The king's ministers now came to the much disputed doctrine of the presence of Christ in the communion.
Ministers.
'Let us put aside the disputes that have divided us so long.[682] Let us all confess that in the eucharist the Lord truly gives believers his body to eat and his blood to drink to feed our souls in life everlasting; and that in this manner Christ remains in us and we in Christ. Whether this sacrament be called the Lord's Supper, the Lord's bread and wine, mass, eucharist, love-feast, or sacrifice, is of little moment. Christians ought not to dispute about names, if they possess the things; and, as the proverb says, "When we have the bear before us, let us not look after his track."[683] Communion with Christ is obtained by faith, and cannot be demonstrated by human arguments. When we treat of theology, let us not fall into matæology.'[684]
The Sorbonne could not overlook this side-blow aimed at the scholastic style.
Sorbonne.
'It is very useful, and often very necessary for the extirpation of heresy, to employ words not to be found in Scripture, such as transubstantiation, &c.[685] Yes, the bread and the wine are truly changed in substance, preserving only the accidents, and becoming the body and blood of Christ. It is not true that the panitas or corporitas of the bread combines with the corporitas of Christ. The transubstantiation is effected in instanti and not successivè; and it is certain that neither laymen nor women can accomplish this miraculous act, but priests only.'
The controversy next turned on confession, justification, faith, works, and free-will; after which they came to practical questions.
Ministers.
'Good men do not ask that the monasteries should be destroyed, but be turned into schools;[686] so that thus the liberality of our brethren may serve to maintain, not idle people, but men who will instruct youth in sound learning and morality.'