacrament, as eate hys fleshe in readynge of the letters of the scrypture. Besydes that S. Hierome calleth the vnsterstōdynge of the scripture verye meate and very drynke: whiche you muste neades vnderstonde in a mysterye and spyrituall sense. For it is no materyall meate nor drynke that is receyued with the mouth and teth, but it is spyrytuall meate and drynke, and is so called for a symylytude and propertye: because that as meate and drynke counforte the bodye and outwarde man, so doth the readynge and knowelege of scrypture conforte the soule and inwarde man. And lykewyse it is of Christes bodye, whiche is called verye meate and verye drynke, whiche you muste neades vnderstonde in a mysterye or spyrytuall sense (as Saynte Hierome called it) for hys bodye is no materyall meate nor drynke that is receyued with the mouth or teth: But it is spyrytuall meate and drynke, and so called for a symilytude and propertye, because that as meate and drynke conforte the bodye, so doth the fayth in hys bodye breakynge & bloode sheadynge refreshe the soule vnto lyfe euerlastynge. We vse it customablye in our daylye speache to saye, when a chylde setteth all hys mynde and delyght vpō sporte and playe: It is meate and drynke to thys chylde to playe. And also we saye by a man that loueth well hawkynge and huntynge: It is meate and drynke to thys man to hawke and hunte. Where no man doubteth, but it is a fyguratyue speache. And therfore I wonder that they are so blynde in thys one poynte of Christes bodye. And can not also take the wordes fyguratyuelye, as these olde doctours ded. |Hieronimus super Matheum.| Agayne S. Hierome sayeth. Postquam mysticum pascha fuerat impletum & agni carnes cum apostolis comederat, assumit panem qui confortat cor hominis, & ad uerū paschæ transgreditur sacramentum, quomodo in prefiguratione eius Melchisedech uinum & panem proferens fecerat, ipse quoq; ueritatem corporis repræsentaret. That is to saye: after the mystycall Easter lābe fullfylled, and that Christe had eaten the lambes fleshe with the Apostles, he toke breade which conforteth the harte of man, and passeth to the true sacramēt of the Easter lambe: that as Melchisedech brought forthe breade and wyne fygurynge hym, so myght he lykewyse represent the truth of hys bodye. Here doth S. Hierome speake after the maner that Tertullyā ded before: that Christe with breade and wyne ded represent the truth of hys bodye. For excepte he had had a true bodye, he coulde not leaue a fygure of it nor represent it vnto vs. For a vayne thynge or fantasye can haue no fygure, nor can not be represented. As by example. How shulde a mā make a fygure of hys dreame or represent it vnto our memorye? But Christ hath lefte vs a fygure and representacyon of hys bodye in breade and wyne: therfore it foloweth that he had a true bodye. And that this was .S. Hieroms mynde doth manefestly appeare by the wordes of Bede, which doth more copyouslye sette out this sayenge of Hierome. |Beda super Luc.| For he wryteth on this maner. Finitis paschæ ueteris solennijs que in commemorationē antiquæ de ægypto liberationis agebantur, transit ad nouū quod in suæ redemptionis memoriā ecclesia frequētare desiderat, ut uidelicet pro carne agni uel sanguine suo, carnis sanguinisq; sacramentum in panis ac uini figura substituens, ipsum se esse monstraret cui iurauit Dominus. Tu es sacerdos in æternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech. Frangit autem ipse panem quem porrigit, ut ostendat corporis sui fractionem non sine sua sponte futuram. Similiter & calicem postquam cœna uit dedit eis. Quia ergo panis carnē cōfirmat, uinum uero sanguinē operatur in carne, hic ad corpus Christi mystice, illud refertur ad sanguinem. That is to saye. After the solempnyte of the olde Easter lambe was fynyshed, which was obserued in the remēbraunce of the olde delyueraūce out of Egypte, he goth vnto the newe which the churche gladlye obserueth in the remēbraunce of hys redempcyon, that he in the steade of the fleshe and bloode of the lambe, myght instytute and ordeyne the sacramēt of hys fleshe and bloode in the fygure of breade and wyne, and so declare hym selfe to be the same vnto whome the Lorde sware, thou arte a perpetuall Preste after the order of Melchisedech. And he hym selfe brake the breade which he gaue, to shewe that the breakynge of hys bodye shulde not be done without hys owne wyll. And lykewyse he gaue them the cuppe after he had supped. And because breade doth confyrme or strengthen the fleshe, and wyne worketh bloode in the fleshe, therfore is the breade mystycallye referred vnto the bodye of Christe, and the wyne referred vnto hys bloode.

Here maye you note, fyrste that as the lambe was a remembraunce of theyr delyueraunce out of Egipte (and yet the lābe delyuered them not) so is the sacrament a remembraunce of our redemptyon, and yet the sacrament redeamed vs not. Besydes that he sayeth, that Christ in the steade of the fleshe and bloode of the lambe, ded instytute the sacrament of hys fleshe and bloode in fygure of breade and wyne.

Marke well, he sayeth not that in the steade of lambes fleshe and bloode he ded instytute hys owne fleshe and bloode, but sayeth that he ded instytute the sacrament of hys fleshe and bloode. What thynge is a sacrament? Verelye it is the sygne of an holye thynge, and there is no dyference betwene a sygne and a sacrament, but that the sygne is referred vnto a worldlye thynge, and a Sacrament vnto a spyrytuall or holye thynge.

|Ad Marcellum.| As Saynte Austen sayeth. Signa cum ad res diuinas pertinent, sacramenta appellantur. That is to saye: sygnes when they partayne vnto godlye thynges are called sacramentes.

Therfore when Bede sayeth, that they ded instytute the Sacrament of hys fleshe and bloode in the fygure of breade and wyne, it is as moche to saye (by Saynte Austens dyffynycyon) as that he ded instytute the fygure of hys holye fleshe and bloode in the fygure of breade and wyne, that is to saye: that breade and wyne shulde be the fygure and sygne representynge hys most blessed holye fleshe and bloode vnto vs, for a perpetuall remēbraunce. And afterwarde he declared the propertye for whiche the breade is called the bodye ād the wyne the bloode: savynge he speaketh not so darkelye as I now do, but playnelye sayeth that the breade is mystycallye referred vnto the bodye of Christe: because that as breade doth strēgthē the fleshe, so Christes bodye which is fygured by the breade, doth strēgthen the soule through fayth in hys death. And so doth he clearlye proue my purpose.

|Crisost. super Matth.| Now lette vs see what Chrisostome sayeth, whiche shall descrybe vs the fayth of the olde Grecyans, who had not loste the true fayth, howsoeuer the wordle go now adayes. Chrisostome sayeth in thys maner. Si enim mortuus Iesus nō est cuius signum & simbolū hoc sacrificū est? uides quantum ei studium fuerit ut semper memoria teneamus pro nobis ipsum mortuum fuisse. That is to saye: Yf Iesus haue not dyed, whose memoryall and sygne is this sacryfyce? Thou seest what dylygence he gaue that we shulde cōtynuallye keape in memorye that he dyed for vs. Here you maye see that Chrisostome calleth the sacramet symbolum et signum: That is to saye, a memoryall and sygne of Christ, and that it was instytute to keape hys death in perpetuall remembraunce. But of one thynge thou muste be ware or els thou arte deceyued, he calleth it also a sacryfyce, and there thou muste wyselye vnderstonde hym. |Sacryfyce.| For yf it were the sacryfyce of Christes bodye, then muste Christes bodye be slayne agayne, which thynge God forbyd. And therfore thou muste vnderstōde hym whē he calleth it a sacryfyce, that he meaneth it to be a remēbraunce of that holye sacryfyce, where Christes bodye was offered on the crosse ones for all. For he can be sacryfyced no more, seynge he is immortall. Notwithstondynge our Prelates wyll here note me of presumptiō, that I dare be so bolde to expounde hys mynde on this fashyon. For in dede they take hym otherwyse, and thynke that it is a verye sacryfyce. And therfore I wyll brynge one other texte, where Chrisostome shall expounde hym selfe. Chrisostome sayeth: |Crisost. ad Hebre. hom. 17.| Nonne per singulos dies offerrimus? offerrimus qdem, sed ad recordationem mortis eius facientes. Hoc autem sacrificium (sicut pontifex) sed id ipsum semper facimus: imo recordationē sacrificij. That is to saye: do we not daylye offer or do sacryfyce: yes suerlye. But we do it for the remembraunce of hys death, for this sacryfyce is as an example of that we offer, not an other sacryfyce (as the Byshopp in the olde lawe ded) but euer the same: yea rather a remembraunce of the sacryfyce. Fyrste he sayeth that they daylye do sacryfyce, but it is in remembraunce of Christes death. Then he sayeth that the sacryfyce is an example of that. Thyrdlye he sayeth, that they offer not an other sacryfyce (that is to saye an oxe or a gotte) as the Byshoppes of the olde lawe, but euer the same.

Marke thys poynte: For though it seame at the fyrste syght to make wyth them, yet doth yt make so derectelye agaynste them, that they shall neuer be able to avoyde it. Chrisostome sayeth, they do not offer an other sacryfyce as the Bysshoppes ded, but euer the same. They offer other breade and wyne thys daye, then they ded yesterdaye: they shall saye an other Masse to morowe, then they ded this daye.

Now yf thys breade and wyne or the Masse be a sacryfyce, then do they offer an other sacryfyce, as well as the Byshoppes of the olde Lawe. For thys sacryfyce ded sygnyfye that Christe shulde come and shedde hys bloode, as well as the breade, wyne, and Masse, do represent that he hath done it in dede. And therfore yf it be a sacryfyce, then do they offer an other sacryfyce, representynge hys passyon, as well as the Byshoppe of the olde Lawe. But that doth Chrisostome denye, and sayeth that they offer euerye daye the same. What same? Verelye euen the same that was done and sacryfyced when Christe shedde hys bloode. In thys sacryfyce is Christe euerye daye bounde and buffetted, and ledde from Anna to Cayphas: he is brought to Pylate and condempned; he is scourged ād crowned with thorne, and nayled on the crosse, and hys harte opened with a spere, and so sheadeth hys bloode for our redempcyon. Why Chrisostome, and do you the selfe same sacryfyce euerye daye? Yea verelye. Then why doth Saynte Paule saye to the Romaynes |Rom. 6.| in the syxte Chapter: that Christe is rysen from death, and dyeth no more? Yf he dye no more, how do you daylye crucyfye hym? For sothe Paule sayeth trouthe.

For we do it not actuallye in dede, but onelye in a mysterye. And yet we saye, that we do sacryfyce hym, and that thys is hys sacryfyce, for the celebracyon of the Sacrament and memorye of the passyon whiche we keape: and for thys cause it hath the name of the thynge that it doth represente and sygnyfye. And therfore, as Saynte Austen declareth a fore ad Bonifacium, |Augustinus ad Bonifacium.| I expounde my mynde by a rethorycall correctyon and saye, Imo recordationem sacrificij. That is to saye: Yea rather the remembraunce, and fygure of the sacryfyce.

Graunde mercyes good Chrisostome, now do I perceyue the pyth of thys matter: euen as the Masse is the verye death and passyon of Christe, so is it a sacryfyce. Now it doth but onelye represente the verye death and passyon of Christe, therfore it doth folowe that the Masse in verye dede doth but onely represente a sacryfyce. And yet not withstandynge manye tymes it is called a sacryfyce of holye doctours, and hathe the name of the verye same thynge that it doth represent ād sygnyfye. And euen so we maye saye of this sacrament, that as the Masse is the verye sacryfyce and passyon of Christ, so is the sacrament hys verye bodye and sacryfyce that is offered. Nowe the Masse doth but onely represent and sygnyfye the passyon: so the sacrament doth but onelye represent and sygnyfye the bodye and very sacryfyce ones offred for euer. Notwithstondynge manye tymes the Masse is called the bodye and a sacryfyce. And hath the name of the verye same thynge that it doth represent and sygnyfye.

|Crisostome.| Furthermore Chrisostome sayeth. Ipse quos; bibitex eo, ne auditis uerbis illis dicerēt. Quid igitur sanguinem bibimus & carnem commedimus? ac ideo perturbarentur, nam & quando prius de his uerba fecit, etiam uerbis ipsius offendabantur. Ne igitur tunc id quoque accideret, primus ipse hoc fecit, ut ad communionem misteriorum induceret intrepidam. That ys to saye: he also dranke of yt, leaste when they harde hys wordes, they shulde saye: why do we than drynke bloode and eate fleshe? and so shulde be troubled. For when he spake before of those thynges, they were offended wyth hys wordes. And because that shulde not now also chaunce, he hym selfe dranke fyrst of yt, that he myght cause thē to come without feare to the partakynge of those mysteryes. Here Chrisostome noteth that Christe dranke of yt, to drawe them from the grosse vnderstōdynge of hys wordes, and by hys drynkynge to testyfye vnto them, that yt was not hys naturall fleshe in dede, but onely memoryalles and representacyons of hys bodye and bloode. And therfore he calleth them mysteryes: that is to saye sacramentes. For in thys place a sacramente ād a mysterye ys all one thynge. Notwithstondynge some tyme thys worde mysterye ys more common ād large in signyfyenge then this worde sacrament. And I haue shewed you before, that a sacrament ys the sygne of an holy thynge, and not the thynge it selfe that yt representeth: albeit somtyme yt beare the name of the verye thynge yt selfe. As the Image of .S. Peter ys not saynt Peter hym selfe, and yet yt beareth hys name.

Chrisostome sayeth. Caro non prodest quicquam: hoc est, secundum spiritum uerba mea audienda sunt. Qui secundum carnem audit, nihil lucratur, nihil utilitatis accipit. Quid est autem carnaliter intelligere: simpliciter ut res dicuntur, neque aliud quippiam excogitare. Misteria omnia interioribus oculis consideranda, hoc est spiritualiter. That is to saye. The fleshe profyteth nothynge, that is: my wordes muste be vnderstonde after the spiryte, he that vnderstondeth them after the fleshe wynneth nothynge, nor taketh no profytte. What meaneth this, to vnderstonde after the fleshe or carnallye? Verelye to take the thynges symplye as they are spoken, and to thynke none other thynge. All mysteryes or sacramentes muste be consydered with the inwarde eyes, that is to saye: spyrytuallye.

And after he expoundeth hym selfe on this maner. Interiores autem oculi ut panem uiderint, creaturas transuolant, & non de illo pane a pistore cocto cogitant: sed de eo qui dixit se panem uitæ, qui per mysticum panem significatur. That is to saye. The inwarde eyes as soone as they see the breade, they passe ouer the creatures, ād thynke not of that breade which is baken of the baker, but of hym that called hym selfe the breade of lyfe, which is sygnyfyed by the mystycall or sacramētall breade. Wolde you haue hym saye any more? he telleth you playne, that Christe which ys the very breade of lyfe, ys sygnyfyed by this sacramentall breade. And that is the thynge which our Byshoppes so fleshlye denye now adayes, which thynge yet you maye see, the olde Fathers cōclude with one assente. Notwythstōdynge yet I wyll alleage mo olde doctours, so that from hence forthe they maye be a shamed to call yt newe learnynge. Fulgentius sayeth. |Fulgentius 2. libro de fide.| In illis enim carnalibus (tèpore legis) uictunis, significacio suit carnis Christi quam pro pctis nostris & ipse sine pctō fuerat oblaturus, & sanguinis quem erat effusurus in remissionè peccarorum nostrorum. In isto autè sacrificio gratiarum actio atq; cōmemoracio est carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit, & sanguinis quē pro nobis idē Deus effudit. That is to saye. In these carnall sacrifyces in the tyme of the lawe, was a sygnyficacyon of the fleshe of Christe, which he without synne, shuld offer for our synnes, ād of the bloode which he shulde shedde out in remyssyon of our synnes. But this sacryfyce is a thankes geuynge ād remembraūce of the fleshe of Christe which he offered for vs, and of the bloode which the same God shedde for vs. Fyrste note that he calleth yt a sacryfyce, which notwithstōdyng is but a remēbraūce of that sacryfyce offered on the crosse ones for all: Thā he playnely calleth yt a thankes geuynge, and remembraunce of Christes very fleshe and bloode: and so concludeth with vs. Neuerthelesse because sophysters wolde soone thynke to avoyde thys place, I wyll alleage one other sayenge of the same autoure which they shall neuer be able to avoyde.

|Fulgen.| ¶ Fulgentius sayeth, as Haymo testyfyeth. Hic calix nouum testamentum est, id est, hic calix quem uobis trado, nouum testamentum significat. That is to saye. Thys cuppe or chalyce is the newe testament: That is: thys cuppe or chalyce which I delyuer you doth sygnyfye the newe testament. In this place he doth playnelye shewe hys mynde, which cā not be avoyded. For euen as the cuppe is the newe testament, so ys the breade the bodye. Nowe the cuppe dothe but sygnyfy the new testament. And therfore I may conclude, that the breade doth but sygnyfye the bodye.

|Eusebius.| Eusebius sayeth. Quia corpus assumptum ablaturus erat ex oculis nostris & syderibus allaturus, necessarium erat ut uobis in hac die sacramentum corporis & sanguinis consecraret, ut coleretur iugiter per mysterium quod semel offerebatur in precium. That is to saye: Because he wolde take awaye out of our eyes the bodye that he toke, and carye yt in to heauen, it was necessarye that in thys tyme he shulde consecrate to vs the sacramēte of hys bodye ād bloode: that that which was ones offered for the pryce of our redemptyon, myght contynuallye be honoured through the mysterye.

|Consecrate.| To consecrate a thynge, is to applye it vnto an holye vse. Here you maye see that he calleth yt the sacrament of hys bodye and bloode, which bodye is caryed vp into heauen. And also he calleth it a mysterye, which is ynough for them that wyll see.

|Druthmarius.| Also Druthmarius expoundeth these wordes, thys is my bodye on this maner: Hoc est corpus meum in mysterio. That is to saye: thys is my bodye in a mysterye. I thynke you knowe what a mysterye meaneth. Christe is crucyfyed euery daye in a mysterye: that is to saye: euery daye hys death ys represented by the sacramentes of remembraunce. The Masse is Christes passyon in a mysterye: that is to saye: the Masse doth represente hys passyon and keapeth yt in our memorye. The breade ys Christes bodye in a mysterye: that is to saye: it representeth hys body that was broken for vs, and keapeth yt in our remēbraunce.

You haue harde already the mynde of the doctours, how the sacrament ys Christes bodye. And now I shall shewe you how the sacrament ys our bodye, which doth not a lytle healpe to the vnderstōdynge of these wordes whych are in controversye. The sacramēt of the Aulter ys our bodye as well as it is Christes bodye. And euē as it is our bodye, so yt is Christes. But there is no man that cā saye that it is our naturall bodye in dede, but onely a fygure, sygne, memoryall, or represētacyon of our bodye: Wherfore yt must also folowe, that it is but onely a fygure, sygne, memoryall or represētaciō of Christes bodye. The fyrste parte of this argument maye thus be proued. |Augustino in sermone ad infantes.| S. Austen wrytynge in a sermon sayeth on this maner. Corpus ergo Christi si uultis intelligere, apostolum audite dicentem. Vos estis corpus christi & mēbra .1. Cor. 12. Si ergo estis corpus christi & membra, mysteriū uestrumque in mensa Domini positū est, mysteriū Domini accipitis, ad id quod estis. Amē respōdetis et respōdēdo subscribitis. That is to saye: Yf you wyll vnderstōde the bodye of Christe, here the Apostle which sayeth. We are the bodye of Christe and mēbres .1. Cor. 12. Therfore yf ye be the bodye of Christe and membres, your mysterye is put vpon the Lordes table, ye receyue the mysterye of the Lorde, vnto that you are you answer Amē. And in answerynge subscrybe vnto yt. Here you maye see that the sacramēt ys also our body, ād yet is not our naturall body, but onely our body in a mysterye, that is to saye: a fygure sygne, memoryall, or represētacyō of our body. For as the breade ys made of many graynes or cornes, so we (though we be manye) are one breade ād one bodye. And for this propertye and symylitude it is called our bodye, and beareth the name of the verye thynge which yt doth represēt & sygnyfy. Agayne s. Austē sayth. |Augusti in ser. de sacra feria Pasche.| Quia Christus passy est pro nobis, cŏmēdauit nobis in isto sacramēto corpus & sanguinem suum, quod etiam fecit & nos ipsos. Nam & nos ipsius corpus facti sumus, & per misericordiā ipsius quod accipimus nos sumus. Et postea dicit. Iam in nomine Christi tanquam ad calicem Domini uenistis, ibi nos estis in mensa & ibi uos estis in calice. That is, because Christ hath suffered for vs, he hath betakē vnto vs in thys sacramēt hys bodye and bloode, which he hath also made euen our selfes. For we also are made hys bodye, and by his mercye we are euē the same thynge that we receyue. And after he sayeth. Now in the name of Christe ye are come, as a man wolde saye, to the chalyce of the Lorde: there are ye vpon the table, and there are ye in the chalyce. Here you maye see, that the sacrament is our bodye. And yet yt is not our naturall bodye, but onelye in a mysterye, as it is before sayde.

|Augusti de sacra feria pasche.| Furthermore S. Austen sayeth. Hunc itaq; cibŭ & potū societatē uult intelligi corporis & mēbrorū suorū quod est sācta ecclesia in predestinatis & uocatis & iustificatis & glorificatis sanctis & fidelibus eius. Huius rei sacramentum alicubi quotidie, alicubi certis interuallis dierum in dominico preparatur, & de mensa Domini sumitur, quibusdà ad uitam, quibusdam ad exitium. Res uero ipsa cuius est sacramentum, est omni homini ad uitam, nulli ad exitium, quicumque eius particeps fuerit. That is to saye: he wyll that this meate and drynke shulde be vnderstōde to be the felowshyp of hys bodye and membres, which ys the holy churche in hys predestynate and called and iustyfyed and gloryfyed sayntes and faythfull. The sacrament of thys thynge ys prepared in some place daylye, and in some place at certayne appoynted dayes, as vpon the sondaye. And yt is receyued at the table of the Lorde, of some vnto lyfe, and of some vnto destruccyō. But the thynge yt selfe whose sacrament thys ys, is receyued of all men vnto lyfe, and of no mā vnto destruccyon, whosoeuer is partaker of yt. Here doth S. Austen fyrste saye, that this sacrament ys the felowshyppe of his bodye and membres which are we. And yet is not our naturall bodye, as ys before sayde. And then he sayeth, that the sacrament of thys thynge ys receyued of some vnto lyfe and saluacyon, and of some vnto death and dampnacyon. For both faythfull and vnfaythfull maye receyue the sacramēt. And after he sayeth, that the thynge yt selfe whose sacrament yt ys, is receyued of all men vnto lyfe, and of no man vnto destruccyon, who so euer ys partaker of yt. And of thys sayenge yt muste neades folowe, that onely the faythfull eate Christes bodye, and the vnfaythfull eate hym not. For he is receyued of no mā vnto destruccyon. And of thys yt muste also folowe that the sacrament ys not Christes bodye in dede, but onelye in a mysterye. For yf the sacrament were hys naturall bodye, then shulde yt folowe, that the vnfaythfull shulde receyue hys bodye. Which is contrarye to the mynde of saynt Austen, and agaynst all truth. Thus haue we suffycyentlye proued the fyrste parte of our argumēte, that the sacrament is our bodye, as well as yt is Christes. And nowe wyll I proue the secōde parte more playnely (although yt be ynough declared already, to them that haue eares) that euen as yt is our bodye so it is Christes.

Fyrste you shall vnderstonde that in the wyne, which ys called Christes 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 |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.

|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. |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. |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.

|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. |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.

|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.

|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.

|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.

|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. |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.

|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. |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.

Furthermore Christ wolde not suffer that devoute womā which of loue sought hym at hys sepulchre, to touche his naturall bodye, because she lacked a poynte of faythe, & ded not counte hym to be equall with hys father. And moche more yt shall folowe that the wycked which haue no faythe nor loue towardes hym, shall not be suffered to eate hys fleshe with their teth, & swallowe yt in to their vncleane bodyes: for that were moche more then to touche hym. And yet notwithstandynge they receyue and eate the sacrament. Whervpon yt shulde folowe yf the sacrament were hys naturall bodye, that they shulde in dede eate hys bodye. Which thynge may be recoūted a blasphemye agaynste God. Moreouer Christe sayeth, he that eateth my fleshe ād drynketh my blood dwelleth in me & I in hym: Now we knowe ryght well that the wycked do eate the sacrament, ād yet neyther dwell in Christe, nor Christ in thē. Wherfore yt muste folowe that the sacramēt is not the very fleshe of Christe. And surelye I can not excuse thē of blasphemye which so dyrectlye do cōtrary Christes wordes. Howe can you avoyde these textes which Christ speaketh vnto hys dyscyples sayēge. Yet a lytel whyle am I with you. And then I departe to hym that sente me. |Ioan. 6.| And agayne it is expedyent for you that I departe. For excepte that I departe, that counforter shall not come vnto you. |Ioan. 6.| And agayne he sayeth. I forsake the worlde |Ioan. 6.| and go to my Father. And to be shorte, he sayeth, |Mat. 25.| poore mē ye shall euer haue with you, |Mar. 14.| but me shall you not euer haue. Now we knowe ryght well that hys Godhed is in all places, |Ioan. 12.| and that as towchynge hys Godhed he forsoke not the worlde, when he ascended vnto hys Father. Wherfore it muste neades folowe that he fors oke yt as towchynge hys fleshe and manhode. And therto agreeth the exposycyons of Saynte Austen, and Fulgentius before alleaged, yea and all other olde faythfull Fathers. Now yf he haue forsaken the worlde as towchynge the presence of hys naturall fleshe and māhode (as all doctours defyne) then mente he not that hys naturall fleshe shulde be presente in the sacrament, to be eaten with our tethe. And therfore though Christe so tell you, yet muste you take hym as he meaneth, or els you be begyled. For yf ye thynke that GOD both maye and wyll fulfyll and veryfye all thynges accordynge to the letter as he speaketh them, I maye call you an obedyent man, as Saynte BARNARD doth hys Monke Adam. And maye saye (as he doth) that yf that be the ryght waye, so symplye to receyue all thynge, we maye put out the texte of scrypture which warneth vs to be wyse as serpētes. For the texte folowynge is suffycyent, which byddeth vs to be symple as doves.

Why doth your mastershyppe graunte a necessarye allegorye, whē Paule sayeth, CHRISTE is a stone, or when Christ sayeth, that he is a dore? The scrypture sayeth he is both twayne. And syth God so sayth, he is able so to make it. And therfore by your reason we shall neade none allegorye in all scrypture, & thē he that is moste symple ād folyshe, may be counted moste faythfull. And so shall we neade no faythfull Fathers to expounde the texte, but it shalbe moste meryte, to beleue the letter. This I denye not, but that God coulde haue done yt, yf he had so entēded, when he spake the wordes: But nowe the scrypture stondynge as it doth, I thynke he can not do it. As by exāple. I thynke that God by the bloode of hys sone Christe myght haue saued all men, both faythfull and vnfaythfull, yf he had so intēded, ād that yt had so pleased hym. But nowe the scrypture stōdynge as it doth, I saye he can not do yt, and that it is impossyble for hym. For then he myght make hys sone a lyer which sayeth, |Ioan. 3.| he that beleueth not is dampned. And agayne, he that beleueth not shall not see lyfe, but the wrathe of God abydeth vpon hym. And euen as it is impossyble to stonde with the processe of scriptures (wherin God hath declared hys wyll) that the vnfaythfull shulde be saued, although God myght haue done it at the fyrst yf he had so wolde. Lykewyse it is impossyble the scryptures stondynge as they do, that the naturall bodye of Christ shulde be presente to our teth in the sacrament. And as for our faythe, yt neadeth not to haue hym presente in the breade. For I maye as well eate hym ād drynke hym through faythe, that is to saye: beleue in hym, as though he were as presente in the sacramēte, as he was hangynge vpon the crosse.

And because you saye, that my naturall reasons be not worth the reasonynge, I wyll alleage you some mo, to see what you can saye to them. Fyrste euery sacrament is the sygne of an holye thynge: but the sacramente of the aulter is a sacramēt (as all faythfull men confesse) ergo it muste folowe that the sacrament of the aulter is the sygne of an holye thynge. Nowe yf it be the sygne of an holye thynge, then it is not the holye thynge yt selfe which yt doth sygnyfye & represent. Why shulde we then feare, to call that breade a fygure, that is to saye: a sacrament of that holye bodye of our Lorde and Sauyoure.

Besydes that I wolde knowe of what necessyte or profyte hys fleshe muste be present in the sacrament. For the presence of hys fleshe can no more profyte vs, thē doth the remembraunce of hys bodye, but this remembraunce maye as well be done by the sacrament, as though hys bodye were present. And therfore syth God and nature make nought in vayne, it foloweth consequentlye, that his naturall fleshe is not there, but onelye a memoryall therof.

Furthermore, the ende and fynall cause of a thynge is euer better then those thynges which are prouyded for the ende (as the house is better than the lyme, stone, & tymber, which are prouyded for the howse) but the ende and fynall cause of the sacramente is the remembraunce of Christes bodye: and thervpō yt muste folowe that yf the sacramente be hys naturall bodye, that the remembraunce of Christes bodye shulde be better then hys bodye it selfe. Whiche thynge is to be abhorred of all faythfull men.

It were fondnes to fayne that the soule ded otherwyse eate then do the Angelles in heauē, and their meate is onelye the Ioye and delectacyon that they haue of God and of hys glorye; And euen so doth the soule which is here vpon the earth eate through faythe the bodye of Christe which is in heauen. For it delyteth & reioyseth whyles yt vnderstōdeth through faythe, that Christ hath takē our synnes vpō hym and pacyfyed the Fathers wrath. Neyther yt is necessarye, that for that or for thys cause, that his fleshe shulde be present. For a man maye as well loue ād reioyse in the thynge which is from hym and not present, as though yt were presēt by hym of that maner.

More ouer, the breade is Christes bodye, euen as the breakynge of the breade is the death of hys bodye. Nowe the breakynge of breade at the maundye is not the verye death of Christes bodye, but onelye a representacyon of the same (albeit the mynde through faythe doeth spirytuallye beholde hys verye death) and euen lyke wyse that naturall breade is not the verye bodye of our Lorde, but onely a sacramēt, sygne, memoryall, or representacyō of the same, albeit through the admonycyō therof, the mynde through fayth, doth spirytually beholde the verye body. And surely yf a man be faythfull, the spirite of God worketh in his harte very swetelye at his communyon.

Fynallye, it was not laufull to eate or drynke the bloode not onelye of man, but also of a brute beaste, and the Apostles them selues moued by the rule of charyte, ded instytute that men shulde abstayne from bloode, somewhat fauourynge the infyrmyte of the Iewes. Now yf the Apostles had taught (as ye do) that in the sacrament hys verye fleshe and bloode is eaten and dronken with the teth and mouthe of faythfull and vnfaythfull, what coulde haue bene a greater occasyō to haue excluded the Iewes frō Christes fayth euen at ones? Thynke you that the Apostles wolde not haue bene to srupulous to haue dronken hys very bloode, seynge it was so playne agaynst Moses lawe, yf they had vnderstonde hym so grosselye as ye do? |Act .10.| Peter had a clothe sente downe from heauen, in whiche were all maner of beastes forbydden by the lawe, and was commaunded to fle and eate thē. And he answered, God forbyd, for I neuer eate any vncleane thynge, meanynge therbye that he neuer eate any thynge forbyddē by the lawe. Wherof it muste neades folowe, that eyther he neuer receyued the sacrament (whiche is playne false) or els that he more spyrytuallye vnderstode the wordes of Christes maundye then ye falselye fayne. For it was playnelye forbydden by the lawe, to eate or drynke any maner of bloode. |obiectyō.| And I knowe but one reason, that they haue which they counte as insoluble: how be it by Goddes grace we shall soone avoyde it. Their reason is this. Paule sayeth, he that eateth and drynketh this sacrament vnworthelye, shalbe gyltye of the bodye and bloode of the Lorde. Now saye they, how shulde they be gyltye of the Lordes bodye ād bloode whiche receyue it vnworthelye, excepte it were the verye bodye and bloode of the Lorde.

|Solutiō.| This argument I saye, is verye weake and slender. For I can shewe manye examples by the whiche it may be dyssolued. For he that dyspyseth the Kynges seale or Letters offendeth agaynste hys owne parson, and yet the Letters or Seale is not hys owne parson. He that vyolentlye plucketh downe hys graces Armes, or breaketh hys brode Seale wyth a furyouse mynde or wyth vyolence, commytteth treason agaynste hys owne parson. And yet hys Armes and brode Seale are not hys owne parsō. He that clyppyth the Kynges coyne, commytteth treason agaynste the Kynges parson and the common wealth: and yet the money is neyther hys graces parson nor the common wealth. And therfore your argument is but weake and slēder. For euē as a man doth offende agaynste the Prynces parson by dyspysinge his Armes, Seale, or Letters, so doth a mā offende agaynste Christes bodye and bloode, by abvsynge the sacrament of hys bodye and bloode, although he be not there present, as the Kynges parsō is not presente in hys Armes, Seale, or Letters.

Besydes that S. Paule sayeth, that euerye man whiche prayeth or preacheth with covered heade shameth hys heade, & hys head is Christe; shall we therfore Imagen that Christe is naturallye in euerye mās heade, as your argument cōcludeth? Forsoth that were a preatye fantasye. Fynally S. Austen sayeth, that he doth no lesse synne whiche neglygētlye heareth the wordes of God, thē doth the other which vnworthelye receyueth the sacrament of Christes bodye and bloode. Nowe yf this be true, then is your reason not worth a ry she, for Christes naturall bodye is not in the worde whiche is preached, as all men knowe. And yet he synneth no lesse that neglygentlye heareth it, then doth he that vnworthelye receyueth the sacramēt. And thus you see their insoluble argument easelye dyssolued.

|More.| ❧ But now muste thys yonge man consyder agayne that he hym selfe confesseth, that the cause for which hym selfe sayeth, that Christe in so sayenge ded so meane, is because that yf he shulde haue mēt so, yt was impossyble to God to brynge hys meanynge a bought: that is to saye, that Christes bodye myght be in two places at ones. And therfore but yf he proue that thynge impossyble for God to do, els he confesseth that God not onelye sayde it but also mente it in dede. And yet ouer thys, yf Christ had neuer sayde it, yet doubt I nothynge, but he is able to do it, or els were there somwhat that he coulde not do; And then were God not almyghtye.

|Fryth.| ¶ Here Master More wolde myre me with his sophystrye, ād wyth wyles wolde wynne hys spores. For as he before ded discant on these wordes, can, and impossyble, and wolde haue made mē beleue that I mente it coulde not be, because it coulde not be by reason, and that I mente it was impossyble, because reason coulde not reache it: So now he dysputeth with lyke maner of sophystycacyon, concludynge that I confesse that it is impossyble and cā not be, because that yf God shulde so haue mente, it was impossyble for God to brynge hys meanynge a bought. Deare bretherne, thys bablynge is suffycyentlye discussed alreadye. For I mente not that it was impossyble for God to brynge it aboute, yf he had so mēte, but I mente that it is impossyble to stonde with the processe of the scrypture whiche we haue receyued. And I saye more ouer, that though it was possyble for God to haue done it (yf it had pleased hym) yet now, the scrypture thus stondynge, it is impossyble for hym to do it. For then he muste make hys sone a lyer. And I saye, that yf he had so ment as the letter stondeth, that he wolde then haue geuen vs other scrypture, and wolde not haue sayde that he muste departe to hym that sente hym, with other textes as are before rehearsed.

And where master More sayeth, that yf there were somwhat that he coulde not do, than were God not almyghtye. I saye it is ashame for our Prelates that they haue gottō suche an ignoraunte proctoure to defende them. And I am sure that they thēselues coulde haue sayde moche better. For els how shulde they enstructe other and leade them in the ryght waye, yf they themselues were so rude and vnlearned? Shulde they not knowe what thys meaneth, that God is almyghtye, whych is a peace of the fyrste artycle of our Crede? Then how shulde their shepe haue any sure syght? More thynketh that God is called almyghtye, because he can do all thynges. And then in dede it shulde folowe that he were not almyghtye. For all thynges he can not do, he cā not saue the vnfaythfull, he can not restore vyrgynyte ones vyolated, sayeth S. Thomas and also (as I remember) S. Hierome wrytynge of vyrgynyte vnto Paula and Eustochium: he can not synne sayeth Dunce: he can not denye hym selfe sayeth .S. Paule. |2. Tim.| Now yf thys mans learnynge were alowed, thē myght not God be almyghtye, because there is sumwhat that he cā not do. But they that are a customed with scrypture, do knowe that he is called almyghtye, not because he can do all thynge: but because there is no superyour power aboue hym, but that he maye do all that he wyll: and all that hys pleasure is to do that maye he brynge to passe. And no power is able to resyste hym. But he hath no pleasure nor wyll to make hys sone alyer nor to make hys scripture false, and in dede he maye not do it. And yet notwithstondynge he abydeth almyghtye. For he may do all thynge that he wyll.

|More.| ❧ Then master More as towchynge the reason of repungnaunce sayeth, that many thynges may seame repungnaunte both to hym and me, which thynges God seeth how to make them stonde together well ynough, and addeth such blynde reasons of repungnaunce as induceth manye men in to a greate erroure: some ascrybynge all thynge vnto destenye without any power of mans fre wyll at all. And some genynge all to mans owne wyll. And haue no fore syght at all to the provydēce of God, and all because the poore blynde reason of man can not see so farre, as to perceyue how Goddes prescyence and mans fre wyll can stonde together, but seame clerelye to be repungnaunte.

|Fryth.| ¶ As for hys dygressyon of mans fre wyll, I wyll not greatlye wrestle with hym. But thys one thynge I maye saye, |Ioan. 8.| that yf the sone of God delyuer vs, then are we verye free. |2. Cor. 3.| And where the spyryte of God is, there is fredome. I meane not fredome to do what you wyll; but fredome |Rom. 6.| frō synne, that we maye be the saruaūtes of ryghtuousnes. But yf we haue not the spyryte of Christe, then wyll I saye with S. Austen, |Augustinus de spiritu & litera.| that our fre wyll is wretched, and can do nought but synne. And as towchynge suche textes of repugnaunce, yf they be so dyffuse that mans reason (which is the lyght of hys vnderstōdyng) can not attayne to set them together, then were you beste to make thē none artycles of our faythe. For I thynke as manye as are necessarye vnto our salvacyon, are conteyned in the Crede, which I thynke euery mā beleueth: I beseche you laye no bygger burthen vpon vs then those faythfull Fathers ded, which thought that suffycyent. And then I am sure, we shulde haue fewer heretykes. For I neuer harde of heretycke that euer helde agaynste any artycle of our Crede, but all that ye dyffame by thys name, are onelye put to death, because they saye that we are not bounde to beleue euerye poynte that the lawes and tyrannye of the cleargye alowe and maynteyne, which thynge how true it is (blessed be God) is meatelye well knowen alreadye. For els had I and many mo bene deade before thys daye.

|More.| ❧ I wote well that many good folke haue vsed in thys matter manye frutefull examples. As of one face beholden in dyuerse glasses, and in euerye peace of one glasse broken in to twentye, ād of one worde comynge whole to an hundreth eares at ones: and the syght of one lytle eye presently beholdynge an whole greate contrye at ones, with a thousande suche meruelles mo: suche as those that see thē daylye done (and therfore meruell not at thē) shall yet neuer be able, no not this yonge man hym selfe, to geue suche a reason by what meane they maye be done, but that he maye haue suche repugnaunce layde agaynste it, that he shalbe fayne in conclusyon (for the chefe and moste euydent reason) to saye, that the cause of all those thynges, is because God that hath so caused them to be done, is almyghtye of hym selfe, and maye do what hym lyste.

|Fryth.| ¶ As towchynge the examples that master More doth here alleage, I maye soone make answere vnto them. For they that are lyke our matter, make cleane agaynste hym, and the other can not make for hym. The glasse I graunte is a good example. For euen as the glasse dothe represent the verye face of man, so doth this sacrament represent the verye bodye and bloode of Christe. And lyke as euery peace of the glasse doth represent that one face, so doth euery peace of that sacrament represent that one bodye of Christe. But euerye mā knoweth ryght well, that thoughe the glasse represent my face, yet the substaunce of the glasse is not my verye face, neyther is my very face in the glasse. And euen so though the sacrament do represent the bodye of Christe, yet the substaunce of the sacrament is not hys verye bodye (no more then the glasse is my face) neyther is hys verye bodye in the sacrament, no more thē my verye face is in the glasse. And thus this example maketh well for vs. And for that one worde commynge whole to an hūdreth eares, I saye that worde is but a sounde ād a qualyte & not a substaunce, and therfore yt is nothynge to our purpose, and can not be lykened to Christes bodye which is a substaunce. And as concernynge the syght of the lytle eye, I say that though the eye dyscrye and see an whole contrye, yet is not that whole contrye in the eye: but as the contrye is knowen by the syght of the eye (though the contrye be not in it) so is the death of Christe and his bodye breakynge and bloode sheadynge knowen by the sacrament, though hys naturall bodye be not in it. And thus hys exāples make nothyng with hym, but rather moche agaynste hym. And where he sayeth that the yonge mā hym selfe cā geue no reasō, by what meane they may be done: I maye saye vnto hys mastershyppe, that whan I was seauen yeare yonger then I am thys day, I wolde haue bene ashamed yf I coulde not haue geuen an evydent reason at the Austēs in Oxforde before the whole vnyuersyte. And albeit I now wochesaue not to spende laboure and paper abought Aristotles doctryne, yet haue I so moche towched hys examples, that he may be werye of them.

|More.| ❧ Also I cā not see why it shulde be more repugnaunt that one bodye maye be by the power of God in two places at ones, then that two bodyes maye be together in one place at ones. And that poynte I thynke thys yonge man denyeth not.

|Fryth.| ¶ The beynge of our bodye in two places at ones is agaynste nature, and scrypture cā not allow it. But that two bodyes shulde be in one place seameth more reasonable. For I haue good experyence that though my bodye can not be in two places at ones (both in the tower and where I wolde haue it besyde) yet blessed be god in this one place, I am not without cōpanye. But yf master More meane that in one proper & severall place, maye be two bodyes at ones, that I wyll denye, tyll he haue laysure to proue it. And yet at the length I am sure, hys proue shall not be worth a podynge prycke. For I am sure it muste be, Ratione porositatis ut in igne & ferro: nam penetracionem dimensionum nunquam probabit. And then he is as nyghe as he was before.

|More.| ❧ Now hys laste reason wyth which he proueth yt impossyble for the bodye of christe to be in two places at ones, is this: You can (sayeth he) shewe no reason whye he shulde be in many places at ones & not in all. But in all places he can not be: Wherfore we muste cōclude that he can not be in many places at ones. This is a mervelous cōcluded argumente. I am sure that euery chylde may soone see that this consequent can neuer folowe vpō these two premysses of thys antecedent.

|Fryth.| ¶ When I made thys reason & compyled my tretyse I had no regarde to the cavyllacyons of sotle sophysters. For I thought no sophysters shulde haue medled wyth that meate. But neuerthelesse syth now I perceyue that they pryncipallye are porynge vpon yt, seakynge some praye to sette their teth a warke, in this boke I haue samwhat prouyded for thē, and haue brought suche harde bones, that yf they be to busye, maye chaunce to choke thē. And yet is not the argumēt so feable as he fayneth. For the fyrst part (if he lyst to cōsyder the sēce & mynde, & be not to curyous) where I say that they cā shewe no reasō why he shulde be in many places & not in all, is thus to be vnderstōd of wyse mē, that the very reasō & cause that he shulde be in many places must be, because the body is so ānexed with the godhed, that yt is in euery place as the Godhed is. Thys I saye, muste be the cause and reason of hys beynge in many places. And neyther you nor no man els cā iustely asygne any other. Now of this maior or fyrste proposycyon thus vnderstonde doth the conclusyon folowe dyrectlye. For yf this shulde be the cause (as they muste neades graūte) and thys cause proued false by scrypture: then muste they neades graunte that the thynge whiche so foloweth of this cause, muste neades be false. And so is my purpose proued, and they concluded. As by example. The Astronomers saye: that the naturall course of the sonne is from the Weste to the Easte. Nowe yf a man shulde aske them what ys then the cause that we see hym daylye take the contrary course, from the East to the Weste agaynste hys nature: they answere. Because the heyghest spere (whose course is from the Easte to the Weste) wyth hys swyfte movynge doth vyolently drawe the inferyoure speres with hym. This is the cause that they alleage, and no man can asygne any other. And now syth I can proue thys sense false by scrypture (for scrypture sayth that the spere is fastened Heb. viij and S. Austen expoundynge that texte improueth the Astronomers which affyrme that it moueth) they muste neades graunte that the thynge which foloweth of this cause muste neades be false. And so we maye conclude agaynste them all, that the naturall course of the sonne is not from the Weste to the East (as the Astronomers saye) but contrarye from the Easte to the Weste. And lykewyse syth the cause that Christes bodye shulde be in many places, is asygned of learned men to be, because hys bodye is so annexed with the Godhed (which is in euerye place) that it is also in all places with it, and no man can asygne any other. And this cause is proued false by scrypture. For when the women sought Christ at hys graue, an Angell gaue the answere that he was not there. |Mar. 14.| But yf hys bodye had bene in euery place, then had the Angell lyed. |Luc. 16.| Also Christ sayde vnto hys dyscyples of Lazarus which dyed at Bathania. |Ioan. 11.| Lazarus ys deade. And I am gladde for your sakes (that you maye beleue) because I was not there. Now yf hys body were in euery place as is the Godhed, then Christ sayde not trulye, when he sayde he was not there. Therfore syth (as I sayde) this is the cause asygned, and yet proued false by scrypture, they muste neades graunte, that the thynge which foloweth of this cause, muste also neades be false. And so we maye conclude agaynste them all, that Christes bodye is in one place onely. And now you maye see how my consequent folowe the premysses.

|More.| ❧ For he can no further cōclude, but that we can shewe no reason whye he shulde be in many places at ones. What had he wone by that: Myght he thā conclude thervpon, that he coulde not be in manye places at ones? As though yt were not possyble for God to make hys bodye in two places at ones, but yf we were able to tell how, and why, and wherbye, and shewe the reason.

|Fryth.| ¶ How farre I cā conclude is shewed immedyatly before. For though of the bare wordes as ye toke them, it was harde to conclude any thynge, yet haue I nowe declared them, and so farre concluded, that you can not avoyde them. And where he sayeth that though they can shewe no reason, yet I had wonne nought by it, I thynke he wolde be angrye yf I shulde so answere. But surely they are in good case, for yt is ynough for them to saye, thus it is, and neade neuer to shewe any cause or reason whye they so saye. For they are the churche and can not erre: so that yf they teache contrarye thynges, yet all is good ynough. And when they see that no man can make the scryptures to agre wyth their doctryne, then they saye, that their doctryne is true ynough, but no mā can vnderstōnde the scrypture. And though the scrypture seame neuer so repugnaunte both to them ād vs, yet God seeth well ynough (saye they) how to sette thē together, and it is possyble for God to make it agree, though they can not tell how. But thys doctryne hath longe ynough deceyued vs. For mē haue seane to lōge wyth your spectacles, yet now (thankes be to God) they begynne to see with their owne eyes. And as towchyng how thys matter was possyble to God and how it is not possyble, is suffycyently declared before to all them that lyste to loke.

|More.| ❧ Howbeit as for me (though I be not bounde to yt) I am cōtēt yet to proue, that God maye make the body of Christ to be in all places at ones. And because thys yōge mā coupleth that proposycyō with the other: so wyll I do also. And I wyll proue therfore that God cā make hys bodye be bothe in many places at ones, & in all places at ones, by that he is almyghtye, and therfore can do all thynge.

|Fryth.| ¶ Now ys the good man in hys olde dreame agayne, and thynketh that God is called almyghtye, because he can do all thynges. And then in dede yt shulde folowe that he were not almyghtye. For all thynges he can not do, he can not saue the vnfaythfull, he can not restore virgynyte ones vyolated, he cā not synne, he cā not denye hym selfe. Yf thys mās lernynge were alowed, thā myght not god be called almyghty, because there is somwhat that he can not do. But they that are accustomed with scrypture, do knowe that he is called almyghtye, not because he can not do all thynges, but because there is no superyour power aboue hym, but that he may do all that he wyll, and all that hys pleasure is, maye he brynge to passe. But he hath no wyll nor pleasure, to make his sone a lyer, & to make hys scrypture false and yet notwitstondynge he abydeth almyghtye and may do what he wyll. And euē as it is impossyble to stonde with the processe of the scryptures (wherin God hath declaeed hys wyll) that the unfaythfull shulde be saued (although at the fyrst god myght haue done it, yf he had so wolde) lykewyse it is impossyble the scryptures stōdynge as they do, that the naturall bodye of Christ, shulde be present to our teth in the sacramēt. And as for our fayth, yt neadeth not to haue hym present in the breade. For I may as well eate hym and drynke hym through fayth (that is to say, beleue in hym) though he contynue styll in heauen, as though he were as present in the sacramēt, as he was hangynge on the crosse. But yet hys mastershype hath lefte one thynge vnproued, and that is euen the pyth of hys purpose. For though he had proued (as he hath not) that God by hys almyghtynes myght make Christes bodye in many places, and in all places, & in the sacrament, yet he forgotte to proue that God hath so done. And therfore albeyt I dyd graūte hym (as I wyll not) that he myght so do, yet therof it doth not folow, that he hath so done in dede. For god maye do manye thynges whiche he doth not. And therfore hys argument doth not proue hys purpose. Now yf he do but thynke that God hath so done, I am well pleased ād wyll not put hym to the payne to proue it. For anone ye shall see hym so intaungled in bryars, that he shall not wete where to be come.

|More.| ❧ But yet this yonge man goeth aboute to proue thys poynte by scrypture. For excepte we graunte hym that poynte to be true, he sayeth that els we make the Angell a lyer that sayde, he is not here, ād also that els we make as though Christes bodye in hys assensyon ded not go vp in the cloude in to heauē from earth, but onelye hyd hym selfe in the cloude, and playeth boo pyppe and taryed beneth styll. Here in the ende he forgetteth hym selfe so fowle, that whan he was a yonge sophyster he wolde I dare say, haue bene full sore ashamed so to haue oversene hym selfe at Oxforde at a pervyse. For ye wote well that thynge whiche he sayeth, and whiche he muste therfore proue, is that the bodye of Christ cā not be in euerye place at ones by no meane that God coulde make. And the textes that he bryngeth in for the proue, saye no further but that he was not in all places at ones.

|Fryth.| ¶ There are two thynges dysputed betwene master More and me: the one is whether God cā make the bodye of Christe in manye places, and in the sacramente. And therto hys mastershyppe sayeth yea. For God is almyghtye and maye do all thynges. And I saye naye, and affyrme that God is not called almyghtye because he maye do all thynges, but because he maye do all that he wyll. And I saye that he wyll not make hys sonne a lyer, nor hys scrypture false, and that he can not do it, and yet abydeth almyghtye. The other thynge is thys, whether he haue done it or not. For albeyt I ded graunte hym that it were possyble, yet is he neuer the nere excepte he eyther can proue that he hath done it in dede, or els thynke that God hath so done. For as I sayde God can do manye thynges which he doth not. And the controversye of thys doubte is dyssolued by the Aungell and scrypture whiche (as master More graunteth hym selfe) proueth that he was not in all places at ones, And therof it foloweth, that God hath not done it, although it be possyble. And so is hys mastershyppe at a poynte. For yf I shulde graunte it neuer so possyble, yet yf scrypture proue that it be not so in dede, then is he neuer the nere hys purpose, but moche the further from it. And thys is euen it that I sayde before: that it was not possyble to stonde with the processe of the scrypture which we haue receyued. And now hys mastershyppe hath graunted it hym selfe, which you maye be sure he wolde not do yf he coulde otherwyse avoyde it. And here you maye see howe sore I haue overseane my selfe.

|More.| ❧ God forbyd that any man shulde be the more prone and readye to beleue thys yonge man in thys greate matter, because he sayeth in the begynnynge that he wyll brynge all men to a concorde and a quyetnes of conscyence. For he bryngeth men to the worste kynde of quyetnes that maye be deuysed, when he telleth vs as he doth, that euery man in thys matter, maye with out parell beleue which waye he lyste. Euery man maye in euerye matter without any counsell, soone set hym selfe at reste, yf he lyste to take that waye and to beleue as he lyste hym selfe, ād care not how. But ād yf that waye had bene sure, Saynte Paule wolde neuer haue shewed that manye were in parell of sycknes and death also, for lacke of dyscernynge reuerentlye the bodye of our Lorde in that Sacramente, when they came to receyue hym.

|Fryth.| ¶ When Christe shulde departe thys worlde and go to hys Father, |Ioan. 15.| he gaue hys dyscyples a commaundement that they shulde loue eche other, sayenge by thys shall all men knowe, that ye are my dyscyples, yf ye loue eche other, as I haue loued you. Thys rule of charyte wolde I not haue broken, which notwithstondynge is often in Ieopardye a monge faythfull folke. This thynge consydered, I thought it necessarye to advertyse both partyes to saue thys rule of charyte, and proued in the fyrste chapter of my treatyse, that it was none artycle of the fayth necessarye to be beleued vnder payne of dampnacyon, and therfore that they were to blame that wolde be contencyous for the matter. For syth it is none artycle of the fayth, they may lawfullye dyssente without all Ieoperdye: and neade not to breake the rule of charyte, but rather to receyue eche other lyke weake bretherne.

This I saye I proued in the fyrste chapter agaynste which master More maketh no busynes, and improueth it not. Wherbye you maye soone gather that it is very true. For els syth hys mastershyppe so laboureth in these other poyntes, he wolde not haue lefte that vntowched you maye be sure. Thys is the concorde that I wolde brynge them vnto. And as towchynge quyetnes of conscyence, I haue knowen manye that haue sore bene combrede wyth it. And amōge all, a certayne master of arte which dyed in Oxforth, confessed vpon hys death bedde, that he had wepte lyenge in hys bedde an hundreth nyghtes wythin one yeare space, because he coulde not beleue it. Now yf he had knowen that it had bene no necessarye artycle, what cōforte and quyetnes shulde it haue bene vnto hym. Furthermore, euerye man can not so quyet hymselfe, as master More Imageneth. For there are manye that thynke them selfes no smalle foles, which whan they haue receyued some folyshe superstycyon, eyther by their owne Imagynacyon, or by belevynge their gossepes gospell ād olde wyfes tales, by and bye thynke the cōtrarye to be deadly synne, and vtterly forbydden by Chrystes gospell. As by example, I knowe an house of relygyon, wherin is a parson that thynketh it deadly synne to go ouer astrawe yf it lye acrosse. And yf there be vpon the pauemente any paynted pycture, or any Image grauen vpon a deade mans graue, he wyll not treade vpon it, although he shulde go a forelonge a bowte. What is thys but vayne superstycyon wherewith the conscyence is combred and corrupted? May not thys be weded out wyth the worde of God, shewynge hym that it is none artycle of the fayth so to thynke, & then to tell hym that it is not forboden by the scrypture, ād that it is no synne? Now albeyt hys conscyence be so cankered that the ruste wyll not be rubbed out: yet wyth Godes grace, some other whome he hath infected with the same, maye come agayne to Godes worde and be cured full well, whiche shulde neuer haue bene able to quyete them selfes. And lykewyse there are some whiche beleue as your superstycyous hartes haue informed them, and these can not quyete thēselues, because they beleue that you haue featched your doctryne out of scrypture. But when it is proued to them, and they themselues perceyue that scrypture sayeth not so, then can they be contente to thynke the contrarye, ād Iudge it no synne at all. And as towchynge S. Paule, surelye ye take hym wronge. For I wyll shewe you what processe he taketh, and how he is to be vnderstonde. But because it is not possyble to fynyshe it in fewe wordes, I shall deferre it vnto the bokes ende, and then I shall declare hym at large.

|More.| ❧ And what a fashyon is thys, to saye that we maye beleue yf we lyste, that there is the verye bodye of our Lorde in dede, and then to tell vs for a trouth, that suche a faythe is impossyble to be true: for GOD hym selfe can neuer brynge it abought, to make hys bodye to be there.

|Fryth.| ¶ Yf a man take the bare wordes of Christe, and of symplycyte be deceyued, and thynke that hys verye bodye be in the sacramente present to their teth that eate it, I dare not saye that he synneth therin, but wyll referre the matter vnto Godes Iudgement, and yet without doubt, I dare saye he is deceyued. As by example, yf a man deceyued by the litterall sence, wolde thynke that men shulde preache to fysshes (as S. Fraunces ded) because Christe badde hys dyscyples go preache to all creatures, yet wolde not I thynke that he synned therin. But wyll referre hym vnto Goddes Iudgement. But yet I wene euerye woman that hath anye wytte, wyll saye that he was deceyued.

|More.| ❧ I am verye sure that the olde holye Doctours which beleued Christes bodye and bloode to be there, and so taught other to beleue, as by their bokes playnelye doth apere, yf they had thought eyther that it coulde not be there or that it was not there in dede, they wolde not for all the good in thys worlde haue wryten as they haue done. For wolde those holye men (wene you) haue taught that men be bounde to beleue, that the verye bodye and bloode of CHRISTE is there, yf they them selfes thought that they were not bounde thervnto? Wolde they make men honoure and worshyppe that thynge as the very bodye and bloode of Christe whiche they thē selues thought were not it? Thys gere is to chyldyshe to speake of.

|Fryth.| ¶ That the olde doctours and faythfull Fathers so taught or thought as ye fayne of them, is verye false. For S. Austen as I haue shewed, maketh whollye for vs. Besydes that, there is none of the olde Fathers but they call it a sacramēte, a mysterye, and mystycall meate, which is not eaten with toth or belye: but with eares and faythe. And as towchynge the honoure and worshyppe done vnto it, I saye it is playne Idolatrye. And I saye, that he falselye reporteth vpon the olde holy Doctours. For they neuer taught men to worshyppe it, neyther can he alleage one place in any of them all whiche wolde haue men to worshyppe the sacramente. Peraduenture he maye alleage me certayne new felowes for hys purpose, as Dunce, Dorbell, Durande, and suche draffe, whiche by their doctryne haue deceyued the worlde wyth dampnable Idolatrye. But I speake of the olde holye Fathers ād doctours, S. Austen, Ambrose, Hierome, Cypriane, Cirille, Chrisostome, Fulgentius, and suche other: These I saye, do not teache men to worshyppe it, and by that I dare abyde. Of thys poynte I am so sure, that I wyll vse it for a contrarye argument, that hys naturall bodye is not there presente. For yf the holye Fathers before named had taken thys texte after the letter and not onelye spyrytuallye, thē in their workes they wolde haue taught men to worshyppe it, but they neuer taught mē to worshyppe thys sacrament, therfore it foloweth they toke not the texte after the letter, but onelye spyrytuallye. Now do I prouoke you to seake a proue of your purpose. Neuer the lesse I wyll not denye, but that these holye Doctours in dyuerse places, do call it hys bodye, as Christe and Paule do, and so do we lykewyse: and saye also that this verye bodye is there eatē. But yet we meane, that it is eaten with fayth (that is to saye by beleuynge that hys bodye was broken for vs) ād haue his bodye more in memorye at thys maundye thē the meate that we there eate. |Note.| And therfore it hathe the name of hys bodye: because the name it selfe shulde put vs in remēbraunce of hys bodye. And that hys bodye is there chefelye eaten, euen more (through fayth) then the meate wyth the mouth. And so are they also to be vnderstonde.

|More.| ❧ Yet one greate pleasure he doth vs, in that he putteth vs all at lyberte, that we maye with out parell of dampnacyon beleue as we ded before: that is to wete, that in the blessed sacramēt the whole substaunce of the breade ād the wyne is transmuted ād chaunged in to the verye bodye and bloode of Christe. For yf we maye wythout parell of dampnacyon beleue thus, as hym selfe graunteth that we maye, then graunteth he that we maye also without parell of dampnacyō beleue that he hym selfe lyeth, where he sayeth, the trouth of that beleue is impossyble.

|Fryth.| ¶ The beleuynge of thys poynte, is of it selfe not dampnable, as it is not dāpnable to thynke that Christe is a very stone or a vyne, because the litterall sence so sayeth: or yf you beleue that you ought to preache to fyshes and go Christen them another whyle, as ye do belles. And I insure you, if there were no worse myschefe that ensued of thys beleue, then it is in itselfe, I wolde neuer haue spoken agaynste it. But now there foloweth vpon it dampnable Idolatrye. For through the beleue that thys bodye is there, men fall downe and worshyppe yt. And thynkynge to please God, do dampnable synne agaynste hym. Thys I saye, is the cause that I so earnestlye wryte agaynste it, to avoyde the Idolatrye that is cōmytted through it. Parte of the germanes do thynke that hys naturall bodye is present in the sacramēt, ād take the wordes fleshelye, as Martyn taught them. But none of them worshyppe it, for that Martyn forbyddeth both in hys wordes ād workes, and so (blessed be God) they auoyde that Ieoperdye, which thynge yf you wyll also graunte, and publyshe but this one proposycyon, that it ought not to be worshypped, I promyse you I wyll neuer wryte agaynste it. For then is the Ieoperdye taken awaye, and then I am contēt that your mastershyppe thynke I lye. But in the meane season I muste thynke that ye fulfyll the worlde with dāpnable Idolatrye. And thus haue you also answere vnto the conclusyon, which you alleage out of the kynges graces boke. For I saye in your waye is no hurte, as longe as you do but onelye beleue the bare wordes of the texte, as S. Fraunces ded, when he preached to fyshes. But yf through the occasyon of those wordes, ye fall in to the worshyppynge of it, then I saye that in your waye is vndoubted dampnacyon. And so is there greate Ieoperdye in your waye, and none at all in ours. For though he were there in dede, yet do not we synne yf we worshyppe it not. For we are not commaunded to worshyppe the sacrament. But yf he be not there, then do you dampnable Idolatrye.