Page images

CHAP. what is that one bread but Christ? For the bread which

IV. you take in the Sacrament one time, and I at another, is Anno 1551. not one bread, but many. Paul saith, We all eat of one

bread, &c.

Whiteh. It is one, because it is taken for the same end, and is used in the same mysteries. For Paul doth not speak of that which is one in number, but one in specie.

Then followed a new wrangling with Mr. Cheke, whether it might be truly said, that it is the same water of Baptism in which various persons are baptized at various times.

Watson said, It is one Baptism, but not one water.

Cheke added another reason, viz. that all that were baptized had put on Christ, and received the Spirit of Christ; for, whosoever hath not this Spirit of Christ is none of his by Baptism it is effected, that we are brethren and coheirs of Christ; which cannot be, unless we do participate of his body and blood in Baptism. Therefore Paul, 1 Cor. xii. expressed by these words the same effect of Baptism and the Eucharist; By one Spirit we are all baptized into one body, and have all drank into one Spirit which latter clause Chrysostom understands of the Eucharist. Therefore he attributed to Baptism incorporation with Christ; to the Eucharist the receiving of the Spirit that from hence it may be manifestly collected, even in Baptism the same communion of Christ is conferred upon us, as is in the Eucharist. But because in Baptism there is no need of a real and natural presence of Christ, there will not be need of it also in the Eucharist.

Watson. There is a diverse reason of Baptism and the Eucharist, and different effects. For in Baptism we receive the Spirit of God to regeneration, and so by his Spirit our spirit is quickened: but in the Eucharist we receive the true substance of his flesh; from which not only our spirit, but our flesh is quickened. And so that comes to pass which is so often in Cyril; that we are naturally united to Christ, and that there is a natural union betwixt the flesh of Christ (which hath a power of quickening) and our flesh, which without it cannot have life. And to this


sense he took the words of John, chap. vi. Unless ye eat SECT. the flesh of the Son of man, &c. that is, unless in the Eucharist ye be partakers of his natural flesh, ye shall not Anno 1551. have life in you, that is, in your bodies, or in the flesh; for ur flesh would not rise to glory without the fles of "Christ," as it is in Hilary.


Here the condition of infants was urged, and dying in infancy; and of adult persons dying soon after the partaking of the Eucharist.

Watson did endeavour to evade by certain distinctions; to wit, that nisi, "unless," makes not an absolute necessity, but if he have the Sacrament, or the desire of the Sacrament. As it is in Baptism, where it is said, Unless one be born again, &c. Yet nevertheless he seemed to attribute something less to children departing before the Eucharist, than to the adult which have communicated.

Grind. If our flesh cannot rise any otherwise to life (which you assert) but by eating the natural body of Christ, and by that natural union, as you call it, we shall indeed fall into many absurdities. For what shall we say of the Fathers of the Old Testament? Paul saith, They eat the same spiritual meat, which we do, and drank the same spiritual drink, to wit, Christ: but they could not eat the natural flesh of Christ, as being not yet born, therefore we may together with them eat Christ, though we do not eat his natural flesh.

Watson denied that the Fathers eat the same meat which we do. For they eat the same spiritual meat; but we eat not only the same spiritual meat, but real food also.

Grind. If the Fathers had not the same communion with Christ, and natural conjunction with him, as we have in the Eucharist, it would follow, the Fathers should not have life in their bodies; and so in the resurrection, the bodies and flesh of the Patriarchs, wanting this substantial participation, would not rise to life, which is most absurd. Augustin saith, "Many shall come from the east and "from the west, and shall sit down, not above Abraham,

CHAP. "Isaac, and Jacob, but with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, "in the kingdom of heaven."


Anno 1551.

Arguments from the Fathers.

A place of Augustin was produced from the twelfth chapter of the book, Contra Adamantum Manichæum. "Nor did the Lord doubt to say, This is my body, when " he gave a sign of his body."

Feckenham confessed a sign, but not a sign only.

Another place was produced out of Augustin, in his third book of Questions upon Leviticus, chap. lvii. where he saith, The seven ears of corn are seven years. He saith not, they signify. The Rock was Christ; not, lastly, as though that were which indeed for the substance not, but by signification. The Rock was Christ, and, This is my body, are of the same nature; but the first proposition is figurative, therefore the second.

Watson contended that this proposition, The rock was Christ, was not figurative.

A place was brought by Watson, which is in St. Augustin, lib. i. Of the Merits and Remission of Sins. "We do "not doubt but the blood is shed for baptized infants, "which before it was shed, &c. So the Sacrament was "given and commended, that it might be said, This is my "blood."

To which place it was answered thus; That none were ignorant that the ancients used that form of speech, as Christ himself, calling the sacraments by the same names as the matters of the sacraments were. Augustin in his Epistle to Archbishop Boniface, numero 23. saith, “The "sacraments have the names of those things of which they are the sacraments; therefore the sacrament of "faith is called faith," &c.

[ocr errors]

Watson. That place to Boniface makes nothing for you; for although it may be taken according to a certain manner, yet that manner is not to be thought significative; for otherwise it may be inquired, according to what manner the sacrament of faith is called faith?


Then he, [Grindal, I suppose,] According to whatever SECT. manner you will. Properly speaking, Baptism, or the sacrament of faith, may not be called faith; and so neither Anno 1551. the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, according to that reason, is the body and blood of Christ.

The Marquis of Northampton produced a place out of Cyprian, and it is in the sermon de Unctione. Let the place be read.

"The Lord gave in the table bread and wine, in the "cross," &c.

In which place Watson laboured after a wonderful manner. The first antithesis, viz. "The Lord gave bread," he lightly passed over; he insisted on the following words, namely, "That Christ should teach the Apostles, that "they in like manner might teach the people, how bread "and wine is flesh and blood;" for otherwise, saith he, if bread and wine are only signs, he might easily teach this. That way he wrested that which followeth.

Cheke. He saith not how they were changed, but how they were: but bread and wine by no means can be the body and blood of Christ, unless after a sacramental and significative manner. And therefore afterward he saith, the things that signify, and the things signified, are to be reputed under the same names.

That place also of Augustin was objected, lib. iii. Of the Christian Doctrine; Si flagitium aut facinus, &c. It is a figurative speech; and therefore it was urged, it was a figurative speech to eat the flesh of Christ, John vi. and therefore the words of the Supper are figurative.

Feckenham acknowledged this place to be difficult, yet to it, it might thus be answered; Augustin saith, Videtur præcipere facinus, "He seemed to command a wicked "deed;" but indeed in these words no wickedness is commanded. And Augustin in another place hath it, "It is "forbid in the law to eat the blood of living creatures; "but to us it is commanded, not to drink the blood of a "living creature, but of Christ himself."

Cheke. See therefore how you endeavour to invert St.


CHAP. Augustin's opinion; for he gathereth, that it is a figure from thence, that he seemeth to command a wicked deed, Anno 1551.and therefore he subjoineth, "Therefore it is a figure." Watson said, that the speech was proper, as it pertaineth to the true eating of Christ; but figurative, as it belongeth to such things as follow in Augustin, viz. when it is taken for the imitation of the passion, and remembrance of the death of Christ.

But this answer was shewn to repugn sufficiently to the scope of Augustin, who makes the whole speech to be tropical; not proper, but tropical: for, saith he, "in the 66 proper sense he seemeth to command a wicked deed."

Another place was produced out of the same book in these words, “As it is the part of servile infirmity to fol"low the letter, and to interpret signs for things, so to "interpret the signs unprofitably is the part of extrava66 gant error."

Watson answered, that Augustin speaketh there of the signs of the Old Testament; but when he had read the place, where it speaks manifestly of Baptism and the Eucharist, he again gainsaid somewhat, I know not what. And the most rose up, that here might be an end.


Resigns his Greek Professorship. Gets Leland's MSS.
Falls sick.

CHEKE had hitherto held the place of the Greek lecin the Greek ture in Cambridge, conferred upon him by his old master,

Car succeeds Cheke


King Henry VIII. though I suppose he substituted somebody else to read in his stead, who seems to have been Nicholas Car, Fellow of Trinity college; who now, the 12th day of October this year, being an exquisite Grecian, was appointed to succeed Cheke in that lecture, by order of the Privy Council, and that by procurement, as it seems, of Cheke himself.

It was Cheke's practice (in order to the furnishing up an excellent library for the King) to procure as many

« PreviousContinue »