A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation wherein the same is declared, by…A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation vvherein the same is declared, by…
A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation wherein the same is declared, by the confession of their own writers, to have no necessary ground in Gods Word: as also it is further demonstrated to be against Scripture, nature, sense, reason, religion, and the judgement of t5xxauncients, and the faith of our ancestors: written by Thomas Gataker B. of D. and pastor of Rotherhith.A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation vvherein the same is declared, by the confession of their owne writers, to haue no necessary ground in Gods Word: as also it is further demonstrated to be against Scripture, nature, sense, reason, religion, and the iudgement of t5xxauncients, and the faith of our auncestours: written by Thomas Gataker B. of D. and pastor of Rotherhith.
Thomas Gataker 1574–1654London: printed by John for William Sheffard, 1624London: printed by Iohn for William Sheffard, 1624
[8], 56, 59-233, [3] p. · 81k words · STC 11657 · ESTC S102914
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Page 16. and 17. My Adversary wisely after his accustomed 1manner undertaketh by comparisons to declare the true manner of Christs body and blood being conveyed unto us in the Sacrament: and that so easily as if there were no difficulty at all in the explication thereof; whereas oCalvin himself accounteth it an inconceivable and unexplicable mystery, worthy with wonder and astonishment to be by us believed, how (to wit) Christs body so remotely distant as heaven is from the earth, can be eaten and received by us. pWe confess it (saith Beza) to be an incomprehensible mystery, wherein it cometh to pass that the same body which is and still remaineth in heaven, and is no where but there, should be truly communicated to us who are now on earth and no where else. This indeed is a mystery and true Jewell of Protestanticall doctrine harder to be conceived, as Calvin, Beza, and other chief Calvinists seem sometime to mean it, then to conceive all those true miracles, which we teach to be wrought by God in the consecration and use of this wonderful Sacrament. Yea surely it implieth an evident contradiction that Christs body should be truly given together with the sacramental signs, as Calvin expressly affirmeth, and so by ut eaten, that is no nearer then the top of heaven is to the mouth of such as receive him. If by faith only and a grateful memory of his passion we eat Christ in the Sacrament, as this Minister solveth the former riddle; no more present therein, nor in any other manner conjoined with the sacramental signs, then the land conveyed by an Indenture sealed is present or conveyed with the seal thereof, or then he is present in the water of Baptism: (they are his own comparisons) then is their Sacrament a bare sign and figure of Christs body, having no mystery at all worthy of admiration in it. For what wonder is it for a man to eat one thing thinking upon another; bread (for example) remembering our Saviours passion? And then are Calvin, Beza and many more of their ⟨p. 182⟩learnedest companions mere Jugglers and Impostors, who seek to plaster rotten walls, and mask with great words the naked breadinesse of their Protestanticall Sacrament.
manner vndertaketh by comparisons to declare the true manner of Christs body and blood being conveighed vnto vs in the Sacrament: and that so easily as if there were no difficulty at all in the explication thereof; whereas
Caluin himselfe accounteth it an inconceiuable and vnexplicable mysterie, worthy with wonder and astonishment to bee by vs beleeved, how (to wit) Christs body so remotely distant as heauen is from the earth, can be eaten and receiued by vs.
Wee confesse it (saith Beza) to be an incomprehensible mystery, wherein it commeth to passe that the same body which is and still remaineth in heauen, and is no where but there, should be truely cōmunicated to vs who are now on earth and no where else. This indeed is a mystery and true Iewell of Protestanticall doctrine harder to be conceived, as Caluin, Beza, and other chiefe Calvinists seeme sometime to meane it, then to conceiue all those true miracles, which we teach to be wrought by God in the consecration and vse of this wonderfull Sacrament. Yea surely it implyeth an evident contradiction that Christs body should be truely given together with the sacramentall signes, as Caluin expressely affirmeth, and so by vt eaten, that is no neerer then the top of heauen is to the mouth of such as receiue him. If by faith onely and a gratefull memory of his passion we eate Christ in the Sacrament, as this Minister solueth the former riddle; no more present therein, nor in any other manner conioyned with the sacramentall signes, then the land conveighed by an Indenture sealed is present or conveighed with the seale thereof, or then he is present in the water of Baptisme: (they are his owne comparisons) then is their Sacrament a bare signe and figure of Christs body, having no mystery at all worthy of admiration in it. For what wonder is it for a man to eate one thing thinking vpon another; bread (for example) remembring our Saviours passion? And then are Caluin, Beza and many more of their
⟨p. 182⟩
learnedest companions meer Iuglers and Impostors, who seeke to plaister rotten wals, and maske with great wordes the naked breadinesse of their Protestanticall Sacrament.
AT the end of this Argument I answer an Objection, 1how Christs body and blood can be conveyed unto us, or eaten and drunk of us in the Eucharist, if he be not there present. Which Question from the Fathers (as you heard before) may in a word be soon answered. Because our Saviour showed it by those words of his concerning his ascension, & his speech thereunto annexed, to be a spiritual not a corporal kind of communication. And if they will hear one of their own Bishops, Jansenius; he will tell them, that qto eat Christs flesh and drink his blood is to believe in his Incarnation and in his passion and blood, shedding; and that so by faith either of them are both present with us, and conveyed to us as well in the Sacrament, as out of it. But hereupon this mine Adversary befooling me for my labour, for taking such a task upon me, to answer such a Question; saith, I undertake to declare that by comparisons, as if there were no difficulty at all in it, cwhich Calvin and Beza confess to be a mystery, unconceivable, incomprehensible, inexplicable, yea which (as we hold it) implieth an evident contradiction: affirming that Christ is no more present therein, nor in any manner conjoined with the sacramental signs, then the land conveyed by an Indenture sealed is present with the same, or then he is present with the water in Baptism. Whereupon he worthily inferreth; that this our Sacrament then is but a bare sign or figure of Christs body having no mystery at all worthy of admiration; and Calvin and Beza, &c. are but Jugglers and Impostors.
AT the end of this Argument I answer an Obiection, 1how Christs body and blood can be conveighed vnto vs, or eaten and drunke of vs in the Eucharist, if hee be not there present. Which Question from the Fathers (as you heard before) may in a word be soone answered. Because our Sauiour shewed it by those wordes of his concerning his ascension, & his speech therunto annexed, to be a spirituall not a corporall kind of communication. And if they will heare one of their owne Bishops, Iansenius; hee will tell them, that qto eate Christs flesh and drinke his blood is to beleeue in his Incarnation and in his passion and blood, sheading; and that so by faith either of them are both present with vs, and conueighed to vs as well in the Sacrament, as out of it. But hereupon this mine Aduersary befooling me for my labour, for taking such a task vpon me, to answer such a Question; saith, I vndertake to declare that by comparisons, as if there were no difficulty at all in it, cwhich Calvin and Beza confesse to be a mysterie, vnconceiuable, incomprehensible, inexplicable, yea which (as wee hold it) implyeth an evident contradiction: affirming that Christ is no more present therein, nor in any manner conioyned with the sacramentall signes, then the land conveighed by an Indenture sealed is present with the same, or then hee is present with the water in Baptisme. Whereupon hee worthily inferreth; that this our Sacrament then is but a bare signe or figure of Christs body having no mystery at all worthy of admiration; and Calvin and Beza, &c. are but Iuglers and Impostors.
1T. G.
qJansen. in concold. Evang. c. 59.Iansen. in concold. Euang. c. 59.
cAll this of Calvin and Beza he borroweth from Bellarmine de Euch. l. 1. c. 1.
It might well have been one of Hercules his labours to purge this mans writings. Augaeus his stable was not fuller of dirt and dung, then they are of foul and filthy corrupt matter, and of loud and lewd lies.
It might well haue been one of Hercules his labours to purge this mans writings. Augaeus his stable was not fuller of durt and dung, then they are of foule and filthy corrupt matter, and of lowd and lewd lies.
1. Where do I affirm it to be a matter without all difficulty fully to explicate the admirable efficacy and ⟨p. 183⟩operation of divine mysteries, or the manner how the same is effected? I show only by some comparisons (and those such as the Apostle warranteth the use of) how Christ may being absent, be truly and effectually conveyed and assured unto us. But followeth it thence that I hold the thing it self for the manner of effecting it to have no difficulty at all in it? Do not the ancient Fathers hold the Trinity an unsearchable mystery? And yet what is more common among them then sby Comparisons and similitudes to show how in one nature there may be a plurality of persons? This Disputant himself among other wondrous works reckoneth the resurrection of mens bodies for one: will he say that the Fathers therefore deem that there is no difficulty in it, because tby sundry similitudes they endeavour to prove a possibility of it; notwithstanding the frequent and successive conversions of them into other things altered and consumed, as he speaketh?
1. Where doe I affirme it to bee a matter without all difficulty fully to explicate the admirable efficacy and ⟨p. 183⟩operation of divine mysteries, or the manner how the same is effected? I shew onely by some comparisons (and those such as the Apostle warranteth the vse of) how Christ may being absent, bee truely and effectually conueighed and assured vnto vs. But followeth it thence that I hold the thing it selfe for the manner of effecting it to haue no difficulty at all in it? Doe not the ancient Fathers hold the Trinitie an vnsearchable mysterie? And yet what is more common among them then sby Comparisons and similitudes to shew how in one nature there may be a plurality of persons? This Disputant himselfe among other wondrous workes reckoneth the resurrection of mens bodies for one: will hee say that the Fathers therefore deeme that there is no difficulty in it, because tby sundry similitudes they endeauour to proue a possibilitie of it; notwithstanding the frequent and successiue conuersions of them into other things altered and consumed, as hee speaketh?
sSee Greg. Naz. ad Nectar. and Aug. de Trinit l. 10, 11, 12, 13. & de verb. Ap hom 1. &c.
tSee Tertull. de resurr. carn. Athenag. de resurr. &c yea the Apostle himself 1Cor. 15. 35, 36. 37.
2. Let him show how it implieth an evident contradiction, to say that Christs body is truly given with the sacramental signs, though it be no nearer then heaven-top is to the mouths of the receivers. How this may be, without colour of contradiction, not in the Sacrament only, but out of it also, when as the thing is done spiritually, beside the comparisons that I express it by, his own uJansenius will show; yea or his own Albert will inform him, where he saith, that xSome eat and yet eat not; and some eat not, and yet eat. The former he meaneth of those that eat unprofitably in the Sacrament; the latter of those that eat spiritually out of it. If out of the Sacrament men may truly receive Christs body, though it be no nearer then heaven top to their mouths; then is it no such strange paradox as should imply contradiction, to say that the self same is done in the Sacrament also. I will tell him of a stranger matter. Many thousands thus did eat Christs flesh a thousand years before he was in the flesh. For howsoever he required before to have it proved; and ⟨p. 184⟩Bellarmine yin diverse places would fain deny it, and in zeffect sometime doth, though directly and absolutely he dare not: yet it was showed before out of Augustine: to whom I now add Gregory Nyssene: who in his tenth Sermon on the Canticles, speaking of those words, aEat and drink my friends, bThere is no difference (saith he) between the words here used, and the words used in the Institution of the Eucharist. For that which he exhorteth us to do in the one, cwas then also done in that divine meat and drink. And very many, yea the most of their own writers uniformly confess it. Thomas Aquinas on 1 Cor. 10. dThey did eat all the same spiritual meat: that is, eChrists body in a sign spiritually understood: and drank all the same spiritual drink: to wit, Christs blood in a sign. gThey did eat Christ spiritually; according to that, hBelieve and thou hast eaten. iAnselm, or Hervae•s rather that goeth under his name, kThey did eat in the Manna the same food of Christs body that we eat in Bread; and the same drink of Christs blood that we drink out of the Chalice, did they drink from the Rock. Hugh of S. Victors; The same (saith he) lthat is, signifying the same, and having the same effect. And Hugh the Cardinal;
2. Let him shew how it implieth an evident contradiction, to say that Christs bodie is truely given with the sacramentall signes, though it bee no neerer then heauen-top is to the mouthes of the receivers. How this may be, without colour of contradiction, not in the Sacrament onely, but out of it also, when as the thing is done spiritually, beside the comparisons that I expresse it by, his owne uIansenius will shew; yea or his owne Albert will enforme him, where hee saith, that xSome eate and yet eate not; and some eate not, and yet eate. The former hee meaneth of those that eate vnprofitably in the Sacrament; the latter of those that eate spiritually out of it. If out of the Sacrament men may truely receiue Christs body, though it be no neerer then heauen top to their mouthes; then is it no such strange paradox as should imply contradiction, to say that the selfe same is done in the Sacrament also. I will tell him of a stranger matter. Many thousands thus did eate Christs flesh a thousand yeeres before hee was in the flesh. For howsoeuer hee required before to haue it prooued; and ⟨p. 184⟩Bellarmine yin diuerse places would faine deny it, and in zeffect sometime doth, though directly and absolutely he dare not: yet it was shewed before out of Augustine: to whom I now adde Gregorie Nyssene: who in his tenth Sermon on the Canticles, speaking of those wordes, aEate and drinke my friends, bThere is no difference (saith hee) betweene the wordes here vsed, and the words vsed in the Institution of the Eucharist. For that which hee exhorteth vs to doe in the one, cwas then also done in that divine meate and drinke. And very many, yea the most of their owne writers vniformly confesse it. Thomas Aquinas on 1 Cor. 10. dThey did eate all the same spirituall meate: that is,
uJansen. ubi sup.Iansen. vbi sup.
xManducantes non mandu•ā •, & non manducantes manducant. A•bert▪ de Sacram. Euchar. serm. 27.Manducantes non mandu•ā •, & non manducantes manducant. A•bert▪ de Sacram. Euchar. serm. 27.
yPaulus nusque dicit escam vel potu• illum fuisse Christum: non aquam, sed Petram. Bellar. de Euch. l. 1. c. 4.
zNon sumebant reipsa carnem Christi, sed effectū eius. Ibid. l. 1. c. 13. Esca & potus ille non propter effectum spirituales dicuntur. Idem de sacr. effect. lib. 2. c. 17. Nec fuerunt Sacramenta. Ibid.Non sumebant reipsa carnem Christi, sed effectū eius. Ibid. l. 1. c. 13. Esca & potus ille non propter effectum spirituales dicuntur. Idem de sacr. effect. lib. 2. c. 17. Nec fuerunt Sacramenta. Ibid.
bEi qui mysticas illas Evangelii voces intelligit, nullum apparebit discrimen inter hoc loco posita verba, & institutam ibid mysterii celebrationē &c. Greg. Nyss. in Cant. Ser. 10.Ei qui mysticas illas Euangelii voces intelligit, nullum apparebit discrimen inter hoc loco posita verba, & institutam ibid mysterii celebrationē &c. Greg. Nyss. in Cant. Ser. 10.
mThey did eat signified in the Manna the same spiritual meat, that is, the body of Christ; and drank the same spiritual drink, the blood of Christ: and this did they by faith according to that of Augustine; Believe and thou hast eaten. If Christs flesh then might be spiritually eaten by faith so long before it was; and it implieth no contradiction ⟨p. 185⟩23to say that Christs flesh was so eaten even before his Incarnation; much less doth it to say, that it is now spiritually eaten, though locally and corporally it be no nearer then heaven-top is to the mouth or lips of him that so eateth it. Faith like oan Epistle, maketh things and persons pabsent present. Nor doth a spiritual feeding necessarily require a corporal presence of that that is fed on.
mThey did eate signified in the Manna the same spirituall meate, that is, the body of Christ; and dranke the same spirituall drinke, the blood of Christ: and this did they by faith according to that of Augustine; Beleeue and thou hast eaten. If Christs flesh then might be spiritually eaten by faith so long before it was; and it implyeth no contradiction ⟨p. 185⟩23to say that Christs flesh was so eaten even before his Incarnation; much lesse doth it to say, that it is now spiritually eaten, though locally and corporally it be no neerer then heauen-top is to the mouth or lips of him that so eateth it. Faith like oan Epistle, maketh things and persons pabsent present. Nor doth a spiritual feeding necessarily require a corporall presence of that that is fed on.
mEundem cibum spiritualem, in Manna significatum, i. corpus Christi: eundem potum spiritualem, sanguinem Christi biberunt.
2f Scilicet, Christi sanguinem in signo.
3n Aug in Joan. tract. 25.n Aug in Ioan. tract. 25.
oAbsents prosentes facit. Turpilius. Quid enim tam presens est inter absentes quam per epistolas & alloqui & audire quos diligas? Hier. ad Nitiam.Absentes prosentes facit. Turpilius. Quid enim tam presens est inter absentes quam per epistolas & alloqui & audire quos diligas? Hier. ad Nitiam.
pNam rerun absentium presens est fides. Aug. de Trinit. l. 13. c. 1. Quem & vide sup. ex tr. 50. in Joan. & epist. 89.Nam rerū absentium presens est fides. Aug. de Trinit. l. 13. c. 1. Quem & vide sup. ex tr. 50. in Ioan. & epist. 89.
3. Where say I, that Christ is no otherwise conjoined with the Sacrament, then the land with the Indenture and seal of it? I say only qthat Christs body maybe and is as effectually conveyed unto us by the one, as land is conveyed to us by the other, though neither of them be locally or materially present. And if no more then so were done in the Sacrament, yet were there much more done thereby, then by their own confession is done by their oral and corporal manducation; in which manner they grant themselves that many so eat Christ, as yet he is never effectually conveyed or assured unto, to be theirs.
3. Where say I, that Christ is no otherwise conioynrd with the Sacrament, then the land with the Indenture and seale of it? I say onely qthat Christs body maybe and is as effectually conveighed vnto vs by the one, as land is cōveighed to vs by the other, though neither of them be locally or materially present. And if no more then so were done in the Sacrament, yet were there much more done thereby, then by their owne confession is done by their orall and corporall manducation; in which manner they grant themselues that many so eate Christ, as yet hee is neuer effectually conueighed or assured vnto, to be theirs.
qQuo modo etiam Caluinum hoc explicasse docet Bellar. de Euchar. l. 1. c. 10. Sed & longe ante Caluinum Bern. de temp. 54. Datur annulus ad investiendum de haereditate aliqua. &c.
4. I say indeed that Christ is as truly present in the Word (which he slyly passeth by, and maketh not a word of) and in Baptism as in the Eucharist; and we receive him as really and as effectually in the one as in the other. Nor doth he answer one word to the allegations of the Fathers to that purpose produced: To which may be added that of Tertullian, which shall hereafter be recited: And this of Augustine, which he saith of Mary, that sshe did eat him whom she heard: and proveth what he saith by that place of John, tI am the living bread, which whosoever eateth shall live for ever. As that also of Ambrose; uHe eateth that bread, that observeth Gods word. And further also that xBellarmine acknowledgeth that yClemens of Alexandria, zBasil of Caesarea, (he might have added ⟨p. 186⟩7aOrigen also, and bChrysostom) cand Hierome apply those words of our Saviour, dHe that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, &c. to the word: which howsoever indeed they be not directly spoken of there, yet certain it is that both in the judgement of those Ancients, (who else would not so have applied it) and in truth it self also (for neither dare Bellarmine himself therein control them) the thing there spoken of is in and by it also effectually performed. But to pass by the Word, and the unutterable effects of it, together with the unconceivable manner, whereby it either worketh upon our souls, or conveyeth Christ into our souls: for in receiving of it we ereceive Christ in it: Do not the ancient Fathers call the Sacrament of Baptism an ineffable mystery, as was cited out of Gregory Nyssene a little before? Yea do they not speak as much of the dignity and excellency, and of the unconceivable and unutterable efficacy of it, as either Calvin or Beza do of the Eucharist? And yet this shameless and blasphemous beast sticketh not to say, if Christ be no otherwise present in the Eucharist then he is in Baptism, it is but a bare sign or figure, having no mystery at all worthy of admiration. And so by necessary consequence he taxeth those Worthies (to speak in his fribald 13language) as mere Jugglers and Impostors, that (in speaking so honourably of it, and ascribing such admirable power and efficacy unto it) seek to plaster rotten walls, and mask with great words the naked wateriness of their Baptism, by them so much admired.
4. I say indeed that Christ is as truely present in the Word (which he slyly passeth by, and maketh not a word of) and in Baptisme as in the Eucharist; and wee receiue him as really and as effectually in the one as in the other. Nor doth hee answer one word to the allegations of the Fathers to that purpose produced: To which may be added that of Tertullian, which shall hereafter be recited: And this of Augustine, which he saith of Mary, that sshee did eate him whom shee heard: and prooueth what he saith by that place of Iohn, tI am the living bread, which whosoeuer eateth shall liue for euer. As that also of Ambrose; uHe eateth that bread, that observeth Gods word. And further also that xBellarmine acknowledgeth that yClemens of Alexandria, zBasil of Caesarea, (he might haue added ⟨p. 186⟩7aOrigen also, and bChrysostom) cand Hierome apply those words of our Sauiour, dHe that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, &c. to the word: which howsoeuer indeed they bee not directly spoken of there, yet certaine it is that both in the iudgement of those Ancients, (who else would not so haue applied it) and in truth it selfe also (for neither dare Bellarmine himselfe therein controule them) the thing there spoken of is in and by it also effectually performed. But to passe by the Word, and the vnutterable effects of it, together with the vnconceiuable manner, whereby it either worketh vpon our soules, or conueigheth Christ into our soules: for in receiuing of it we ereceiue Christ in it: Doe not the ancient Fathers call the Sacrament of Baptisme an ineffable mysterie, as was cited out of Gregorie Nyssene a little before? Yea doe they not speake as much of the dignitie and excellency, and of the vnconceiuable and vnutterable efficacy of it, as either Calvin or Beza doe of the Eucharist? And yet this shamelesse and blasphemous beast sticketh not to say, if Christ be no otherwise present in the Eucharist then hee is in Baptisme, it is but a bare signe or figure, hauing no mystery at all worthie of admiration. And so by necessary consequence he taxeth those Worthies (to speake in his fribald
sAudeo dicere; ipsum manducabat, quem audiebat. Aug. de diveri. serm. 27.Audeo dicere; ipsum manducabat, quem audiebat. Aug. de diueri. serm. 27.
Let him show how with any colour at all, he can here clear himself of impiety and blasphemy. And let him (if he dare) deny that Christ is effectually received both in the Word and in gBaptism: in neither whereof yet there is any such real ⟨p. 187⟩transmutation, or corporal presence, as they necessarily require unto the receiving of Christ in the Eucharist.
Let him shew how with any colour at all, he can here cleere himselfe of impietie and blasphemy. And let him (if hee dare) deny that Christ is effectually receiued both in the Word and in gBaptisme: in neither whereof yet there is any such reall ⟨p. 187⟩transmutation, or corporall presence, as they necessarily require vnto the receiuing of Christ in the Eucharist.
gNulli est aliquatenus ambigendum tunc ununquē que fidelium corporis & sanguinis Christi participem fieri quando in baptismate membrum Christi corporis efficitur etiamsi antequam illum panem comedat, &c. de hoc seculo abscedat. Gratian. ex August, de consecr, dist. 4. & Biel in Can. Miss. lect. 36.Nulli est aliquatenus ambigendum tunc vnūquē que fidelium corporis & sanguinis Christi participem fieri quando in baptismate membrum Christi corporis efficitur etiamsi antequam illum panem comedat, &c. de hoc seculo abscedat. Gratian. ex August, de consecr, dist. 4. & Biel in Can. Miss. lect. 36.
MY Adversaries next Argument from the quality of 1the Communicants, page 18. is this; If Christs body be really and corporally present in the Eucharist, then all that eat thereof must of necessity eat Christ in it. But many eat of the Eucharist, that yet eat not Christ in it: for none but faithful and lively members of Christ eat him in this Sacrament. In which Argument he endeavoureth to prove one falsehood by another, equally by us denied; because the holy Fathers expressly affirm that Judas and the Corinthians blamed by Saint Paul received, albeit unworthily, and to damnation, the body of Christ, as the Apostles words 1 Cor. 11. evidently import; and when S. Augustine and others seemed to deny them to receive Christ in the Sacrament, they speak not of bare sacramental, but of profitable and fruitful receiving of him.
MY Aduersaries next Argument from the qualitie of 1the Communicants, page 18. is this; If Christs body be really and corporally present in the Eucharist, then all that eate thereof must of necessity eate Christ in it. But many eate of the Eucharist, that yet eate not Christ in it: for none but faithfull and liuely members of Christ eate him in this Sacrament. In which Argument hee endeavoureth to prooue one falshood by another, equally by vs denyed; because the holy Fathers expressely affirme that Iudas and the Corinthians blamed by Saint Paul receiued, albeit vnworthily, and to damnation, the body of Christ, as the Apostles words 1 Cor. 11. euidently import; and when S. Augustine and others seemed to deny them to receiue Christ in the Sacrament, they speake not of bare sacramentall, but of profitable and fruitfull receiuing of him.
They did eate in the Manna the same food of Christs body that wee eate in Bread; and the same drinke of Christs blood that wee drinke out of the Chalice, did they drinke from the Rocke. Hugh of S. Uictors; The same (saith hee)
that is, signifying the same, and having the same effect. And Hugh the Cardinall;
gManducabant Christum spiritualiter.
hCreed & manducasti Aug in Joan. tr. 25.Crede & manducasti Aug in Ioan. tr. 25.
iAnselmi nomine prostant, sed Har•aei sunt commentarii illi. Vise Fontanum in praefat. & Possevin. in Appar.Anselmi nomine prostant, sed Har•aei sunt commentarii illi. Vise Fontanum in praefat. & Posseuin. in Appar.
kEandem escam corporis Christi, quam nos in pane manducamus, ipsi manducaverunt in Manna: & eundem potum sanguinis Christi, quem nos ex calice bibimus, ipsi biberunt ex petra.Eandem escam corporis Christi, quam nos in pane manducamus, ipsi manducauerunt in Manna: & eundem potum sanguinis Christi, quem nos ex calice bibimus, ipsi biberunt ex petra.
language) as meere Iuglers and Impostors, that (in speaking so honourably of it, and ascribing such admirable power and efficacy vnto it) seeke to plaister rotten walles, and maske with great wordes the naked watrinesse of their Baptisme, by them so much admired.
