after the words of consecration were pronounced； that many of them were
condemned to death and burned at the stake in Queen Mary's reign。
Fuller； the famous Church historian； says：〃 The sacrament of the
altar was the main touchstone to discover the poor Protestants。 This
point of the real corporal presence of Christ in the sacrament。； the
same body that was crucified； was the pendious way to discover those
of the opposite opinion。〃Fuller's Church History； vol。 iii。 p。 399；
Tegg's edition。
33。 Why was John Rogers； the protomartyr； Vicar of St。 Sepulchre's and
Prebendary of St。 Paul's； burned in Smithfield； on February 4； 1555？
Let us hear his own account：
〃I was asked whether I believed in the sacrament to be the very body
and blood of our Saviour Christ that was born of the Virgin Mary； and
hanged on the cross； really and substantially？ I answered； ' I think it
to be false。 I cannot understand really and substantially to signify
otherwise than corporally。 But corporally Christ is only in heaven； and
so Christ cannot be corporally in your sacrament。'〃 Foxe in loco； vol。
iii。 p。 101； edit。 1684。
And so he was burned。
34。 Why was Hugh Latimer； sometime Bishop of Worcester； burned at
Oxford； on October 16； 1555？
Let us hear what Foxe says were the articles exhibited against him：…
〃That thou hast openly affirmed； defended； and maintained that the true
and natural body of Christ after the consecration of the priest； is not
really present in the sacrament of the altar； and that in the sacrament
of the altar remaineth still the substance of bread and wine。〃
And to this article the good old man replied：
〃After a corporal being； which the Romish Church furnisheth； Christ's
body and blood is not in the sacrament under the forms of bread and
wine。〃 Foxe in loco； vol。 iii。 p。 426。
And so he was burned。
35。 Why was Nicholas Ridley； Bishop of London； burned at Oxford； on
October 16； 1555？
Once more let us hear what Foxe says were the words of his sentence of
condemnation：…
〃The said Nicholas Ridley affirms； maintains； and stubbornly defends
certain opinions； assertions； and heresies； contrary to the Word of God
and the received faith of the Church； as in denying the true and
natural body and blood of Christ to be in the sacrament of the altar；
and secondarily； in affirming the substance of bread and wine to remain
after the words of consecration。〃 Foxe in loco； vol。 iii。 p。 426。
And so he was burned。
36。 Why was John Bradford； Prebendary of St。 Paul's； chaplain to Bishop
Ridley； and one of Edward the Sixth's chaplains； burned at Smithfield；
on July 1； 1555？
Let us hear what Foxe says he wrote to the men of Lancashire and
Cheshire while he was in prison：
〃The chief thing which I am condemned for as an heretic is because I
deny the sacrament of the altar （which is not Christ's Supper； but a
plain perversion as the Papists now use it） to be a real； natural； and
corporal presence of Christ's body and blood under the forms and
accidents of bread and wine； that is； because I deny
transubstantiation； which is the darling of the devil； and daughter and
heir to Antichrist's religion。〃Foxe in loco； vol。 iii。 p。 260。
And so he was burned。
37。 But may not these four men who were burned have been isolated
cases； and not true representatives of the Church of 。England？ May they
not have been violent fanatics； and unlearned and ignorant men？
Nothing can be further from the truth than these suggestions。 The
doctrines for which these four men laid down their lives were the
doctrines professed by the whole Church of England in the reign of
Edward the Sixth。 So far from standing alone； their opinions were
shared by 280 other persons； who were burned in Queen Mary's reign。 As
to ignorance and want of learning； Ridley and Rogers were among the
most learned men of their day； and to Ridley in particular we are
indebted for the foundations of our English Prayer Book。
38。 But is it not said that the English Reformers； having just e out
of Rome； adopted very extreme and rather defective views of the Lord's
Supper？ Have not English divines since the Reformation taken up much
more moderate and temperate opinions about the doctrine of the Real
Presence？
Whosoever says this says what he cannot possibly prove。 With very few
exceptions； all the greatest； ablest； and most learned English
theologians of every school of thought； for three hundred years； have
agreed in maintaining that there is no real corporal presence of
Christ's natural body and blood in the consecrated bread and wine in
the Lord's Supper。
39。 What does Bishop Jewell； in his work on the Sacraments； say？
〃Let us examine what difference there is between the body of Christ and
the Sacrament of His body。
〃The difference is this： a sacrament is a figure or token； the body of
Christ is figured or tokened。 The sacramental bread is bread； it is not
the body of Christ； the body of Christ is flesh； it is no bread。 The
bread is beneath； the body is above。 The bread is on the table； the
body is in heaven。 The bread is in the mouth； the body is in the heart。
The bread feedeth the body； the body feedeth the soul。 The bread shall
e to nothing； the body is immortal and shall not perish。 The bread
is vile； the body of Christ is glorious。 Such a difference is there
between the bread which is a sacrament of the body； and the body of
Christ itself。 The sacrament is eaten as well of the wicked as of the
faithful； the body is only eaten of the faithful。 The sacrament may be
eaten unto judgment； the body cannot be eaten but unto salvation。
Without the sacrament we may be saved； but without the body of Christ
we have no salvation： we cannot be saved。〃Jewell's Works； vol。 ii。；
Treatise on Sacraments； Parker Society edition； p。 1121。
40。 What does Richard Hooker； in his 〃Ecclesiastical Polity；〃 say？
〃The real presence of Christ's most blessed body and blood is not to be
sought for in the sacrament； but in the worthy receiver of the
sacrament。
〃And with this the very order of our Saviour's words agreeth。 First； '
Take and eat；' then；' This is My body which is broken for you。' First；
' Drink ye all of this；' then followeth； ' This is My blood of the New
Testament； which is shed for many for the remission of sins。' I see not
which way it should be gathered by the words of Christ；when and where
the bread is His body or the wine His blood； but only in the very heart
and soul of him which receiveth them。 As for the sacraments； they
really exhibit； but for aught we can gather out of that which is
written of them； they are not really nor do really contain in
themselves that grace which with them or by them it pleaseth God to
bestow。〃 Hooker； Eccl。 Pol。； book v。 p。 67。
41。 What does Jeremy Taylor； in his book on the Real Presence （edit。
1654； pp。 13…15）； say？
〃We say that Christ's body is in the sacrament really； but spiritually。
The Roman Catholics say that it is there really； but spiritually。 For
so Bellarmine is bold to say that the word may be allowed in this
question。 Where now is the difference？ Here by spiritually； they mean
spiritual after the manner of a spirit。 We by spiritually； mean present
to our spirit only。 They say that Christ's body is truly present there
as it was upon the cross； but not after the manner of all or anybody；
but after that manner of being as an angel is in a place。 That's their
spiritually。But we by the real spiritual presence of Christ do
understand Christ to be present； as the Spirit of God is present； in
the hearts of the faithful by blessing and grace； and this is all which
we mean beside topical and figurative presence。〃
42。 What did Archbishop Usher； in his sermon before the House of
mons； say？
〃In the sacrament of the Lord's Supper； the bread and wine are not
changed in substance from being the same with that which is served at
ordinary tables。 But in respect of the sacred use whereunto they are
consecrated； such a change is made that now they differ as much from
mon bread and wine as heaven from earth。 Neither are they to be
accounted barely significative； but truly exhibitive also of those
heavenly things whereunto they have relation； as being appointed by God
to be a means of conveying the same to us； and putting us in actual
possession thereof。 So that in the use of this holy ordinance； as
verily as a man with his bodily hand and mouth receiveth the earthly
creatures of bread and wine； so verily with his spiritual hand and
mouth； if he have any； doth he receive the body and blood of Christ。
And this is that real and substantial presence which we affirm to be in
the inward part of this sacred action。〃
43。 What does Waterland say？
〃The Fathers well understood that to make Christ's natural body the
real sacrifice of the Eucharist； would not only be absurd in reason；
but highly presumptuous and profane； and that to make the outward
symbols a proper sacrifice； a material sacrifice； would be entirely
contrary to gospel principles； degrading the Christian sacrifice into a
Jewish one； yea； and making it much lower and meaner than the Jewish
one； both in value and dignity。 The right way； therefore； was to make
the sacrifice spiritual； and it could be no other upon gospel
principles。〃Works； vol。 iv。 p。 762。
〃No one has any authority or right to offer Christ as a sacrifice；
whether really or symbolically； but Christ Himself； such a sacrifice is
His sacrifice； not oursoffered for us； not by us； to God the Father。〃
Works； vol。 iv。 p。 753。
44。 What does Bishop Burnet； in his work on the Articles； say？
〃We assert a real presence of the body and blood of Christ； but not of
His body as it is now glorified in heaven； but of His body as it was