The trew re­port of the dysputacyon had & begōne in the con­uocacyō hows at london among the clargye there assembled the xviij. da­ye of October in the yeare of our lord M.D.LIIII.

i. Iohan. iiij. Proue euery spyryte whether thei be of god or no.

To the Chrysten reader.

IT is not vnknowen to the world / Chrysten reader / what varietie and contenciō hath bene abowt weyghti matters of religion for a gret space / which were thought to haue bene so disiussed debated and examined of our clergie / that all men were in hope that such an vniformitie agreable to the word of god / to the doctrine of the patriarkis and apostles & to the order of the primatiue church also / had bene determined for our church of Ingland / that from hensforth one shuld haue liued wyth a nother in moch better vnitie and godli quietnes than in mani yeares before they had done: euery one imbracing one sincere maner of worshipping and inuocacion off god / wythowt any supersticion / idolatrie or hipocrisy that hath in processe of time crept in by the diuise and fantasie of mans braine. And the thing was brought to such a point that all men / in maner / were wōn to a wonderfull in [Page] differency / and begān to espie their ig­norance and errors wherewyth they haue bene heretofore blynded and seduced, But the awncient aduersari of mā kind / Satan / which neuer ceaseth to se­ke how he may destroye the workes of god in vs / enuieng that vnitie in trewe religion that all men of all agis statis and degreys as well high as lowe / had in maner atteyned and were well nigh comne vnto / hath now stirred vp the old cōtenciō agayne bringing the weake vnlerned and simple sort thereby in to such a dowt and wauering that they can now lesser tell what they may bileue and which waye they may steye their faith and constiencys than euer thei could before. But as the great prophete (as Moyses nameth him) the son̄ of god doth prophecy and wytnes / that offēcys must nedis come / and that such offencys shuld come that euen the veri elect / (yff it were possible) shuld be seduced / now we see wyth our eyes and grope wyth our sensys that it is comne to passe and fullfilled euyn among vs. But let them take hede that haue bene [Page] the auctors thereoff ffor as it seruyth for the prouing and tryeng of gods e­lect (to whom all thyngs worke to the best) euen so shall it serue to theyr woo and vtter damnacion / as he sayth that knoweth all thingis (ve homini illi per quem scandalum venit) woo vnto that man thorow whom offence doth come. And let the godly sort now reioyse in the crosse of christ / for they haue no lesse cause / for as moch as by this tēptacyō they haue the same tokē that theyr professyō is the trewe religyō of god / which all the trewe byleuers euermo­re frō tyme to time haue had / that is to saye / christys crosse the token that can not deceiue vs / and with owt the wh­ich we can not be / yff we will be sure to liue godly in christ / as holy. s. Paul sayth. But now to my purpose as in other poītys moch varietye of opinyōs hatth bene / euyn so in the hygh miste­rye of christys supꝑ (which was institu­ted to be a sacramēt of cōcord / loue and vnitie) the difference and diuersytie of opyniōs there abowt hath brought to passe that more dyscord / dissension and [Page] diuisyon hath growen among men a­bowt that than in any other one arty­cle of our chrysten religyon. And the­refor they whos subscripcyon was re­quyred in the conuocacyon holden at powlys at the last parlament / iudged not amysse / that thought it necessary to reason and dispute therein before they wold subscrybe to any conclusyon or determynate sentēce. And to the in­tent that all men may knowe and see what reasons and answers were made on both partys / I haue thought good to publyssh so moch thereoff as came vnto my handis / trusting that no man wyll be more offēded wyth the settyng furth thereoff / to the intēt that such as were not present may reade such thin­gys as there were done and sayd / no more than they were that all that were presēt shuld heare them / and iudge in­dyfferently by the toch stone of gods word / on whych part the truth doth re­mayne. Whych / men may well goo a­bowt to suppresse / but whan they ha­ue done all they cā agaynst it / yet will it owt and haue the ouer hand. God [Page] grant that all men may seke and study for the truth and not suffer thē seluys to be caryed abowt nor changed with euery blast of strāge doctrine / nor with euery fantastycall fable of Antychry­stys mynysters. Amen.

And as by readyng and weyng the reasōs and answers of thys dysputaciō I dowt not but thow shalt be sussyciē ­tly confyrmed in the truth of the arty­cles thereī reasoned and debated / euyn so in a lytle treatyse of the trewe sacry­fyce of a christē mā which by gods grace shall shortly also be set furth / thow shalt be instructed what to iudge off o­ther artycles / as of the masse / of alta­rys / of the inuocatyon of sayntys / and such lyke. And now that we see how gods wrath is bent ouer our nacyon / that we may now well saye wyth da­uyd / O god / heathen peple are ente­ryd in to thyne inherytans. (For now Antychrystys generacyō thinck to sta­blish their kyngdō in Inglād for euer) let all faythfull hartis yoyne them sel­uis together in vnfayned and cōtynu­all prayer that god will haue mercy vpon vs [Page] and defend vs against them / that the light of his word which hath now nys shyned vp on vs o may both be preserued among vs / and also preserue vs agaynst all the practises and enterpry­ses of hys enemies Amen.

The trew report of the disputacyon had & begōn in the cōuocacyon hows at london the xviij. of October. An̄o Dn̄i. M.D.LIIII.

WHereas dyuers and vncer­ten rumors be spred abro­de of the disputacyon had in the conuocacyon hows / to the intent that all men may knowe the certentye of all thyngs therein done and sayd as moch as the memory of hym that was present the­reat can beare a way / he hath thought good at request / thoroughly to descry­be what was sayd therein ō both parts of the matters argued and had in que­styon and of the entrans thereoff.

Fyrst vp on wedynsday beyng the xviij. day off october at affter noone / master weston the prolocutor certified the hows that it was the quenys plea­sure [Page] that the cōpany of the same hows bēyg many lerned mē assembled / shuld debate of matters of religiō and cōstitute lawes thereoff / which hyr grace and the ꝑlamēt wold ratifye. And for that there is a booke of late set furth / called the cathechysme (whych he shewed fur­th) bearīg the name of thys honorable Synody / and yet putt furth with owt your cōsentis / as I haue lerned / being a book very pestiferos / & full of here­syes (as he sayd) and lyke wyse the booke of comō prayer / very abhomynable (as it pleased hym to terme it) he thou­ght it therfor best fyrst to begyn̄ wyth the artycles of the cathechysme concer­nyng the sacrament of the altar / for to cōfyrme the naturall presens of chryst in the same / and for transsubstantya­cyon. In the which on fryday next en­sewyng / he wylled all men there frely to speak theyr tonsciens and lerning / and they shuld be fully satysfyed.

The fryday comyng beyng the xx. of October / whan men had thought they shuld haue ent [...]yd disputacyō of the q̄s­t [...]ōs ꝓposed / the ꝓlocutor dyd exhybyte ij. seuerall billys vnto the hows: tho­ne for the natural p̄sēs of chryst in the sacramēt of the altar / the other cōcernīg [Page] the cathechisme / that it was not of that hows agreamēt set furth and that thei doo not agree thereunto. Requyryng all them to subscrybe to the same as he himsylf had done: whereunto the who­le hows dyd īmedyately assent except vi. which were the deane of rochester the deane of exceter / the archdeacon of wynchester / the archdeacō of hertford / the arthdeacō of stowe and one other / And whyle the rest were abowt to subscribe thes ij. articles. I. filpot stode vp and spake first cōcernyng the article of the cathechysme that he thought thei were deceyued in the tytle of the cathechisme / in that it bearyth the title of the Synode of london last before this / all though mani of thē which thā were present were neuer made pryuy thereof in setting it furth / for that this hows had grāted the auctorytye to make ecclesy­astical lawys vnto certē persons to be appoynted by the kyngys magestye / and what soeuer ecclesyasticall lawes thei or the most part of thē did set furth accordyng to a statute in that behalf ꝓuyded / it might be wel sayd to be do / ne in the synode of lōdō although such as be of this hows now had no notyce thereof, be­fore [Page] the ꝓmulgaciō. And in this point he thought the setterfurth thereoff no­thing to haue slandred the hows / as thei by theyr subscripcyon went abowt to persuade the world / sins thei had our synodall auctoritie vnto them cōmitted to make such spirituall lawys as they thought conueniēt and necessary. And more ouer he sayd as cōcerning the ar­ticle of the naturall presens in the sa­crament / that it was agāyst reasō and order of lernyng and also very preiudi­cyall to the truth that mē shuld be mo­uid to substribe before the matter were thorowly examined and discussed. But whā he sawe that allegacyō might ta­ke no place / being as a man astoyned at the multitude of so mani lerned mē as there were off purpose gathered to­gether to mainteyne old tradicyōs mo­re than the truth of gods holy word / he made his request vnto the prolocutor- that where as there were so many awncyent lerned mē present on that syde as in the realme the lyke againe were not to be fownd in such nomber / and that on the other syde of them that had not [Page] subscrybed / were not past .v. or vi. both in age and lerning farr inferyor vnto thē / therfor that equalite might be had in this disputacyō he desyered that the prolocutor wold be a meane vnto the lordes that some of thos that were ler­ned and setters furth of the same cathechisme might be broght in touthe hows to shewe theyr lerning that mouyd thē to sett furth the same / And that D. rydley and master rogers with ij. or iij. moo might be lycensed to be present at this disputaciō and to be associate with thē. This request was thought reasonable and was ꝓposed vnto the lord bisshops who made this answer that it was not in them to call such parsonis vnto our hows / syns some of them were priso­ners. But thei sayd thei wold be peti­yoners in this behalff vnto the cown­cell / and in case any were absent that ought to be of the hows / they willed thē to be taken in vnto them / yff they li­sted. Affter this thei minding to haue enterid in to disputacyon / there came a gentleman a messenger frō the lord gret master signyfieng vnto the prolocutor [Page] that my lord gret master and the earle of deauonshyre wold be present at the disputacyons / and therfor he differryd the same vntill monday at one of the clock at affternone.

Vp on mōday the xxiij. of October at the tyme appoynted / in the presens of many earlys / lordis / knyghtis / gentle­men and diuers other of the coint and of the cytye also / the ꝓlocutor made a ꝓtestacyō that they of the hows / had appoynted thys disputaciō / weston not to call the truth in to dowt / to the which thei had allready all subscribed / sauing v. or v [...]. but that thos gayne sayers myght be resolued of theyr argumētis in the whych they stode / as it shall appeare vnto yow / not dowtyng but thei wyll also cōdescend vnto vs. Than he demā ­ded of master haddon whether he wold reasō agaynst the q̄styōs ꝓposed or no?

M. haddonTo whom he made answere that he had certyfyed hym before by wrytyng that he wold not / syns the request of such lerned mē as were demāded to be assystēt with thē / wold not be granted.M. Elmar Master elmar lykewyse was asked / who made the prolocutor the lyke an­swer / addyng moreouer thys / that they had done to moch preiudice all redy to [Page] the truth / to substrybe before the mat­ter was discussed: and lytle or nothyng it myght auayle to reasō for the truth / syns all they were now determyned to the cōtrary. Affter thys he demāded of master chenye whō the prolocutor said allowed the presens with them / but he denyed the trāssubstancyacyon / by the meanis of certen auctorityes vpon the which he stōdeth and desyereth to be resolued / M. cheyny­ [...]s obietcyons. as yow shal heare whether he will ꝓpose hys dowtis concernyng trāssubstācyacyō or no Yea / quoth he / I wold glady mi dowtes to be resolued which moue me not to byleue trans­substācyacion. The first is owt of the scripture of s. Paull to the corinthyans who speaking of the sacrament of the body and blood of chryst calleth it offt tymis bread / affter the consecracyon. The second is owt off Orygen / who speakyng of this sacrament sayth that the materyal part theroff goyth down to the excrementis. The third is owt of theodoretus who makyng mencyon of the sacramētall bread and wyne af­ter the cōsecracyon sayth that they goo not owt of their former substāce / forme and shape. Thes be some of my dowtis [Page] amōg many other which I require to be answered off. Than the prolocu­tor assigned D. Moreman to answer hym.More­mans aaswer to s. Paul. Who to. s. Paull answered hym thus / that the sacrament is called bread by him in dede / but it is thus to be vnderstād that it is bread off the sacramētall bread / that is / the forme of bre­ad.Master cheyny­es replycacion. Than mastery cheny / inferred and alleaged that hifichyus calleth the sa­crament both bread and flessh. Yea / quoth moreman / hyfichyus calleth it bread becaus it was bread and not by­caus it is soo. And passyng ouer orygē he came to theodoretus / and sayd that mē mistoke his auctoryte / by interpre­ting a generall in to a speciall / as peter martyr hath done in that place of theodoret / More­mans answer to theo­dorete. marcke this an­swer ād shyyfft. interpreting / ousia / for substāce / which is a speciall signyficacion of the word. whereas ousia is a generall word as well to accydēce as to substāce. And therfor I answer thus vnto Theodoret that the sacramentall bread and wyne doo not goo owt of their former sub­stance forme and shape / that is to say / not owt of theyr accidentall substance [Page] and shape. Affter this master theny sa­te him down / and by and by master el­mar stode vp / M. elmar. as one that could not a­byde to heare so fond an answer to so graue an auctorite / And reasonyd vp on the auctorite of theodoret / alleagyd before by master cheny and declared that moremans answer to theodoret was no iust nor sufficyent answer but an illusyon and a suttle euasyon con­trary to Theodoretis meanyng. For / sayd he / yff (ousia) shuld signifye an ac­cydēce in the place alleaged as it is an­swered by master moreman / than we­re it a word superfluos set in theodore­te / there where doo folow ij. other wordis which sufficyently do expownd the accydēs of the bread / that is / eidos and shema / which signifye in Inglysh / sha­pe and forme: And so very lernydly ꝓ­uyd owt of the same auctor by dyuers allegacyons that (ousia) in greke could not be so generally taken in that place as moreman for a shyfft wold haue it.more­mans shifft is ouer­thrown. But moremā as a man hauyng no no­ther salue for that sore affyrmed styll that (ousia) which signyfyeth substāce / [Page] must nedis signifye accydental substā ­ce properly.fylpots replica­cyon / to more­mans shyfft. To whos importunyte sy­ns he could haue no nother answer / el­mar as a man weryed wyth so long talk gaue place. Affter this / stode vp Iohn fyllpot and sayd that he could proue that by the matter that Theodo­ret intreated off in the place aboue al­leaged and by the simylytude which he makyth to proue his purpose / by no meanis master moremans interpreta­cyon of (ousia) / myght be taken for ac­cydentall substance as he for a shyfft wold interpret yt to be. For the matter whych theodoret intreatyth off in that place is agaynst eutyches an heretyke which denyed ij. naturys of substance to remayne in christ beyng one parson but that hys humanytye affter thac­complyshment of the mystery of our saluacyon ascendyng in to heauyn and beyng yoyned vnto the dyuynitie was absorpt or swalowed vp of the same / so that chryst shuld be no more but of one dyuyne substance only by hys opy­nyon. Agaynst whych opynyon Theodoret wrytyth and by the symylytude [Page] of the sacrament proueth the contrary agaynst the heretyke / that lyke as in the sacrament of the body of christ aff­ter the consecracyo there is the substan­ce of chrystis humanytye with the substance of bread / remaynyng as it was before / not beyng absorpt of the humanitye of chryst but yoyned by the diuy­ne operacyō thereunto / Euyn so in the parson of chryst beyng now in heauyn of whom this holy sacrament is a re­presentacyon / there be ij. seuerall sub­stancys / that is / his dyuynytye and hu­manitie vnited in one hipostacy or parson / which is chryst / The humanitye not absorpt by the coniunccyon of the deitye / but remainīg in his former substans. And this similytude / quoth fyll­pot / brought in of theodorete to con­fownd Eutyches / shuld proue nothing at all / yff the very substance off the sa­cramentall bread dyd not remayne as it dyd before / but yff D. More­mans interpretacion might take pla­ce for transsubstancyacyon / than shuld the heretyke haue thereby a [Page] strong argument by theodoretis auctorytye so taken to maynteyne his here­sy and to proue him filff a good chrystē man / and he might well saye thus vn­to theodorete. Lyke as thow theodoret yff thow were of D. Moremās mynd / doyst say that affter the consecracyon in the sacrament the substance of the bread is absorpt or trāssubstancyate in to the humane body of chryst coming thereunto / so that in the sacrament is now but one substance of the huma­nyte a lone and not the substance of bread as it was before / euyn likewyse may I affyrme and conclude by thyne own similytude that the humanitye as­cendyng vp by the powr of god in to heauyn and adioyned vnto the deytye was by the might thereoff absorpt and turned into one substāce with the dey­tye: so that now there remaynith but one diuyne substance in christ / nomore than in the sacramentall sygnis of the lordis supper affter the consecracyon doo remayne any more than one sub­stance according to your byleffe and cō struccyon. To this D. Moreman stac­kered [Page] in answering / whos defect fyll­pott perceyuing / spake on this wise.more­mā stac­ke ryh and can not tell what to answer. weston is offended. Wel master moremā yf you hauenotā answer ready at this present / I pray yow diuyse one yff you can conuenien­tly / agaīst our next metyng here aga­yn: with that his sayng the prolocutor was greuosly offēded / tellyng him that he shuld not bragg there / but that he shuld be fully answered. Than sayd fil­pot / It is the thing that I only desyre to be answered directly in this behalff / and I desyre of yow & of all the hows at this present / that I may be sufficyē ­tly āswered / which I am sure yow are not all able to doo / sauīg theodoretis autorite and similytude vpright / as he ougt to be taken. No nother answer was made to fillpots reasons / but that he was commanded to sylens.Fylpot, tis replicacyon answe­red by cōman­ding hī to sylēce Thā stode vp the deane of rochester offring hī sylff / to reason in the fyrst question agaynst the natural presens wisshing that the scripture and the awncyent doctors in this point might be weyed / byleuid and folowed. And agaynst this natu­rall presens he thought the sayng of [Page] chryst in. s. Mathew to make sufficiēt­ly ynough / yff men wold credite and folowe scripture: who sayd there of him selff that poore men we shuld haue all­weis with vs / the dea­ne of rochester. but him we shuld not haue alweys / which was spoken / quoth he / concerning the naturall presens of christis body / therfor we ought to byleue as he hath taught that christ is not naturally presēt on earth in the sacra­ment of the altare.westōs answer to the deane. To this was answered by the prolocutor that we shuld not haue chryst present allweyes to exercyse almes dedis vp on hym / but vp on the pore. But the deane prosecuted his argument / and shewed owt of. s. Austen further / that the same interpretacyon of the scripture alleaged / The deanes re­plicaciō was no sufficyent answer / who wrytych in the fyfftye treatise of s. Iohan on thys wyse of the same sentence. Whan as he sayd / sayth Austen / me shall ye not ha­ue allweyes with you / he spake of the presence of his body. For by his ma­gestye / bi his prouydence / by hys vn­speakable [Page] and vysyble grace / that is fullfylled which is sayd of him / behold I am with yow vntyll the consumma­cyon of the world.A nota­ble auc­toritye owt of. s. Austē But in the flessh which the wore toke vp on him / in that which was borne of the virgyn / in that which was apprehended of the Iewys which was crucifyed on the crosse / which was lett down from the crosse / which was wrapped in clowtis / which was hiddē in the sepulchre / which was manifested in the resurreccyon / yow shall not haue me allweyes with yow. And why? For affter a bodily presen­ce he was conuersant wih his discy­ples xl. eayes / and thei accompa­nyeng him by seyng and not by folo­wing / he ascendyd and is not here / for there he sytteth at the ryght hand of the father / And yet here he is / be­caus he is not departed in the presens of his magestye. Affter a nother ma­ner we haue chryst allweys by pre­sens of hys magestye / but affter the p̄sens off his flessh it is vprightly sayd [Page] you shall not verily haue me allweys with yow. For the church had hym in the presence of his flessh a fewe dayes / and now by fayth it apprehēdeth him and seyth him not with eyes.watsōs answer to s. Au­sten. To this auctorite D. Watson toke vp on him to answer / and sayd he wold answer. s. Austen by. s. Austen / and hauing a certen boke in his hand of notis / he allea­ged owt of the xc. treatye vp on.Fylpot agaynst watson. s. Ioan that affter that mortall condicyon and maner we haue not now chryst on the earth as he was heretofore before his passion. Agaynst whos answer Iohan fillpott replyed and sayd that watson had not fully answeryd. s. Austen by. s. Austen as he wold seme to haue done / for that in the place aboue mencionyd by master deane of rochester / he doth not only teach the immortall state of christis bodye before his passion / but also the immortall condicyō of the same affter his resurrection / in the which mortall body. s: Austen semyth playnely to affirme that christ is not present-vp on the arth neyther in forme visibly neyther in corporall substance inuisi­bly: [Page] As in fewe linis affter the place a­boue alleaged. s. Austē doth more plai­nely declare by thes wordis / saīg / now thes ij. maner af christis presence declared / which is by his magestie / prouidence / and grace now present in the world which before his ascensyon was pre­sent in flessh / being now placed at the ryght hand of the father is absēt in the same from the world / I thynk / (sayth. s. Austen) that there remaynith no no­ther questiō in this mater. Now / quoth fillpot / yff. s. Austen acknowleged no more presence of christ to be now on earth but only his diuyne presence / and towching his humanitye to be in hea­uyn / we ought to confesse and byleue the same. But yff we put a thyrd pre­sens of christ / that is corporally to be p̄ ­sent allweys in the sacrament of the al­tare inuisibly / according to your supposycions / whereoff. s. Austen maketh no mencyon at all in all his workis / yow shall seme to iudge that which. s. Austē dyd neuer comprehend. Why / quoth watson. s. Austē in the place by me al­leaged maketh no mencion how. s. Ste­uyn [Page] beyng in this world sawe Christ affter his ascension. It is trewe / sayd fyllpot / but he sawe christ as the scryp­ture telleth / in the heauyns beyng opē / standing at the right hand of god the father. Further to this / watson an­swered not.D. we­ston. Than the prolocutor went abowt to furnyssh vp an answer to. s. Austen / sayng that he is not now in the world affter that maner of bodyly presence / but yet present for all that in his bodye. To whom fyllpot answe­red that the prolocutor dyd grate moch vp on this word / (secundum) in. s. Au­sten / which signifyeth affter the ma­ner / in forme / but he doth not answer to / (id quod) which is that thing or sub­stance of chryst in the which christ suf­fered / arose / and ascended in to heauyn In the which thyng and substance he is in heauin and not on earth / as. s. Austen in the place specyfyed most clere­ly doth defyne.The deane of rochester. To this nothyng els being answered / master deane of rochester procedid in the maintenance of his argument and redd owt of a boke of [Page] annotacions / sondry auctoryties for the confirmaciō thereoff.more­man. To the which moreman / who was appointed to answer him / made no direct answer / but bad hī make an argument / sayng master dea­ne had recyted many wordis of doc­tors but he made not one argument. Than sayd master deane / the auctori­ties of the doctors by me rehersed / be sufficient argumentis to proue myne intēt / to the which my desire is to be answeryd of yow. But still moreman cri­ed / make an argument / to shifft off the auctorite which he could not answer vnto. Affter this master deane made this argument owt of the institucyon of the sacrament / (Doo thys in remembrance of me / and thus ye shal shewe furth the lordis death vntyll he com­myth) The sacrament therfor is the remembrance of christ / than it is not very christ for yet he is not comme. For this word / (Vntyll he comyth) doth playnely signifie the absens of chry­stis body.weston. Than the prolocutor me­nt abowt to shewe that thys word / [Page] (Vntil he comyth / ) dyd not import any absence of christ on the earth / by other placis of scripture where (donec) vntill / was placed as well as there / but direc­tly to the purpose he answered nothīg. In conclusyon master deane fel to que­styoning of moreman whether chryst ate the pasthalawb with his discyples or no? He answered / yea. Further he demanded whether he ate lykewise the sacrament with them as he dyd instytute yt? Moreman answered Yea. Than he axed what he ate / and whether he ate his own naturall body as they ymagyne it to be / or noo. Than sayd master deane It is a great absurdytye by yow granted / and so he sate down.more­mā affirmeth that christ ato his own bo­dy. Agaynst this absurditye / filpot stode vp and ar­gued / saīg he could proue by good rea­son to be diducyd owt of scripture / that chryst ate not his own naturall bodye at the institucyon of the sacramēt / and the reason is this. The body of christ giuyn by the sacrament hath a promes of remissyon of synnis adyoyned / vnto all thē that receyue it dewely / Fylpot. but this promes could take no effect in chryst / [Page] ergo christ ate not his own body in the sacramēg.more­man de­nyeth the sa­cramēt to haue a ꝓmes of remissyon of sinne annexed vnto it. To this reason moremā an­swered / denienh the former part of the argument / that the sacrament had a promes of remissyo of synnis annexed vnto yt. Than fillpot shewed this to be the promes in the sacrament (Which is gyuyn for yow / which is shed for yow for the remissyō of synnis) But more­man wold not acknowlege that to be any promes / so that he droue fyllpot to the vi. of Ioh. to vouch his sayng with thes wordis the breade which I will gyue / is my flessh / which I wyll gyue for the lyffe off the world. Moreman answering nothing directly to this ar­gument / harps­feld af­firmeth that wh­ich mo­reman his fe­low de­nyed. harpsfeld start vp to supplie that which wanted in his behalff / and thinkyng to haue answered fyllpott / confyrmed more strongly his argu­ment / sayng / ye mistake the promes which is annexed to the body of chryst in the sacrament / for it perteyned not to christ but to his discyples to whom christ sayd this is my body which is gyuē for yow / and not for christ him sylff. Yow haue sayd well for me quoth fyl­pott [Page] / for that is mine argument. The promes off the body of christ toke no effect in christ / ergo christ ate not his own body.weston also is cōtrary to more man. Than the prolocutor to showlder owt the matter / sayd the ar­gument was naught / for by the like argument he myght goo abowt to proue that chryst was not baptysed / becaus che remissyon of synn which is anne­xed vnto baptysme toke no effect in christ.fylpots argu­ment is not soluted. To the which / fyllpot replyed that lyke as christ was baptysed / so he ate the sacrament / but he toke on hym baptisme / not that he had any nede the reoff / or that it toke any effect in him / but as our master / to gyue the church an example to folowe him in the mi­nistracyon of the sacrament / and there­by to exhibite vnto vs / him self / and not to giue him self to him selff. No mo­re was sayd in this. But afterward the ꝓlocutor demāded of filpot / whether he wold argue agaynst the naturall presence or no. To whō he answeared / yea yff he wold heare his argument with owt interrupcyon and assigne one to answer him and not many / which is a [Page] confusiō to the opponent and specyally for him that was of an yll memori. By this tyme the night was cōne on / whe­refore the prolocutor brake vp the dis­putacyon for that tyme and appointed fillpot to be the fyrst that shuld beginn the disputacion the next day affter / cō ­cernyng the presence of chryst in the sacrament.

On the wedinsday the xxv. of Octo­ber / Iohnnfillpott / Filpot. as it was before appointed / was redy to haue entred the disputacyō myndyng fyrst to haue made a certen oracyon and a trewe decla­racyō in laten off the mater of christis presens which was than in questyon which thīg the prolocutor perceyuing / by and by he forbad fillpot to make a­ny oracyon or declaracyon of any mat­ter / cōmandyng hym also that he shuld make na argument in laten but to con­clude no his argumentis in Inglyssh. Than sayd fyllpott / this is contra­ry to your order taken at the begyn­nyng of this disputacyon: For than yow appoynted that all the argumen­tis shuld be made in laten. And [Page] thereupon I haue drawen and diuysed all my argumētis in laten. And becaus yow / master prolocutor / haue sayd heretofore openly in this hows that I had no lerning / I had thought to haue she­wed such lerning as I haue / in a brefe oracyon and short declaracyon of the questyons now in controuersy: thyn­kyng it so most conuenient also / that in case I shuld speak otherwyse in my de­claracyon than shuld stand with lernīg or than I were able to warant and iu­styfye by gods word / it myght the bet­ter be reformyd by such as were lerned of the hows / so that the vnlerned sort beyng present myght take the lesse of­fence thereat. But this allegacyon pre­uayled nothyng with the prolocutor who bad him styll forme an argumēt in Inglyssh or els to hold his peace.

Than sayd fyllpot. Yow haue sore dy­sapoynted me thus sodenly to goo frō your former order / but I wyll accom­plysh your commandement leauyng myne oracyon a part And I wyll co­me to my argumētis / the which as wel as so sodē a warnyng wyll serue I wil [Page] make in Inglyssh. But before I bryng furth any argumēt I will in one word declare what maner of presens I doo dysallowe in the sacrament to the intēt the hearers may the better vnderstand to what end and effect myne argumentis shall tende: not to denye vtterly the presence of christ in hys sacramētis tre­wely ministryd accordyng to his insti­tucyon / but only to denye that grosse and carnall presens which yow of this hows haue allredy substrybed vnto to be in the sacrament of the altar contrary to the truth and manyfest meanyng of the scrypturys / That by transsubstā cyacyon of the sacramētall breade and wyne christis naturall body shuld by the vertu of the wordis pronownced by the pryst be conteyned and included vnder the formis or accydentys of breade and wyne. Thys kynd of presens y­magyned by men / I doo denye / quoth fyllpot / And agaynst thys I wyll rea­sō: But before he could make an end of that he wold haue sayd he was inter­rupted of the prolocutor / and commanded to descēd to his argumēt. At whos [Page] vniust importunite fyllpot beyng offē ­and thincking to purchase hym a re­medy therfor / he fell down vp on his kneys before the earles and lords wh­ych were there present / beyng a gret nomber / wherof some were of the quenis cowncell / beseching thē that he mi­ght haue libertie to prosecute his argumentis with owt interrupcyon of any mā: the which was gētilly grāted hym of the lordis. But the ꝓlocutor puttīg in vre a point of the practyse of prela­tis / wold not condescend thereunto / but styll cryed hold your peace or els make a short argumēt. I am abowt it / quoth fyllpot / yff yow wold lett me alone. But fyrst I must nedis axe a question of my respondent (who was. D. ched­sey) concernyng a word or twayne of your supposycion / that is / of the sacra­ment of the altare / what he meanyth thereby / and whether he take as so­me of the awncyent wryters doo / termyng the lordis supper the sacrament of the altar / becaus it is a sacrament of that liuely sacrifyce which christ of­fered for our synnis vp on the altar of [Page] the crosse and becaus that chrystis body crucifyed for vs was that blody sacrifyee / which the blood shedyng of all the beastis offered vp on the altare in the old lawe dyd prefigurate and si­gnifie vnto vs. And in signifycacyon thereoff / the old writers sometime doo call the sacramēt of the body and blood of chryst / among other namis which thei astrybe thereunto / the sacrament of the altare and that ryght well. But yff yow take it other wyse / as for the sacrament of the altare which now a dayes is made of lime and stone and hangen ouer the same / ād to be all one with the sacrament of the masse / as it is at this present in many placis / chedscy than I wyll direct myne argumentis accor­ding as your answer shall gyue me oc­casyon. Than made D. chedsey this answer that in theyr supposicyon thei to­ke the sacrament of the altar and the sacrament of the masse to be all one.Fillpot speake­th play­ne In­glyssh. Than quoth fyllpott / I wyl speake playne Inglyssh / as Master prolocu­tor wylleth me / and make a short resolucyon therof / that that sacrament [Page] of the altare which ye reken to be all one with the masse / onys iustly abolis­shed and now put in full vse agayne / is no sacrament at all / neyther is christ in any wise presēt in yt: And this his saīg he offered to proue before the hole ho­ws / yff they lysted to call him thereun­to / and lykewyse offered to vouch the same before the quenis grace and hyr most honorable cowncell / before the face of vi. of the best lernyd men of the hows of the contrary opinyon / he refused none. And yff I shall not be able / quoth he / to mainteyne by gods word that I haue sayd / and confownd thos vi. which shall take vp on thē to with stand me in this point / let me be bur­ned with as many fagots as be in lon­don / before the court gates. This he vttered with a gret vehemency of spirite. At this / the prolocutor with diuers o­ther / were very moch offended / demā ­ding of him whether he wyst what he said or no. Yea / quoth fyllpott I wote well what I say: defieryng no mann to be offended with his sayng / for that he spake no more than by gods word he [Page] was able to proue. And praised be god quoth he / that the quenis grace hath grāted vs off this hows (as our prolo­cutor hath informed vs) that we may frely vtter our consciences in thes ma­ters of controuersie in religyon.Here weston confu­teth fylpot mi­ghtilie. And therfor I will speake here my consciēs frely / grownded vp on gods holy word for the truth: Albeyt some off yow he­re present mislyke the same. Than dy­uers of the hows besydys the prolocu­tor / tawnted and reprehended hym / for speakyng so vnfaryngly agaynst the sacrament of the masse / And the prolocutor sayd he was mad and threatened him / that he wold send hym to prison yff he wold not cease his speaking.

Than fylpot seing him selff thus abu­sed / and not permitted with free lyber­tie to declare his mynd / fell in to an ex­clamacyon / castyng his eyes vp towardis the heauyn and said / O lord what a world is this / O lord what meaneth this world / that the truth of thy holy word may not be spoken and abidden by? And for very sorow and heuynes the tearis trykled owt of his eyes. Aff­ther [Page] this / the prolocutor being mouth by so­me that wore abowt him / was content that he shuld make an argumēt so that he wold be viefe therein.Fillpot I will be as brefe / quoth filpot / as I mai cōueniētli be in vttrīg all that I haue to saie. And fyrst I wil beginn to grownd mine ar­gumentis vp on the auctorities of scriptures / where vp on all the bylding of our faith ought to be grownded. And affter I shall cōfirme the same by aun­cient doctores of the church. And I ta­ke the occasiō of my first argumēt owt of the xxiiij. of Mathew of the sayng of the angell to the iij. Maryes seking christ at the sepulchre saing / he is risen / he is not here: ād in. s. luke in the xxiij. chap. the angell asketh them / whi thei sought him that liueth amōg the dead? Like wise the scripture testifieth that christ is rysen / ascended in to heauē and sitteth on the right hand of the father: all the which is spoken of his naturall body / ergo it is not on earth included in the sacrament. I wyll confyrme this yet moie effectually by the saing of [Page] chryst in the xvi. of. s. Iohn. I came saith christ / from my father in to the world / and now I leaue the world and goo a way to my father. The which coming / and going / he ment of his naturall bo­dy / therefor we may affirme thereby that it is not now in the world. But I looke here / quoth he / to be answered with a blīd distinction of visibly and inuisibly / that he is visibly departed in his humanite / but inuisibly he remay­neth not withstonding in the sacramēt: but that answer I prouēt my sylff that with more expedicyon I may descend to the pyth of myne argumentes wherof I haue a dosen to propose / and wyll proue that no such distinccyon maye take awaye the force of that argument / by the answer which his disciples gaue vnto christ speaking thes wordes / now thow speakyst plainely and vtteryst furth no prouerbe: which wordis. s. cy­ryll interpreting fayth that christ spa­ke with owt any maner of impedy of obscure speach / And therefor I con­clude hereby / thus: that yff chryst spa­ke plainely and with owt parable / (as [Page] mē say) saing / I leaue / the world now / and goo a waye to my father / thā that obscure / darke and imperceptyble pre­sens of christes natural body to remayne in the sacrament vp on earth inuysibly contrary to the playne wordis of chryst / ought not to be allowed: For nothyng can be sayd more vncerten / or more parabolycall and vnsensyble thā so to saye. Here now wyll I attēd what ye will answer / and so descend to the cō fyrmacyon of all that I haue sayd by awncyent writers.thed seys an­swer to fyllpot. Than D. ched sey recityng his argument in such order as it was made / made āswer seuaerlly to euery part thereoff / on this wise First to the saing of the angell / that christ is not here / And why seke ye the liuyng among the deade / he answered that thes sayngis perteined nothyng to the presens of christes natural body in the sacrament / but that thei were spoken of christes body being in the sepulchre whan the iij. maryes thought hym to haue bene in the graue stil. And ther for the angell sayd / why doo ye seke him that liuyth among the dead. And [Page] to the auctorite of the xvi-of Iohn where christ sayth / Now I leaue the world and goo to my father / he ment that of his ascensyon / and so lykewyse dyd ci­ryl / interpreting the saing of the disci­ples that knewe playnely that christ wold visibly ascend in to heauyn / but that yet doth not exclude his inuisible presens of his naturall body in the sa­crament. For s. Chrysostome writing to the peple of Antioch doth affirme the same / comparing Helyas and christ to gether / and helias clooke vnto Christis flessh. Helias / quoth he / whan he was taken vp in the fiery charet / lefft his clooke behind him vnto his disci­ple helyseus / But christ ascendyng in to heauyn toke his flessh with him / and lefft also his flessh behynd him. Wher­by we may ryght well gather that christis flessh is visibly astended in to hea­uen and inuisibly abydeth still in the sacramēt of the altare.fyllpot replied. To this answer / fyllpot replyed / and sayd that he infor­ced not his argument vp on the sayng of the angell / (Christ is rysen and is not here) / but toke his beginnyng the­reby [Page] to ꝓcede as before is rehersed: to the ꝓces wherof yow haue not thoro­wli answered / for I procedyd further / as thus / he is rysē / ascēded ād sitteth at the right hād of god the father ergo he is not remaining on the earth. Neither is your āswer to ciryl / by me alleaged / sufficient: but by and by I will returne to your interpretacyō of cyryll and more playnely declare the same / affter th­at I haue first refelled the auctorite of chrysostom which is one of your chefe principles that yow alledge to make for your grosse carnall presens in the sacrament / the which being well weyd and vnderstād perteineth nothing the­reunto. At that the prolocutor starcled that one of the chefe pillers in this po [...]t shuld be ouertrhowē / and therfor recy­ted the sayd auctoritie in laten first / ād affter ward Inglisshed thesame / willīg all that were presēt to note that saīg of chrisostō / which he thought inuincible on theyr syde. But I shall make it ap­peare / quoth fylpot / by and by to make lytle for your purpos. And as he was abowt to declare his mynd in that be­halff [Page] / the prolocutor did interrupt him as he dyd allmost continually / where with fyllpot not beyng content / sayd / Fillpot is inteerupted. master prolocutor thinketh that he is in a sophistrye scole where he knoweth right well the maner is that whan the respōdent ꝑceiueth that he is like to be inforced with an argument to the wh­ich he is not able to answer thā he doth what he cā with cauyllacyon and interrupciō to dryue him frō the same. This sayng of fylpot was yll lyked of the ꝓ­locutor and his adherentis: and the ꝓ­locutor sayd that fillpot could bryng nothing to auoide that autorite but his own vayne ymaginaciō. Heare / quoth fyllpot / and affterward iudge. For I wyll doo in this as in all other aucto­rityes yow shall charge me with in re­fellyng any of my argumentis that I haue to prosecute answering eyther vnto the same bi sufficiēt auctorities of scripture / or els by some other testimo­ni of like auctoritie / ād not of mine own ymaginaciō: the which yff I doo / I wil it to be of no credyte. And concernyng the sayng of chrysostom / I haue ij. wayes to beate hym from your pur­pose [Page] / the one owt of scripture / the other owt of chrisostome him selff in the place here by yow alleaged. First where he semeth to saye that christ ascending / toke his flessh with him / and lefft also his flessh behind him / truth it is: for we all doo confesse and byleue that christ toke on him our humane nature in the virgī maryes wombe / and thorow his pas­sion in the same hath vnyted vs to his flessh / and thereby are we becōne one flessh with him / so that chrysostom mi­ght therefor ryght well saye / that christ ascending toke his flessh which he re­ceiuid of the virgine mary / a way with him: And also lefft his flesh behind him / which are we / that be his elect in this world / which are the membres of christ / and flessh of his flessh: as very aptli. s. Paul to the ephesians in the iiij. chapter doth testifye sayng we are fles­sh of christes flessh and bones of his bo­nis / And yf percase any man will affir­me that he intreateth there of the sacrament so that this interpretacyon cā not so aptly be applyed vnto hym in that place / than wyll I yet interprete chry­sostom [Page] a nother way by him sylff. For in that place in fewe lynes before thoo words which were here no rather redd are thes wordes red / that christ affter he ascended in to heauyn lefft vnto vs indewed with his sacramētis / his fles­sh in misteryes / that is sacramentally. And that mistycall flessh / christ leaueth as well to his church in the sacrament of baptisme as in the sacramentall bre­ade and wyne. And that. s. Paul iustly doth wytnes / saing / as many of vs as are baptysed in christ haue put vp on vs Chryst. And thus yow may vnder­stand that s. chrysostome maketh noth­ing for your carnall and grosse presen­ce in the sacrament as yow wrongful­ly take hym.Pye ād weston rownd to ge­ther. Now in thys meane whi­le master pye rownded the prolocutor in the eare to put fyllpot to silence and to appoynt some other / mystrustyng lest he wold shrowdly shake their car­nall presence in conclusyon / yff he held on long / seing in the beginnyng he ga­ue one of theyr chefe fowndacyōs such a pluck.weston. Than the prolocutor sayd to fyllpot / that he had reasoned sufficien­tly [Page] inough / and that some other shuld now supplye his romth. Where with he was not well content / saing / whi syr I haue a dussen argumentes concer­ning this matter to be proposed and I haue not yet searse ouergone my fyrst argument / for I haue not brought in any confirmacyon thereof owt of any awncyent wryter / whereoff I haue for the same purpose many / being hether­to still letted by your offt interrupting of me.Fillpot is com­māded to silēce note th­is geare Well / quoth the prolocutor / yow shall speake no more now and I com­mād yow to hold your peace. Yow perceyue / quoth fyllpot / that I haue stuff ynough for yow / and am able to with­stand your fals supposicyon and ther­for yow cōmand me to silence.Fillpot is threatened to prison. A good solucyō for all his argumences Iff yow will not gyue place / ꝙ the ꝓlocutor / I will send yow to prysō. This is not / ꝙ fyllpot / according to your ꝓmes made in this hows / nor yet accordīg to your bragg made at pawlys crosse that mē shuld be answered in this disputacion to what so euer they cā say / Syns yow wyll not suffer me of a dussen argumē tis to ꝓsecute one. Thā M. pie toke vpon him to ꝓmes that he shuld be āswe­red [Page] a nother daie. Filpot seyng he mig­ht not ꝓcede on his purpos beīg there with iustli offēded / ēnded: saing thus: a fight of yow here / which heiherto haue lurked in corners and dissembled with god ād the world / are now gathered to gether to suppres the sīcere truth of gods holy word / ād to set furth eueri false de which by the catholike doctrine of the scripture / ye are not able to mayn­teyne.M. elmar. Than stepped furth master el­mer chaplin to the duke of suffolk wh­om master moreman toke vp on him to answer / agaīst whom master elmer obyected diuers and sondry auctory­tyes / for the confyrmyng of the argu­ment he toke the day before in hand to proue that (ousia) in the sentence of Theodorete brought in by master cheyny / must nedes signifie substance and not accidence / whos lerned reasons and clerkly approbacions becaus thei were all grownded and brought owt of the greke / I doo passe them ouer for that they want theyr grace in In­glissh / And also theyr propre vnder­stondyng. But his allegacyons so in­combred master moremā that he desie­ryd [Page] a day to ouer vewe thē / for at that instant he was with owt a conuenient answer.more­mā de­siereth a daye to ima­gine so­me crafty shift. Than dyd the prolocutor call master haddō deane of exceter and chaplyn to the duke of suff. who pro­secuted theodoretis auctoritie in confir­myng master elmers argumēt: to whō D. watson toke vp on him to giue an­swer / who affter long talk was so con­fownded that he was not able to āswer to a certen word (Misterium / watson cōfownded by. M. haddon) but for as moch as he semed to dowt there­in / master haddon toke owt of his bo­som a latyne aucthor to confirm his saing / and shewed the same to master watson / asking hym whether he thou­ght the translacyon to be trewe or that the prynter were in any fawt.watson for a bare shi­fft put­teth a fawt in the printer. There may be a fawt in the prīter / quoth watson / for I am not rememberyd of this word. Than dyd master haddon take owt of his bosome a greke boke / whe­rein he shewed furth with his fyngar the same wordes which master watson could not denye. His argumentis fur­ther I omyt to declare at large becaus thei were for the most part in greke [Page] abowt the bulting owt of the trewe significacyon of (ousia). Than stept furth master perne and in argument / M. perne. made declaracyon of his mind against trans­substanciacyon and confirmed the saings and auctorityes alledged by master elmer and master haddon: to whō the prolocutor āswered / saing I moch meruell / master perne / that yow will say thus / for so moch as on friday last yow substribed to the contrary. Which his saing / master elmer did mislyke / saing to the prolocutor that he was to blame so to reprehēd any mā / partly for that thys hows / quod he / is an hows of free libertye for euery mann to speake his conscyens / weston praiseth theyr lerning to flat­ter they but he answe­reth not ther ar­gumen­tes. and partly for that yow promised yesterday that not withstonding any man had substrybed / yet he shulde haue free libertie to speake his mind. And for that the nyght did approch and the time was spent / the prolocutor gyuing them prayses for their lerning dyd yet not with stondyng cōclude that all reasonīg sett a part / the order of the holy rhurch must be receiuid ād al thinges must be ordered thereby.

[Page]On Fryday the xxvii. of october / D. weston the prolocutor dyd first propo­wnd the matter shewyng that the cōuo­cacyon had spent ij. dayes in disputaciō allreadi abowt one onely Doctor / whi­ch was theodorete / and abowt one on­ly word which was (ousia.) Yet were thei comne the thyrd day to answer all thinges that could be obiected / so that thei wold shortly put owt theyr argu­mentes.M. haddon and watsō. So master haddon deane of exceter / desiered leaue to appose master watson / which with ij. other moo that is morgane and harpsfeld / was appoī ­ted to answere. Master haddon demanded this of him / whether any substance of breade or wyne dyd remayne affter the consecracyon: Than master watson asked of him agayne / whether he thou­ght there to be a reall presens of gods body or no? Master haddō sayd it was not mete nor orderlyke / that he which was appointed respondēt / shuld be op­ponent: and he whos dutye was to ob­yect / shuld answer. Yet master watson a long while wold not agree to answer but that thing first granted hym. At [Page] last an order was sett / and master had­don had leaue to goo forward with his argument. Than he proued by theodo­retes wordes / a substance of breade and wine to remaine. For thes are his wordis / the same thei were before the sanctificacyon / thei are after. Master wat­son / said that theodorete ment not the same substance but the same essence / whereupon thei were dryuen agayne vnto the discussyng of the greke word (ousia) and master haddon proued it to meane a substance / both by the etymo­logy of the word and by the wordis of the doctor. First / quoth he / it cometh of the participle / (on / ) which descendeth of the verbe / sum. And so the nowne (ousia). Than master watson answered that it had not that significacyon only. Than master haddon prouyd that it must medes so signifie in that place and he axed / whan the bread and wy­ne became symbolys: whereunto an­swer was made / affter the consecra­cyon and not before. Than gathe­red master haddon this reason / [Page] owt of his auctor: The same thing / say­th theodorete / that the breade and wy­ne were before they were symbolys / the same thei remaine stil in nature ād substance / affter they are ssymbolys: breade and wine they were before / therefor breade and wyne they are affter Than master watson fell to the deniall off the auctor and sayd he was a nesto­ryan:watson is driuē to a shamefull shifft to denie the auc­tor / wh­an he can not answer And he desiered that he myght answer ts master cheyny / which stode by / for that he was more mete to dispute in the matter / becaus he had gran­ted and substrybed vnto the reall pre­sens. Master cheyny desiered pacience of the honorable mē to heare him tru­sting that he shuld so open the matter that the veryte shuld appeare: ꝓtesting furthermore / that he was no obstyna­te nor stubburne man / but wold be cō ­formable to all reason.M. cheyny. And yff thei by theyr lernyng / which he acknowlegyd to be moch more than hys / could an­swer his reasons / that than he wold be rulyd by them and saye as they sayd / for he wold be no auctor of schisme nor hold any thyng cōtrary to the holy mother [Page] the church which is christis spow­se. D. Weston liked this well and cō ­mended him highly / saing that he was a well lerned man / and a sober mā and well execused in all good lerning and in the doctors / and finalli a man mete / for hys knowlege / to dispute in that place / I pray yow heare hym / quoth he Than master cheyny desyeryd such as there were present to pray ij.M. chenys prayer. wordys with hym vnto god / and to say (vincat veritas) let the veryte take place and haue the vyctory. And all that were pre­sent cryed with a lowd voyce / vincat veritas / vincat veritas. Than sayd doc­tor weston to him / that was hipocryti­call. Men may better say / quoth he / vicit veritas / Truth hath goten the victory. Master cheyny sayd agayne yff he wold gyue him leaue he wold bryng it to that point that he myght well say soo.M. cheny and watson. Than he disputed with master watson affter this sort / yow sayd that ma­ster haddon was vnmete to dispute be­caus he granteth not the naturall and reall presens / but I sape yow are moch more vnmete to answer / becaus yow [Page] take a way the substāce of the sacramēt Master watson said he had substribed to the reall presens and shuld not goo a waye from that. So sayd weston also and the rest of the pristis / in so moch that off a gret while he could haue no leaue to say any more / till the lordis spake and willed that he shuld be hard. Than he told them what he ment by his subscribing to the reall presence / farr other wise than they supposed: so than he went forward and prosecuted master haddons argument in prouing that (ousia) was a substance / vsyng the same reason that master haddon dyd before him / and whan he hadd receyued the same answer also that was made to master haddon / he sayd it was but a lewde refuge / whan they could not an­swer / to denye the auctor. Yet he pro­uyd the auctor to be a catholyk doctor / and this proued / he cōfirmid his saing (of the nature and substāce) further: for the similitude of theodorete is this / ꝙ he. As the tokins of christes body and blood affter the inuocacion of the prist [Page] doo change theyr namys and yet con­tinewe the same substance / So the bo­dy of christ affter his ascēsyon / changed his name and was called immortall / yet had / it his former fasshon / fygure and cyrcumscripcyon / and to speake at one word / the same substance off his body. Therfor / sayd master cheyny / yff in the former part of the similitude / yow denye the same substance to continew / than in the latter part of the similitude which agreth with it / I will denye the body of christ / affter his ascensyon to haue the former nature and substance: but that were a gret herisy / therfor it is also a gret herisy to take a way the substance of breade and wyne affter the sanctificacyon. Than was master watson enforcyd to say that the substance of the body in the former part of the similitude brought in by him / dyd sig­nifye quantite and other accidencys of the sacramentall tokens which be sene / and not the very substance of the same. And therfor theodoret sayth / (que vi­dentur.) et ce, that is thos [Page] thinges which be sene for according to philosophy / the accidentes of thingys be sene / and not the substances.M. cheny appea­led to the lor­des. Than master cheyny appealed to the honora­ble menn and desiered that they shuld gyue no credyte vnto them in so saing / for yff they shuld so thīck / as thei wold teach / affter theyr lordshyppys had ridden xl. mylys on horseback / as theyr besynes doo sometyme require / they shuld not be able to saye at night that thei sawe theyr horses all the day but only the color of theyr horsys / and by his reason christ must goo to stole and lerne of Aristotle to speake. For whan he sawe nathanaell vnder the figg tree yff Aristotle had stand by / he wold haue sayd / no christ / thow sawest not him but the color of him / Affter this / watson sayd / what yff it were grāted that theodorete was on theyr side / where as they had one of that opinyon / there were an hundreth on the other syde.morgā is called for to help at a pinch. Than the prolocutor called for master mor­gan to help. And he sayd that Theodorete did not more than he might laufullly doo. For first he granted the truth / [Page] and than / for feare of such as were not fully instructed in the fayth / he spake (enigmaticos) that is couertly and in a misteri / And this was lawfull for him to doo. For first he granted the truth and called them the body of christ and the blood off christ / than affterward he semed to gyue somewhat to the sen­ces and to reason. but that theodoret was of the same mīd that thei were of / the wordis folowyng quoth he / doo declare. For that which foloweth is a cause off that which went before / and therfor he sayth (The immortalyte & ce.morgā is taken with fa­ls allea­ging of the text) whereby it doth appeare that he ment the dyuyne nature and not the huma­ne. Than was morgan taken with misalleagyng of the text. For the booke had not this word (for) for the greke word dyd rather signifye (truly / ) and not / (for / ) so that it myght manifestly appeare that it was the begynning of a newe matter and not a sentence ren­dering a cause of that he had sayd be sore. Than was it sayd by watson agay­ne / suppose that theodorete be with yow / which is one that we neuer hard [Page] off printed / but iij. or iiij. yearis agoo. Yet he is but one / And what is one a­gaynst the hole consent of the church. Affter thys master cheyny inferrid / th­at not only theodorete was of that my­nd / that the substance of breade ād wi­ne doo remayne / but diuers other also and specially Ireneus / who makyng mencyon of this sacrament / sayth thus whan the cupp which is mingled with wyne / and the breade that is made / doo receyue the word of god / it is made the thankis gyuing of the body and blood of chryst / by the which the substance of our flessh is norisshed and doth cōsyst. Yff the thankis geuing doo norissh our body / than there is some substance be­sydes christes body. To the which rea­son / both watson and morgan answe­red / that (ex quibus / ) by the which / in the sentence of Ireneus were referred to the next antecedent / that is to the body and blood of christ / ād not to the wyne / which is in the cupp and the breede that is made. master cheiny replied th­at it was not the body of christ / which norisshed our bodyes. And let it be th­at [Page] christes flessh norissh to immortalite yet it doth not answer that argument / although it be trewe / no more thā that answere which was made to my alle­gacyon owt of. s. Paull / The breade which we breake et ce. with certē other like / whereūto yow answered that breade was not takē there in his ꝓper significacyon / but for that that it had bene: Nomore thā the rodd of Aaron which was takē for the serpēt / becaus it had bene a serpēt. Affter this master cheny brought in hisichius and vsed the same reason that he dyd of the custome of burning of Symbolys / and he axed thē what was burnt. Master watson sayd we must not inquyre nor axe / but yff there were any fawte / impute it to ch­rist.Harps­feld called in to help watson Than sayd master cheiny / where of came thos asshys / not of a substance? or can any substance ryse of accyden­ce? Than was master harpysfeld called led in / to see what he could say in the matter. who told a fayre tale of the omnipotency of god / and of the imbe­cillitye ād weakenes of mās reasō / not able to atteyne to godly thinges. And he sayd it was cōuenient that what so [Page] euer we sawe / felt / ortasted / not to trust our sensys / And he told a tale owt of is goodly geare / as if it were­owt of the le­gend of lyes. cypryane how a woman sawe the sa­crament burnyng in hir cofer / and that which burnid there / quod harpysfeld / burnyth here and becomyth asshhes. but what that was that burnt he could not tell. But master cheyny contyne­wed styll and forced thē with this que­stion / what it was that was burnt? It was eyther / sayd he / the substance of breade or els the substance of the body of christ / which were to moch absurdy te to grant. At length they abswered that it was a miracle:weston wold knowe wheth­er thei were suficientli answe­red whā he nor his had not answered ond ar­gumēt. where at master cheyny smiled and sayd that he could than / say no more. Than D. weston ax­ed of the company there whether thos men were sufficiently answered or not certen prystes cryed yea / but thei were not hard at all / for the great multitude which cryed No / No: which crye was hard and noysed allmost to the end of powlys. Whereat D. Weston beyng moch moued / answered bitterly that he axed not the iudgement of the rude multytude and vnlerned peple / but of [Page] thē which were of the hows. Thā ared he of master haddō ād his felows whether thei wold answer them other iij. dayes. Haddon / cheiny and elmer sayd no. But the archdeacon of winchester stode vp ād sayd that thei shuld not say but they shuld be answered / ād though all other dyd refuse to answer / yet he wolt not but offered to answer them all / one affter a nother:mark mestōs impu­dency. with whos profer the prolocutor was not contentid / but rayled on him and said that he shuld goo to bedlem. To whom the arch-deacon soberly made this answer: that he was more worthy to be sent thether who vsed him selff so ragingly in that disputacyon with owt any indifferent-equalite.a strōg argu­ment of weston, where he is not able to answer he wold owt fa- Than rose D. Weston vp and sayd / There hath all the company sub­scrybed to our article / sauing only thes menn / which yow see What theyr rea­sons are / yow haue hard. We haue an­sweryd them iij. Dayes / op on promes (as it pleased him to descant / with owt truth / for no such promes was made) that thei shuld answer vs agayne / as long: As the order of disputacyon doth [Page] require: and yff they be able to defend their doctrine / let them so doo. Thā ma­ster elmer stode vp ād ꝓued how a vai­ne a man weston was: for he affyrmed that thei neuer promised to dispute / but only to open and testifie to the world their conscyences: for whan thei were required to subscribe thei refused / and sayd thei wold shewe good reasōs wh­ich mouyd their consciences that thei could not with their consciēces subscri­be / as thei had partly allredy done and were able to doo more sufficiētly. Therfor / quoth he / it hath bene yll called a disputacyon / and thei worthy to be blamet that were the auctors of that na­me. For we ment not to dispute / nor now meane not to answer / before our argumētis / quoth he / which we haue to propownd / be soluted according as it was appointed. For by answeryng we shuld but incomber our seluys and profite nothing / sins the matter is all­redy decreyd vp on and determined / what so euer we shall proue or dispute to the contrary.

[Page]On monday folowyng beyng the xxx. of october / weston the prolocutor deman­ded of Iohn fyllpot archdecon of win­chester whether he wold answer in the questions before propowned / to th­eir obieccyons or no? To whom he ma­de this answer that he wold willingly so doo / yff according to theyr former determinacyon / thei wold fyrst answer sufficiently to some of his argumentie as thei had promised to doo: whereoff he had a dosen and not halff of the first yet decyded: And yff thei wold answer fully and sufficiently but to one of his argumentis / he promised that he wold answer all the obyeccyons that they shuld bring. Than the prolocutor bad hym propownd his argument and it shuld be resolutely answered / by one of them / whereunto master morgan was appoynted.fylpot ād morgan. Vp on wedēsday last / quo­th he / I was inforced to silēce before I had beaten owt halff of myne argu­ment / the somme where of was this / as was gatheryd by the iust context of the scripture / that the humane body of [Page] christ was ascended into heauen and placyd on the right hand of god the fa­ther / wherefor it cold not be situate vp on earth in the sacramēt of the altare inuisible affter the Imaginacyon of man. The argument was denyed by morgane. For the profe whereoff / fyll­pot sayd that this was it that he had to confirme his first argumēt / yff he my­ght haue bene fufferid the other daye: as thus. One selfe and same nature / ꝙ he / receiuith not in it selff any thing th­at is contrary to yt selfe / but the body of christ is an humane nature distinct from the deitye / ād is a proper nature of yt selff / ergo / it can not receyue any thing that is contrary to that nature and that varieth from it selfe but bo­dyly to be present and bodyly to be ab­sent / to be one earth ād to be in heauyn and all at one present tyme / be thinges contrary to the nature of an humane body / ergo it can not be sayd of the hu­mane body of christ / that the selff same body is both in heauē and also in earth at one instant / either visybly or inuisi­bly. Morgan denyed the maior / that [Page] is the first part of the argument. The which fylpot vowched owt of vigilius an awneyent is a newe euasion inuētēd by mor­gā who dareth not plainely de­nie vigilius auctoritye / but vn­der a color. But morgan ca­uilled / that it was no scripture and bad him proue the same owt of scrypture. Filpot said he could also soo doo / and right well diduce the same owt of. s. Paul / who sayth that chryst is like vnto vs in all pointes / except synne / and therefor / like as one of our bodyes can not receyue in it selff any thing contrary to the nature of a body as to be in paulis church and at westminster at one instant or to be at london visibly / and at lyncoln inuisibly at one tyme. for that is so contrary to the nature of a body and of all creaturys that as dy­dimus ād basilius doo affyrme / that an inuisyble creature / as an angell / cā not be at one tyme in diuers placis: where for he concluded / that the body of ch­rist might not be in moo places than in one / which is in heauin and so conse­quently / not to be conteyned in the sa­crament of the altare. To this the pro­locutor toke vp on him to āswer / saing that it was not trew that christ was lyke [Page] vnto vs in all pointes / as fylpot to­ke yt / except synn:weston. answe­reth / wisely / I warant yow / ād pythily For that christ was not conceyued by the sede of man as we be. To the which fylpot replied that christes concepcyon was prophe­cyed before by the angell / to be super­naturall / but after he had receiued our nature / by the operacion of the holy goost in the virgins womb / he became affterwardes in all pointes like vnto vs except synn.morga- Than morgan inferred that this saing of paul dyd not playnely proue his purpose. Well quoth fyll­pot / I perceyue yow doo answer but by cauillacion: Yet am I not destitute of other scriptures to cōfirme my first argument / allthough yow refuse the probacion of so awncient and catholy­ke a doctor as vigilius is. S. Peter in the sermō that he made in the third of the actes / making mencion of christ / saith thes wordes / whom heauen must receyue / vntill the consummacion of all thinges / et ce. Which wordes are spo­ken of his humanitie. No wyff heauen must hold christ / than can he not be he­re on earth in the sacrament as is pre­tended [Page] Than morgā / laughing at this and geuing no direct answer a tall / harpisfeld stode vp which is one of the bisshop of londons chaplins and toke vp on him to answer to the saing of. s. Pe­ter / and demandid of filpot whether he wold necescitate / that is / of necessitye force / christ to any place or no? Fylpot sayd that he wold no notherwise force christ of necessitie to any place / than he is taught by the wordes of the holy goost / which sownd thus that christes humane bodie must abyde in heauen vntill the daye of iudgemēt / as I rehersed owt of the chapter before mencio­ned.harps­feld. Why / quoth harpisfeld / doo yow not knowe that christ is god omnipo­tent? Yes / sayd fylpot / I knowe that ri­ght well neyther dowt I any thyng at all of his omnipotency / but of christes omnipotency what he may doo is not our questyon / but rather what he doth I knowe he may make a stone in the wall / a man / yff he lyst / and also that he may make moo worldes / but doth he therfor soo?

[Page]It were no good consequent so to con­clude / he may doo this or that / therfor he doth it. We must byleue so moch of his omnipotēcy / as he by his word ha­th declared and taught vs: but by hys word he hath taught vs that the hea­uens must receyue his body vntill the daie of dome: therfor we ought so to bileue. Why / quoth the prolocutor / than yow wyll put christ in prison in heauin To the which fylpot āswered doo yow reken heauen to be a pryson?weston. god grāt vs all to come to that prisō. Affter this harpisfeld inferred that this word (o­portet) in.the pro­locutor and fyl­por. s. peter which dyd signifie in Inglissh / (must / ) dyd not import so moch as I wold inferr of necessitye. as by other placis of scripture it may appea­re / where (oportet) is as well as there as in the first to timothy where paul saith / (oportet episcopum esse vnius vxoris virum / ) a bisshop must be the husband of one wife / here quoth he / (oportet / ) must. doth not import such a necescytie but that he that neuer was maryed mai be a bisshop. To this fyl­pot said againe that the placis were not [Page] like which he went abowt to compare. which thing ought specially to be ob­serued in conferring of wordis / or scriptures to gether. For that in the place bi him alleaged. s. paull doth declare of what qualitye a bisshop ought to be. but in the other. s. peter teacheth vs the place where christ must necessarily be vntyll the end of the world / which we ought to bileue to be trewe. And this comparyson of this word (oportet / ) doth no more answer myne argument than yff I wold say of yow / now being here (oportet te hic esse) yow must ne­dis be here (which importeth such necessitye for the tyme / that yow can no no­therwyse be but here) ād yet yow wold goo abowt in wordis to auoyde thys necessitye with a nother (oportet) or a nother / (must / ) in a nother sentence as this / (oportet te esse virū bonum) yow must be a good man. where (oportet) doth not in very dede conclude ani such necessitie but that yow may be an yll man. Thus yow may see that your an­swer is not sufficyent / and as it were no answer to my argument. Than the [Page] prolocutor brought in a nother (opor­tet) to help this matter yff it myght be sayng / what say yow to this (oportet hereses esse / ) must herisyes nedis be therfor bicaus of this word (oportet?) no truly / quoth fylpot / it can not other wyse be / yff yow will add that which foloweth immediately vp on thos wordis of paul / that is (vt qui electi sūt ma­nifestentur) that is / that such as be the elect of god may be manifested ād knowen. Why / quoth the prolocutor / the tyme hath bene that no heresyes were. I knowe no such tyme / quoth fillpott / for syns the time of Abell and Cayn herisies haue bene and than begann thei. Thā sayd the prolocutor / wil yow now answer morgan an argument s [...]? I will / quoth fyllpott / yff I may first be answered of myne argument any thing according to truth and to lerning What / quoth the prolocutor / yow will neuer be answered. How I am answe­red / quoth fyllpott / let all men that are here present iudge: and specially such as be lerned / and with what cauilla­cyons yow haue dalyed with me. First [Page] to the awncyent auctoritye of vigilius yow haue answered nothing at all / but only denieng it to be scripture that he saith. Secondarily tot he saing of s. Pe­ter in the actis ye haue answered thus / demanding of me / whether I wold ke­pe christ in prison or no. Let all mē now iudge yff this be a sufficient answer or no. Than stode morgan vp agayn / and axed filpott whether he wold be ruled by the vniuersall church or no?Mor­gan. Yes / quoth he / yff it be the trewe catholike church. And fith yow speake so moch of the church I wold fayne that yow wold declare what the church is.The church. The church / quoth morhan / is diffused and dispersed through owt the hole world. That is a diffuse diffinicion / quoth fyllpot / for I am yet as vncerten as I was before what yow meane by the church. But I knowlege no church but that which is grownded and fownded on gods word as S. Paull saith / vp on the fowndacyon of the prophetis and apostles / ād on on the scripturys off god. What / quoth moreman / was the scripture before the church? Yea [Page] quoth fylpot / More­mā / and fylpot. But I will proue Nay / quoth moreman / and I will beginne at christis tyme. The church of christ was before any scripture writton. For Mathewe was the fyrst that wrote the go­spell abowt a dosen yearys affter christ ergo the church was before the scripture. To whom filpot answeryng / denied his argument. Which whan moremā cowld not ꝓue / filpot shewed that his argument was (elechus) or a fallace / that is a deceyuable argument. For he toke the scripture onli to be that which is wrytton by men in letters / where as in very dede all prophecy vtteryd by the spiryte of god / was cownted to be scripture before it was wrytton in pa­per and Inck. For that it was wryttō in the hartis and grauen in the mindis yea and inspyred in the mowthys of good men and off christis apostles by the spirite of christ: As the salutacion of the Angell was the scripture of ch­rist and the word of god before it was wryton. At that moreman cryed / fye / fye: wondring that the scripture of god shuld be cownted scrypture before it [Page] was writton / and affirmed that he had no knowlege that so sayd. To whō fill­pot answerid that concerning knowle­ge in this behalff / for the triall of the truth abowt the questions in controuersy / he wold wyssh hym selff no worse matched than with moreman. At the which saing / the prolocutor was gre­uosly offended / saing that it was arro­gantly spokē of him / that wold compare with such a worshipfull lerned man as moremā was / being him selff a mā vnlerned / yea a mad man meter to be sent to bedlem than to be a mong such a sort of lernyd and graue men as the­re were / and a man that neuer wold be answered / and that trobled the whole hows: And therefor he dyd command hym that he shuld come no more in to the hows demanding of the hows whether thei wold agree thereupon or no. To whom a gret nōber answered Yea. Than sayd fylpot agayne that he mi­ght thinck him selff happy that was owt of that company. Affter this morgan rose vp and rownded the prolocu­tor in the eare. And than agayne the [Page] prolocutor spake to fylpott and sayd / lest yow shuld slander the howse and say that we wyll not suffer yow to de­clare your mind we are content / yow shall come in to the hows as yow haue done before / so that yow be apparelyd with a long gown and a typpet as we be / and that yow shall not speake but whan I commād yow. Than quoth fylpot / I had rather be absent alltogether. And thus thei ended.


All glory to god only.

Imprinted at Basil by Alexander Edmonds.

Faultes estaped in the printing. In the second syde of the syxt leaffe of the letter B. affter thes words (as thei imagin it to be / or no) reade thus. Mo­remā sayd yea. Than sayd M. deā. &c.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.