A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to…A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to…

But Lord what meant ye to allege Theophylacte, and S. Ambrose, whose Doctrine is so contrary to yours,¹ as light is to darkness? Theophylacte expounding these words of Christ in S. John. As the Living Father hath sent me, even so live I by the Father, and he that eateth me, shall live by me, saith thus: Doest thou not hear a dreadful saying? We eat not pure God, for he is untouchable, and unbodily. Neither can he be comprehended with eyes, nor teethe. Neither eat we the flesh of a pure man: for that can profit nothing at all. But now that God hath united unto him self flesh after a unspeakable contemperament, the flesh is also become lifemakinge. Not for that it is passed away into the Nature of God,^* beware of that, but after the likeness of fiery iron, which abideth iron, and showeth the operation of fire: even so (quoth he) the flesh of our Lord abiding flesh, is lifemakinge, as being the flesh of God the word. then as (saith he) I live by the Father, who is life, so he that eateth me, shall live by me, being tempered with me, as also being transelemented into me, who have Power to vivificate or give life. Which last words your own Doctor Oecolampadius hath thus turned, Dumb quodammodò miscetur, & transelementatur in me, qui vivificare potest, corruptinge the sound Doctrine of the writer with his forged^* quodammodò, which he found not in the Greek there placed, and breaking the congruity of the Latin speech, by putting that in the third Person, that ought to be in the first. If faith wrought all this matter, then after your meaning, might we eat God, which Theophylacte denieth. He saith, he that eateth Christs flesh, is tempered together with him, and transelemented into him, so as he is made one Body with him,