Critical Apparatus for this Page
View an Image of this PageCommentary on the Text
Names and Places on this Page
None
1398 [1374]

K. Edw 6. Peter Martyrs Disputation in Oxford.
Gregory.

MarginaliaAnno 1552. MarginaliaGregorius in Registro.Notwithstanding, whether we take leauened or vnleauened bread, we are all one body of our Lord and Sauiour, &c.

¶ Argument.
Da-Where bread leauened or vnleauened is taken, there is
substance of bread, and not accidences only.
ri-In the Sacrament bread is receaued either leauened or
vnleauened:
j.Ergo, in the Sacrament is substaunce of bread and not
accidences onely.
¶ Argument.
Ba-The body of Christ is named of that which is propor-
tioned round, and is vnsensible in operation.
ro-Accidences only of bread haue no figure of roundnes:
co.Ergo, the body of Christ is not named of accidences, but
of very bread substantiall. 
Commentary  *  Close

According to the metaphysics of the ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle, which became enshrined in Catholic theology through its use by St Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century, 'substance' refers to the inherent nature of an object; 'accidents' refer to the elements of an object that are not inherent. In the case of bread, for example, the shape and color are accidents of the substance of a piece of bread.

[Back to Top]
¶ Argument.

The wordes of the Euangelist speaking of that whyche Christ tooke, blessed, brake, and gaue, do importe it to be bread, and nothing else but bread.

Ergo, the substance of bread is not to be excluded out of the Sacrament.

Chrisostome.

MarginaliaChrisost. 1. Cor. 11. homil. 27.Christ in bread and wyne sayde: do this in remembraunce of me.

Cyrillus.

MarginaliaCyrill. in Ioan. lib. 4. cap. 14.He gaue to them peeces or fragments of bread.

Also the same Cyrill sayth: In bread we receaue his precious body and his bloud in wyne.

Ergo, by these Doctours it remaineth bread after consecration.

Ambrose.

Before the blessing of the heauenly words, it is called another kynde of thyng. After consecration the body of Christ is signified.

¶ Arguments of Peter Martyr disputing with M. Chadsey vpon the first question.
Da-The Analogie 
Commentary  *  Close

St Augustine gave the traditional definition of Sacraments as visible signs ('analogy', 'similtude'of invisible grace, grace being the Holy Spirit or God's divine self at work in the world. Protestants argued that regarding the Eucharist the bread and wine are the 'analogy' that signify Christ's true but spiritual presence. Catholics argue that visible signs or analogy are the accidents of the outward signs of bread and wine after the substance of the bread and wine have been consecrated and completely transformed into the invisible but true, spiritual and corporeal body and blood of the Risen Christ.

[Back to Top]
and resemblaunce betwene the Sacra-
ment and the thing signified, must euer be kept in all
Sacraments.
ti-In the Sacrament of the Lordes body, this Analogie
or resemblaunce can not be kept, if bread be transub-
stantiated:
si.Ergo, the substance of bread must needes remayne in the
Sacrament of the Lords body.

MarginaliaAugust. epist. as Dardanum.The Maior 

Commentary  *  Close

The 'major' of an argument is its chief point; the 'minor' is the proof ascertaining ('certaine') the major's veracity.

of this Argument is certaine by S. Austen, Lib. De catechisandis rudibus, & Epist. ad Dardan. Where hee sayeth: Sacramentes must needes beare a similitude of those thyngs whereof they are Sacramentes, or else they can be no Sacramentes.

The Minor is thus proued.

¶ Argument.
MarginaliaAnalogie or proportion betweene the outward nourishing of bread in our bodyes, and the inward nouryshing of Christes bodely death in our soules.Ba-The resemblaunce betweene the Sacrament and the
body of Christ is this: that as the properties of bread
and wyne do nourish outwardly: so the properties of
the body of Christ do nourish spiritually.
ro-Without the substaunce of bread and wine, there is no
resemblaunce of nourishing.
co.Ergo, without the substaunce of bread and wyne, the
Analogie can not hold.
¶ Argument.
Ba-Agayne, another resemblaunce and similitude or Ana-
logie of this Sacramente is this, that as one loafe of
bread, and one cuppe of wine conteineth many cornes
and many grapes: so the mysticall congregation cōtei-
neth many members, and yet maketh but one bodie:
ro-Without the substance of bread & wine, no such resem-
blaunce or similitude of cōiunction can be represented:
co.Ergo, without the substaunce of bread and wyne, the
Analogie of this spirituall coniunction can not holde.
¶ Another Argument.
Ba-Euery Sacrament consisteth in two thynges, that is,
in the thing signifieng, and the thing signified.
ro-Without the substance of bread and wine, there is no-
thing that signifieth in the Sacrament:
co.Ergo, the substaunce of bread and wyne in the Sacra-
mente, can in no wise be transubstantiate from theyr
natures. The Minor is thus to be proued.
Fes-There is no signification in any Sacrament without
the element.
ti-The substaunce of bread and wine is the elemente of
this Sacrament:
no.Ergo, without the substaunce of bread and wine, there
is no similitude nor signification in this Sacrament.

And for somuch as the aduersaries ground their tran-substantiation so much vpon these wordes of Christ: This is my body: 

Commentary  *  Close

Matt. 26: 26; Mark 14: 22; Luke 22: 19 - the Gospel narratives of the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper. Martyr claimed that Catholics read this phrase only according to the literal sense of interpreting the Bible, not the analogical, figurative or 'spiritual' sense. Catholics claim they understand this Biblical text in both the literal and spiritual senses.

[Back to Top]
which they expound onely after þe litteral sense, without troupe 
Commentary  *  Close

'Trope': metaphor; in this case a visible object signifying Christ's Eucharistic presence. A sacrament could not exist without the visible sign of invisible grace, and Martyr claimed that the Catholic Eucharist did not have one, since the substance was completely transformed. Catholics maintained that the accidents of bread and wine - the outward signs of the transubstantiated elements - served as the trope or figure of Christ's corporeal body and blood, and so could be called 'bread' and 'wine'.

[Back to Top]
or figure: now that this their exposition is false, and that the sayde woordes are to be taken figuratiuely and spiritually, MarginaliaThree causes prouing that these wordes of Christ. Hoc est corpus meum, are not to be taken literally but spiritually.by three causes it is to be proued.

[Back to Top]

1. First by the wordes of the Scripture. 2. By the nature of a Sacrament. 3. By the testimonies of the fathers.

MarginaliaPlaces of Scripture making agaynst transubstantiation.1. First by these wordes of the scripture, where he sayth: Doe this in remembraunce of mee, for so muche as remembraunce properly serueth not for thinges corporally presēt, but for thinges rather being absent. 

Commentary  *  Close

Luke 22: 19; I Corinthians 11: 23-26 (the institution narrative as given by St. Paul). Martyr held that Christ is spiritually present in the bread and wine, not literally, for otherwise there would be no need to remember Christ, since one remembers only that which is not there. Catholics state that the Eucharist is a memorial that makes truly but mystically present Christ's one sacrifice on the cross, as well as making his body and blood corporeally present.

[Back to Top]

2. Secondly, where he saith: Vntill I come. 

Commentary  *  Close

I Corinthians 11: 27. Catholics claim Christ shall come personally at the end of time in the majesty of his glorified and risen body to judge the living and the dead; they also claim he comes truly, corporeally and spiritually in the Eucharist of his glorified and risen body and blood, since for Christ, who is truly divine as well as truly human, nothing is impossible.

[Back to Top]
Which words were vayne, if he were already come by consecration.

3. Thirdly, where S. Paule sayth: The breaking of bread, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 

Commentary  *  Close

I Corinthians 10: 16-17. Catholics claim that Christ's one death upon the cross, where he body was broken, becomes truly, mystically present in the Mass. They also receive Christ's true, corporeal, risen, glorified body and blood, which can no longer be broken as it was upon the cross, but Christ's one body can be given to people whenever and wherever they receive the Eucharist.

[Back to Top]
Which words of breaking in no case can be verified vppon the body of Christ, which for the glory thereof is vnpossible.

4. Furthermore where as the Lord biddeth thē to take and eate, it is euident, that the same cannot be vnderstand simply of the body of Christ without a trope, forsomuch as he cannot be eaten and chawed with teeth, as we vse properly in eating other meates to doe. 

Commentary  *  Close

A common objection to Catholic Eucharistic doctrine at the time. Catholics claim that Christ's risen, glorified body is not susceptible to whatever befalls any other kind of food, including chewing.

5. The wordes moreouer of Luke and Paule spoken of the cuppe, doe argue likewise that the other words spoken of the bread must needes be taken mistically. As where it is sayd: This cup is the new testament: which woordes must needes be expounded thus: thys cup doth signifie the new Testament. 

Commentary  *  Close

Luke 22: 19 and I Corinthians 11: 25. Catholics maintain that Christ's body and blood both represent Christ's New Testament or covenant: his promise to be with his Church always, including in the sacrament of the Eucharist, in contrast to the Hebrew covenant in which God's presence and protection was dependent upon Jewish adherence to the Law of Moses. It is unclear whether Martyr means the Eucharist represents the New Testament as only meaning the Christian scriptures.

[Back to Top]

6. Item, these wordes of S. Iohn. chap. 6. My wordes be spirite and life. The flesh profiteth nothing &c. 

Commentary  *  Close

John 6: 63. The beginning of the conclusion of Jesus' 'The Bread of Life Discourse' in John 6. Catholics would remind those who denied Christ's corporeal presence in the Eucharist, that such a reading of John 6: 63 seemed to deny that 'The Word became Flesh and dwelt among us' (John 1: 14): God became incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ.

[Back to Top]

7. Itē, where in the same place of S. Iohn, Christ to refell the carnal vnderstanding of the Capernaites of eating his body, maketh mention of his Ascension. &c. 

Commentary  *  Close

John 6: 62. Perhaps the chief Protestant argument against Christ's corporeal presence in the Eucharist at the time was that Jesus had ascended into heaven and told his disciples he would not return until the end of time. Jesus 'refells' (refutes) the 'Capernaites' (people of Capernaum, though actually he is addressing his disciples) who find Jesus' self-description as 'the bread of life' that must be eaten for salvation difficult to accept. Jesus counters by asking if they would believe if they see him doing something else impossible: ascending into heaven (which seems to imply that they will, though no mention of it is given in John's Gospel, but see Luke 24: 51 and Acts 1: 9). Catholics state that Christ is personally present in heaven and is also corporeally present in the Eucharist, for nothing is impossible for God.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaThe secōd cause, the nature of a Sacrament.The second cause why the wordes of Christ: This is my body, cannot be litterally expounded without trope, is þe nature of a sacrament: whose nature and propertie is to beare a signe or signification of a thinge to be remembred, which thing after the substantiall and reall presence, is absent. As touching which nature of a sacrament sufficiently hath bene sayd before.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaThe third cause, the testimonye of the fathers.The third cause, why the woordes of consecration are figuratiuely to be taken, is the testimonie of the auncient Doctours.

Tertullianus.

MarginaliaTertullianus Contra Martionem. Lib. 4.This is my body: that is to say, this is a figure of my body.

August. Psal. 3.

MarginaliaAugustinus. Psal. 3.Christ gaue a figure of his body.

August, Contra Adamantum Manichæum.

MarginaliaAugust. contra Adamantum.He did not doubt to say: This is my body when he gaue a signe of his body.

Hieronimus. 
Commentary  *  Close

Hieronimus is Saint Jerome.

MarginaliaCap. 12. Hieronimus.Christ represented vnto vs his body.

August.

MarginaliaAugust de Doctrina Christiana. Lib.August. in his booke De Doctrina Christiana declareth expressely that this speache of eating the body of Christ, is a figuratiue speach.

Ambrosius.

MarginaliaAmbros. de Sacram. lib. 4. cap. 4.As thou hath receaued the similitude of his death: so thou drinkest the similitude of his precious bloud.

¶ Argument.
Fe-The death of Christ is not present really in the sacra-
ment but by similitude.
ri-The precious bloud of Christ is present in the Sacra-
ment as his death is present:
o.Ergo, the precious bloud of Christ is not present really
in the Sacrament.

The Minor of this argument is proued before by the wordes of Ambrose.

The second question. Whether the body and bloud of Christ be in the bread and wine, or vnder the formes of bread and wine carnally and corporally. MarginaliaThe second conclusion.
¶ Argument. 
Commentary  *  Close

The second argument has already been alluded to. Catholics claim that Christ is both present in heaven and in the Eucharist on earth.

Di-The true natural body of Christ is placed in heauen.
sa-The true naturall body of man can be but in one
place at once, where he is:
mis.Ergo, the true naturall body of Christ can be in no
place at once, but in heauen where he is.

The Maior is playne by the Scriptures: Iesus was taken vp to heauen, and sitteth at the right hand of God. Math. 26 

Commentary  *  Close

Matthew 26: 64.

MarginaliaMath. 26. The poore ye haue alwayes with you, but me you shall not alwayes haue Iohn 12 
Commentary  *  Close

John 12: 8.

MarginaliaIohn. 12. I leaue the world and go to my Father. Ioh. 16. 
Commentary  *  Close

John 16: 28.

MarginaliaIohn. 16. Many shal say in the day: Loe here is Christ, and there is Christ, beleue thē not. Mat. 24 
Commentary  *  Close

Matthew 24: 23.

MarginaliaMath. 24. Whō the heauēs must receiue

[Back to Top]
for
Go To Modern Page No:  
Click on this link to switch between the Modern pagination for this edition and Foxe's original pagination when searching for a page number. Note that the pagination displayed in the transcription is the modern pagination with Foxe's original pagination in square brackets.
Find:
Type a keyword and then restrict it to a particular edition using the dropdown menu. You can search for single words or phrases. When searching for single words, the search engine automatically imposes a wildcard at the end of the keyword in order to retrieve both whole and part words. For example, a search for "queen" will retrieve "queen", "queene" and "queenes" etc.
in:  
Humanities Research Institute  *  HRI Online  *  Feedback
Version 2.0 © 2011 The University of Sheffield