Chapter 17: The Inconveniences of Transubstantiation
there was seen: Why (say they) shall not this which Ambrose had, be rather granted to the body of Christ? But they take as granted, which we grant not.
For it might be that it was revealed unto Ambrose, and that it seemed unto him he was present at those funerals, and by the help of Angels he was perhaps represented in them and unto the sight of the people, but that his body was verily in both places together, we will not grant. Further, we might leave it to the author of the miracle recited, to consider whether it be true or no.
They oppose again as touching souls, that whereas they be creatures, yet each one of them is in the head, and in all the members of our body. But they deal very unwisely, which compare a spirit with a body, and that they would have to be given unto bodies which they may lawfully do unto a spirit. Christ said plainly: "A spirit hath no flesh and bones," whereby He put no small difference between them. Further, if we should grant that that is to be given unto the body which our soul hath, it followeth not that the body of Christ can be in diverse places, because our soul and the angels cannot be in diverse places at one and the same time: for they be creatures, and therefore of a power limited and definite.
Chapter 17:
The Inconveniences of Transubstantiation There follow also many other inconveniences: because if the mice have gnawed these sacred hosts, they will say, that they eat accidents. And if they be filled and satisfied, this also shall be a work of accidents. And if it happen that a sacrificing priest, do utter those words over a great vessel of wine, and over a great chest full of bread, and that thou demand what filleth the vessel, what the chest, or what also filled the bellies of them which did eat and drink thereof: they would answer, accidents. And because those that
eat, are sustained, some of them dare to say, that God createth in the bellies of the eaters and drinkers, either phlegm or some other humour, which may be converted into blood whereby they should be nourished.
But if that sacrament be burned, as it was done in the time of Hesychius (which thing he himself testifieth upon Leviticus, and the very same hath
Origen upon the same book), undoubtedly ashes will remain, and by that means shall a substance be procreated out of accidents. In like manner, worms may arise of the bread consecrated, and there also they will say that substance is brought forth of accidents. Albeit, (as they be bold fellows,) some of them feign that the former matter is by miracle brought again, by reason whereof these things may happen. But if it be lawful after this manner to breed and feign miracles, every divine may escape as he will. For to every intricate matter he will apply a miracle, and so will he unwind himself out of all arguments which shall be objected against him.
These things they affirm not only by miracles, but also by subtle sophistical arguments. As Scotus, when he is urged in the uttering of those words:
"This is my body," that he should tell us what is showed in the subject of the proposition, at length answereth, that there is demonstration made of some singular or particular thing of a more general substance, which together with that which is affirmed thereof doth show the same thing or (as the schoolmen said) is of the same supposition: neither do those things differ one from another which are signified by the subject and that which thereof is affirmed, except it be by a diverse manner of conceiving. See whereinto they rush and yet for all that they escape not. For it is not yet answered by them what is showed, when it is said, "This is my body." The Bishop of Rochester saith in these propositions, that when anything is changed into another thing, it is not absurd that that which was before should be showed: And so he admitteth, that in "This is my body" should be showed the bread which was before, and is changed into the body of Christ while those words be spoken. But then (say I) the proposition is not well