Mary. he saith,' For a type or figure whereof we receive the mystical cup of his blood, for the safeguard of our bodies and souls.' A. D. Chedsey: :-"A type? He calleth not the blood of Christ a type or sign: 1554. but the blood of bulls and goats in that respect was a type or sign." Argument. Answer to the place of Justin. Answer. Irenæus. Cranmer:-" This is new learning; you shall never read this among the fathers." Chedsey:- Cranmer: "He calleth the bread and the cup a type or sign of the blood of Christ, and of his benefit." Weston:-" Ambrose understandeth it for a type of his benefit; that is, of redemption not of the blood of Christ, but of his passion. The cup is the type or sign of his death, seeing it is his blood." Cranmer:-"He saith most plainly, that the cup is a type of Christ's blood." Da- Chedsey:-" As Christ is truly and really incarnate, so is he truly and really in the sacrament. ri i. "But Christ is really and truly incarnate: Ergo, The body of Christ is truly and really in the sacrament." ό Chedsey "I prove the major out of Justin, in his second Apology, Ον τρόπον διὰ λόγου θεοῦ σαρκοποιηθεὶς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς, ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν, καὶ σάρκα καὶ αἷμα ύπερ σωτηρίας ἡμῶν ἔχεν, οὕτω καὶ τὴν δι ̓ εὐχῆς λόγου τοῦ παρ ̓ αὐτοῦ εὐχαριστηθείσαν τροφὴν, ἐξ ἧς αἷμα καὶ σάρκες κατὰ μεταβολὴν τρέφονται ἡμῶν, ἐκείνου τοῦ σαρκοποιηθέντος Ἰησοῦ καὶ σάρκα καὶ αἷμα ἐδιδάχθημεν εἶναι.” Cranmer:-"This place hath been falsified by Marcus Constantius. Justin meant nothing else but that the bread which nourishes us is called the body of Christ." Chedsey :-" To the argument. As Christ is truly and naturally incarnate, etc. ut supra." Cranmer:-" I deny your major." Chedsey: :-"The words of Justin are thus to be interpreted word for word :3 As by the word of God, Jesus Christ our Saviour, being made flesh, had both flesh and blood for our salvation: so we are taught, that the meat consecrated by the word of prayer, instituted of him, whereby our blood and flesh are nourished by communion, is the flesh and blood of the same Jesus which was made flesh," etc. 5 Cranmer ::-"You have translated it well; but I deny your major. This is the sense of Justin: that the bread is called the body of Christ; and yet of that sanctified meat our bodies are nourished." Chedsey:-"Nay, he saith, that of that sanctified meat both our bodies and souls are nourished." Cranmer:-" He saith not so; but he saith that it nourisheth our flesh and blood and how can that nourish the soul, that nourisheth the flesh and blood."6 Cole:" It feedeth the body by the soul." Cranmer:-" Speak uprightly. Can that which is received by the soul and spirit be called the meat of the body?" Weston:-"Hear then what Irenæus saith:7 This, the same cup which is a creature, he confirmed to be his body, by which he increaseth our bodies. When both the cup mixed, and the bread broken, hath joined to it the word of (1) In cujus typum nos calicem mysticum sanguinis ad tuitionem corporis et animæ nostræ percepimus.-Ambros. in 1 Cor. xi. (2) Marcus Constantius' was the fictitious name under which Gardiner published his 'Confutatio Cavillationum,' etc. The following is his translation: Cibum illum, ex quo sanguis et carnes nostræ per mutationem nutriuntur, postquam per verbum precationis fuerit ab eodem benedictus, edocti sumus esse carnem et sanguinem illius Jesu, qui pro nobis fuit incarnatus.' Peter Martyr's complaint against it is, that the clause Ex quo, etc., nutritur,' is transposed, to avoid the inference which may be drawn from the original expression of Justin, that the bread and wine, after consecration as well as before, nourish our bodies by the ordinary process of digestion."""Gardyner Confutat." object. 151. p. 151; Pet. Martyr, "De Eucharist." p. 311. Jenkyns, p. 60.-ED. (3) "Quemadmodum per verbum Dei caro factus Jesus Christus, Salvator noster, carnem habuit et sanguinem pro salute nostra: sic et cibum illum consecratum per sermonem precationis ab ipso institutæ, quo sanguis carnesque nostræ per communionem nutriuntur, ejusdem Jesu, qui caro factus est, carnem et sanguinem esse accepimus." (4) Of thanksgiving. (5) Mutation. (6) Aiμa kai σáρkes, i. e. blood and flesh. (7) Eum calicem, qui est creatura, suum corpus confirmavit, ex quo nostra auget corpora. Quando et mixtus calix, et fractus panis percipit verbum Dei, fit eucharistia sanguinis et corporis Christi, ex quibus augetur, et consistit carnis nostræ substantia." God, it is made the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, of which the Mary. substance of our flesh is increased and consisteth.' 46 A. D. 1554. Irenæus "The substance of our flesh is increased by the body and blood of Christ: Ergo, Our body is nourished by the body and blood of Christ." Cranmer:-" I deny your argument. He calleth it the flesh and blood, for the sacrament of the body and blood; as Tertullian also saith:1Our flesh is answered nourished with symbolical or sacramental bread; but our soul is nourished with by Terthe body of Christ.' Weston:-"Look what he saith more: How do they say, that the flesh cannot receive the gift of God that is eternal life, which is nourished with the blood and body of Christ? That is in the fifth book, two leaves from the beginning.'" Cranmer:-"The body is nourished both with the sacrament, and with the body of Christ with the sacrament to a temporal life; with the body of Christ to eternal life." Chedsey::-"I cannot but be sorry when I see such a manifest lie in your writings. For whereas you translate Justin on this fashion; that the bread, water, and wine, are not so to be taken in this sacrament, as common meats and drinks are wont to be taken of us, but are meats chosen out peculiarly for this; namely, for the giving of thanks, and therefore be called of the Greeks 'eucharistia,' that is, thanksgiving-they are called moreover the blood and body of Christ (so have you translated it)--the words of Justin are thus: "We are taught that the meat consecrated by the word of prayer, by the which our flesh and blood is nourished by communion, is the body and blood of the same Jesus who was made flesh.'' tullian. Cranmer :- "I did not translate it word for word, but only I gave the Cranmer meaning and I go nothing from his meaning." Harpsfield ::-"You remember, touching Justin, to whom this apology was written; namely, to a heathen man. The heathen thought that the Christians came to the church to worship bread: Justin answereth, that we come not to common bread, but as to, etc., as is said afore. Weigh the place well; it is right worthy to be noted: Our flesh is nourished according to mutation.' Cranmer :-"We ought not to consider the bare bread, but whosoever cometh to the sacrament eateth the true body of Christ." 4 Weston :---"You have corrupted Emissene; for instead of 'cibis satiandus,' that is, to be filled with meat,' you have set 'cibis satiandus spiritualibus,' that is, to be filled with spiritual meats.' Cranmer :- Weston-"You have corrupted another place of Emissene; for you have omitted these words, Mirare cum reverendum altare cibis spiritualibus satiandus ascendis: sacrum Dei tui corpus et sanguinem fide respice, honorem mirare, merito continge,' etc. Marvel thou when thou comest up to the reverend altar to be filled with spiritual meats: look in faith to the holy body and blood of thy God; marvel at his honour; worthily touch him.'” Cranmer ::-"This book hath not that."6 Weston:- "Also you 6 purgeth himself. with false have falsified this place by evil translating Honora Cranmer corpus Dei tui,' i. e. Honour the body of thy God.' You have translated it, charged Honora eum qui est Deus tuus,' i. e. Honour him which is thy God.' translaWhereas Emissene hath not 'honour him,' but 'honour the body of thy God.'" ting. Cranmer :-" I have so translated him, and yet no less truly, than not Purgeth without a weighty cause; else it should not have been without danger, if I had himself, translated it thus: Honour the body of thy God;' because of certain that (according to the error of the Anthropomorphites) dreamed that God had a body." (1) Nutritur corpus pane symbolico, anima corpore Christi." (2) "Quomodo carneni negant capacem esse donationis Dei quæ est vita æterna, quæ sanguine et corpore Christi nutritur? Lib. v., post duo folia à principio." Irenæus, lib. v. (3) Note that the archbishop here did not translate the words of Justin, but only gather the effect of his meaning. (4) In eating the sacrament, no bread is considered; but only the true body of Christ. Consecrat. dist. 2. "Quia." (5) See Cranmer's translation of Emissene, vol. ii. p. 323; also the original, among the authorities in the Appendix: from a comparison of which it will appear that the charge of corruption was unfounded. See Jenkyns.-ED. (6) The original fully justifies Cranmer's assertion; it is strange that Weston, in the very act of charging another with false quotation, should himself be so audacious as to substitute "merito continge" for "mente continge." See Jenkyns.-ED. Mary. Weston:-"Nay, you most of all have brought the people into that error, who so long have taught that he sitteth at the right hand of God the Father; and counted me for a heretic, because I preached that God had no right hand. 1554. Then I will oppose you in the very articles of your faith. A. D. Argument. Cranmer "Christ sitteth at the right hand of God the Father. "But God the Father hath no right hand : "Ergo, Where is Christ now?” Cranmer:-" I am not so ignorant a novice in the articles of my faith, but that I understand that to sit at the right hand of God, doth signify to be equal in the glory of the Father." Weston:-"Now then take this argument. "Wheresoever God's authority is, there is Christ's body. "But God's authority is in every place : Ergo, What letteth the body of Christ to be in every place. Moreover you charged have also corrupted Duns." with mis translating Duns. Challenged for Cranmer:-"That is a great offence, I promise you." Weston:-"For you have omitted secundum apparentiam,'1 i. e. 'as it appeareth' whereas his words are these, Et si quæras quare voluit ecclesia eligere istum intellectum ita difficilem hujus articuli, cum verba Scripturæ possint salvari secundum intellectum facilem et veriorem, secundum apparentiam, de hoc articulo,' etc.: that is, 'If you demand why the church did choose this so hard an understanding of this article, whereas the words of Scripture may be salved after an easy and true understanding (as appeareth) of this article,' etc. Cranmer :- "It is not so." Weston :-" Also you have set forth a catechism in the name of the synod of London, and yet there be fifty, who, witnessing that they were of the number forth the of the convocation, never heard one word of this catechism." setting Catechism, etc. Cranmer :-" I was ignorant of the setting to of that title; and as soon as I had knowledge thereof, I did not like it. Therefore, when I complained Purgeth thereof to the council, it was answered me by them, that the book was so entihimself. tled, because it was set forth in the time of the convocation." Charged transla ting 6 Weston :-" Moreover, you have in Duns translated in Romana ecclesia,' 'pro ecclesia catholica:' in the church of Rome,' for the catholic church.' Cranmer:-" Yea; but he meant the Romish church." Weston:-" Moreover you have depraved St. Thomas, namely, where he with mis- hath these words: Inasmuch as it is a sacrifice, it hath the power of satisfaction but in satisfaction the affection of the offerer is more to be weighed, than Aquinas. the quantity of the oblation. Wherefore the Lord said, in Luke's gospel, of the widow which offered two mites, that she cast in more than they all. Therefore, although this oblation of the quantity of itself will suffice to satisfy for all pain, yet it is made satisfactory to them for whom it is offered, or to the offerers, according to the quantity of their devotion, and not for all the pain.' You have thus turned it: That the sacrifice of the priest hath power of satisfaction,' etc. And therefore in this place you have chopped in this word, sacerdotis,' ' of the priest;' whereas, in the translation of all the New Testament, you have not set it but where Christ was put to death. And again, where St. Thomas hath pro omni pœna' for all pain,' your book omitteth many things there. Thus you see, brethren, the truth steadfast and invincible. You see, also, the triumph craft and deceit of heretics. The truth may be pressed, but it cannot be the vic- oppressed: therefore cry altogether, Vincit veritas,' i. e. The truth overcometh.'" This disordered disputation sometimes in Latin, sometimes in English, continued almost till two of the clock. Which being (1) This is not true; but the accuracy of his translation is rather doubtful. See Jenkyns, note, page 64.-ED. (2) See a note of Jenkyns upon this subject.-ED. (3) In quantum vero est sacrificium, habet vim satisfactivam: sed in satisfactione attenditur magis affectio offerentis, quam quantitas oblationis. Unde Dominus dicit apud Lucam de vidua quæ obtulit duo æra, quod plus omnibus misit. Quamvis ergo hæc oblatio ex sui quantitate sufficiet ad satisfaciendum pro omni pœna: tamen fit satisfactoria illis pro quibus offertur, vel etiam offerentibus, secundum quantitatem suæ devotionis, et non pro tota pœna." (4) "Quod sacrificium sacerdotis habet vim satisfacitvam," etc. finished, and the arguments written and delivered to the hands of Mary. master Say, the prisoner was had away by the mayor, and the doctors dined together at the University college. DISPUTATION AT OXFORD BETWEEN DR. SMITH, WITH HIS OTHER A. D. 1554. to dispute The next day following, which was the 12th of April, was brought smith set forth Dr. Ridley to dispute; against whom was set Dr. Smith to be against principal opponent. Touching which Dr. Smith, forsomuch as Ridley. mention here happeneth of his name, first the reader is to be advertised what is to be attributed to his judgment in religion, who so oftentimes before had turned and returned to and fro, grounded (as it seemeth) upon no firm conscience of doctrine, as both by his articles by him recanted may appear, and also by his own letter sent a little before in king Edward's days to the archbishop of Canterbury from Scotland. Which letter I thought here to exhibit as a certain preface before his own arguments, or rather as a testimony against himself, whereby the reader may understand how devoutly he magnified them and their doctrine a little before, against whom he now disputeth so busily. Read I beseech thee his epistle and judge. The true Copy of a certain Epistle of Dr. Richard Smith to Dr. Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, declaring his Affection to the setting-forth of God's sincere Word. to write Most honourable, I commend me unto your lordship, doing the same to understand, that I wrote letters to your grace in January last and the 10th day of February, declaring the causes of my sudden and unadvised departing from your grace over the sea; and desiring your good lordship, of your charity toward them that repent of their ill acts, to forgive me yourself all the wrong I did towards your grace, and to obtain in writing the king's majesty's pardon for me in all points concerning his laws: upon the receipt whereof I would return again home, and, within half a year (at the uttermost) afterward, write "De Dr. Smith Sacerdotum Connubiis," etc. a Latin book that should be a just satisfaction for purposing any thing that I have written against the same. Reliquaque omnia dogmata for the vestra tum demum libentur amplexurum, ubi Deus mentem meam [ita persua- marriage deat] ut ea citra conscientiæ læsionem agnoscam, doceamque. I wrote not this of priests. that I want any good living here, but because mine absence out of the realm, is dishonour to the king's highness and realm, and because I must needs (if I tarry here a quarter of a year longer) write an answer to your grace's book of the sacrament, and also a book of common places against all the doctrine set forth by the king's majesty, which I cannot do with a good conscience. Wherefore I beseech your grace help me home, as soon as you may conveniently, for God's sake; and ye shall never, I trust in God, repent that fact. Ex urbe divi Andreæ. 14. Feb. Rich. Smitheus. against And thus much touching the forenamed Dr. Richard Smith, being set here (as is said) to dispute against bishop Ridley, who was brought now, the next day after the archbishop, to answer in the divinity school. Against whom also, besides Dr. Smith, disputed Dr. Weston, Disputers Dr. Tresham, Dr. Oglethorpe, Dr. Glyn, Dr. Seton, and Dr. Cole, Ridley. master Ward, master Harpsfield, Dr. Watson, master Pie, master Harding, master Curton, master Fecknam: to all them he answered very learnedly. He made a preface to these questions, but they would not let him go forth in it, but caused him to make an end of the same, and said it was blasphemy. And some said, he drave off Mary. the time in ambiguous things, nothing to the purpose; and so they A. D. would not suffer him to say his mind. Dr. Smith could get nothing 1554. at his hand; insomuch that others did take his arguments and prosecuted them. He showed himself to be learned, and a great clerk. They could bring nothing, but he knew it as well as they. The questions. The Disputation beginneth. Weston the prolocutor:-"Good christian people and brethren, we have begun this day our school, by God's good speed I trust; and are entering into a controversy, whereof no question ought to be moved, concerning the verity of the body of our Lord Jesu Christ in the eucharist. Christ is true, who said the words. The words are true which he spake, yea, truth itself that cannot fail. Let us therefore pray unto God to send down unto us his holy Spirit, which is the true interpreter of his word; which may purge away errors, and give light, that verity may appear. Let us also ask leave and liberty of the church, to permit the truth received to be called this day in question, without any prejudice to the same. Your parts thereof shall be to implore the assistance of Almighty God, to pray for the prosperity of the queen's majesty, and to give us quiet and attentive ears. Now go to your question." Dr. Smith:-"This day, right learned master doctor, three questions are propounded, whereof no controversy among Christians ought to be moved, to wit; "First, Whether the natural body of Christ our Saviour, conceived of the Virgin Mary, and offered for man's redemption upon the cross, is verily and really in the sacrament by virtue of God's word spoken by the priests, etc. 66 Secondly, Whether in the sacrament, after the words of consecration, be any other substance, etc. Thirdly, Whether in the mass be a sacrifice propitiatory, etc. Touching the which questions, although you have publicly and apertly professed your judgment and opinion on Saturday last; yet being not satisfied with that your answer, I will essay again to demand your sentence in the first question whether the true body of Christ, after the words pronounced, be really in the eucharist, or else only the figure. In which matter I stand here now to hear your answer." (The Preface or Protestation of Dr. Ridley before his Disputation.) "I received of you the other day, right worshipful master prolocutor, and ye my reverend masters, commissioners from the queen's majesty and her honourable council, three propositions; whereunto ye commanded me to prepare against this day, what I thought good to answer concerning the same. "Now, whilst I weighed with myself how great a charge of the Lord's flock was of late committed unto me, for the which I am certain I must once render an account to my Lord God (and that how soon, he knoweth), and that moreover, by the commandment of the apostle Peter, I ought to be ready alway to give a reason of the hope that is in me with meekness and reverence, unto every one that shall demand the same: besides this, considering my duty to the church of Christ, and to your worships, being commissioners by public authority; I determined with myself to obey your commandment, and so openly to declare unto you my mind touching the aforesaid propositions. And albeit plainly to confess unto you the truth in these things which ye now demand of me, I have Ridley to thought otherwise in times past than now I do, yet (God I call to record unto judgment my soul, I lie not) I have not altered my judgment, as now it is, either by confrom the straint of any man or laws, either for the dread of any dangers of this world, either for any hope of commodity; but only for the love of the truth revealed unto me by the grace of God (as I am undoubtedly persuaded) in his holy word, and in the reading of the ancient fathers. What moved alter his church of Rome. "These things I do rather recite at this present, because it may happen to some of you hereafter, as in times past it hath done to me: I mean, if ye think otherwise of the matters propounded in these propositions than I now do, God may open them unto you in time to come. |