Exposition of the Doctrine Contained in the Articles (part 1 of 2)

Exposition of the Doctrine Contained in the Articles

ecause the contention that has been stirred in our time touching the Sacraments has been very vexatious to all men fearing God and of

B

right judgment — seeing that they perceived that by it the course of the Gospel was retarded — not only have they always desired that it might be buried or smothered by some good means, but also some have taken great pains to appease it. Now if they did not succeed in bringing it to a conclusion at the first stroke, in this we see how difficult it is to extinguish a fire that will have been kindled by the artifice of Satan. Yet these good people of whom I speak have so far prevailed that the excess which had been too ardent has been appeased, and that one has on either side given oneself to teaching peaceably, rather than to fighting. Yet because one still saw some sparks flying from embers that had been smothered, and there was cause to fear that a new fire might be kindled again, we the Ministers and Pastors of the Churches of Zurich and Geneva — together with our good brother and faithful servant of Jesus Christ Guillaume Farel — had endeavoured to apply the remedy that we thought most suitable for abolishing completely all occasions of discord: that is, in having printed a brief Summary, containing the doctrine that we preach in such a way that it is also a testimony that comprises truly and simply what is preached in the land of Switzerland and of the Grisons, where the Gospel is purely announced.

We, after having published such a testimony, were sufficiently persuaded of having altogether satisfied those who would be equitable and of settled sense: at the least we thought well that the most peevish and difficult to satisfy would keep quiet. For, as will be shown presently, there is therein so clear a declaration of all the articles that had been previously debated, that all scruples ought well to have been removed. Indeed, our Lord showed himself so favourable towards us in this matter that in large measure we obtained what we wished for, but the devil, being vexed at our tranquillity, has shortly after again stirred up new troubles. For there is no doubt that it is he who pushes and inflames certain scatter-brained men, to make us sound alarms without cause. It seems properly that such people feed on quarrels and disputes, and they must not cover themselves with a shadow of good zeal to excuse their rage.

We know well that one must not abandon the truth to purchase peace: indeed, I confess that it would be better that heaven and earth should be mixed together than to suffer that the true doctrine should be trampled underfoot through lack of being maintained. Wherefore I am far from reproving those who oppose themselves to all sophistries, and resist valiantly all cavillings that serve to disguise and mask the pure simplicity of things, or that tend to make the black resemble the white. Moreover, I may boast that if there are any in the world who love a simple directness, I will not be found the last. Wherefore it is no longer necessary that these scatterbrained persons who trouble us should pretend this colour, that it is sometimes better to stir up war than to betray or trample underfoot the truth. For in the first place, I am very ready to show that in this matter we have enveloped nothing under obscure propositions, we have hidden nothing by cunning, we have put nothing in oblivion, nor left out what was to be said. Secondly, our intention has not been to hinder the truth from having its free course, but rather we have endeavoured — insofar as in us was — to seek the means whereby one might teach peaceably, whereby one might speak of the Sacraments in edification, and read what would be written thereof, without scandal. But I do not wish to use language here: only I will pray the readers to open their eyes and to render themselves attentive and docile to receive what I will show them to the letter.

First, one cannot deny that in treating of the Sacraments one must above all regard the institution of the Lord, and its end. For from thence both the nature and property of the Sacraments, and their use, may be known: so that all those who tend to that end to which the Lord calls us will never be in danger of failing. Now the most malicious cannot deny that we have rightly shown to what end the Sacraments have been instituted — namely, to lead us to the communion of Christ. I will speak yet more frankly: that none of all those who murmur against our Accord has ever put forward anything that expressed better the intention of God, to which one must hold fast. If the dignity of the Sacraments is of concern to them, it is not possible to better adorn and magnify them than by saying that they are aids and means to incorporate us in Jesus Christ, or when we are already of his body, to confirm us therein more and more, until he unites us fully to himself in the heavenly life. If these people have the care of our salvation, so that it may be aided by the Sacraments, is there anything more proper thereto than to lead us to the fountain of life, which is Jesus Christ, so that we may be vivified in him? Wherefore whether one regards our profit and edification, or whether one wishes to maintain the dignity and reverence due to the Sacraments, we have very well set forth the end and the cause for which they have been given to us.

Certainly, what Saint Paul reproaches to false doctors — who do nothing but puff up souls with vain ambition or fine show — is very far from us: that is, that they do not hold fast to the head. For one sees that we refer all things to Christ; that we gather all in him; that we strive to retain all under him; and in sum, that we declare that all the force of the Sacraments rests in him and proceeds from him. Now, therefore, it will be necessary that these controllers who are not content with us contrive a better rule of teaching than that which is given us by Saint Paul. For they could not more openly resist him than by not being able to suffer that the Sacraments be appropriated and compassed as we have said — that is, that Jesus Christ be their beginning and their end — seeing that Saint Paul places in this point all perfection of doctrine.

Wherefore we have very well begun in wishing to treat of the Sacraments, and have so well described their end, that all equitable people and of settled sense will approve without dispute our manner of teaching. It remains now to know the legitimate use of the Sacraments, in which one must guard against two vices. For if one too greatly exalts their dignity, soon some superstition works its way in. If one speaks coolly of their virtue and of the fruit that comes to us from them, by this, the world takes occasion to despise them as profane things. If we have kept a good mean between these two extremities, I ask you, does it not appear that those who prefer to grumble against us rather than to receive gently, or to approve our doctrine in silence, are well obstinate enemies of the truth? For we do not constrain them to speak word for word as we do: only that they keep quiet, and do not bark against those who know better how to speak than they, and more rightly.

They will perhaps pretend that the difference they have with us is because we do not attribute to the Sacraments the force that belongs to them, but if this comes to showing how some, as senseless ones, skirmish without cause, and pay us in fine injuries: others, to better maintain their gravity, condemn without reason or proof what they have never read. So much so that it appears by experience that they mutiny and plead inconsiderately.

All the world is only too well informed how the doctor Martin Luther has been sharp in conducting this cause. I know that many excessive words escaped him in this contention, by which he was too much moved: yet so much so that in order to render his party favourable to all good believers, behold how he has protested — it is that he could not suffer that the Sacraments should be held merely as external signs serving to make confession of our faith before men, without being recognised as pledges and assurances of the grace of God towards us. Secondly, that he combated to the end that the Sacraments might not be reputed similar to vain and empty figures, seeing that God testifies therein truly what he shows us by signs, and accomplishes by his secret virtue what he testifies therein. Behold with what the doctor Luther combated, if one wishes to believe him. Whether it was rightly or wrongly that he so heated himself, I do not dispute at present: for it suffices me that the principal author and master of these people —whom they make a show of following — after having deployed all his wits, finds no better foundation for making his cause prevail than by making such a protestation as we have said. For the rest, in leaving off speaking of him, as for the honour and reverence I bear him, I desire to spare him — let us only attend to the fact. I say therefore that this cover being removed, all those who bring quarrel against us cannot escape but that all good and upright judges reject and hate them as people who cannot be content with reason.

And indeed, they always have this song in their mouth, that they fight to the end that the virtue of the Sacraments may not be annihilated. Now if their intention is such, and not to deceive the simple by vain colours —when they hear that we confess with full mouth that the Sacraments are not figures without effect, nor even ensigns or marks to confess our religion before men: but that they are truly seals of the promises of God, testimonies of spiritual grace to nourish and confirm the faith; likewise that they are organs by which God works effectually in his elect; and although insofar as they are signs, one must distinguish them from the things they represent, yet that one must not separate the one from the other; likewise that they are given to confirm and ratify what God has given us by his Word, and above all to seal the high and mystical communication that we have with Jesus Christ — what reason have they to hold us for enemies? For since they do not cease to cry — as I have said — if they seek nothing but that this doctrine be held and observed: namely that God uses the Sacraments as aids and means to nourish our faith; that the promises of eternal salvation are engraved therein to offer them to us; that they are not empty and bare signs devoid of their effect, since God conjoins the efficacy of the Spirit thereto — when all these things are granted to them by us, what is it that prevents them from declaring themselves friends?

And to the end that I may not be too long in leafing through the particular writings of each, it ought well to suffice that one will find in our Accord all that the confession of the Protestant estates contains — such as it was produced at Regensburg — provided one does not disguise it to gratify the Papists, for fear of persecution. The words are these: that in the holy Supper with the bread and wine, the body and blood of Jesus Christ are truly given. Now let it never happen that we should wish to take from the holy Supper its truth, or to deprive the faithful souls of so great a benefit. We say therefore and affirm that our senses are not frustrated there by the sight of the bread and wine, but that the true effect is conjoined with the external figure, so that the faithful receive therein the body and blood of Christ.

Moreover, since our intention was to remove all scruple and doubt as to this article, we have taken pains to set forth more fully and more clearly what is touched upon briefly in the confession of the Germans. For if one asks what is the virtue, the use, and the office of the Sacraments, our Accord responds thereto: since all the salvation of the faithful depends upon the spiritual communication they have with the Son of God, God has ordained both the Gospel and the Sacraments to testify it to us. It is well to note here that the Sacraments are conjoined with the Gospel to profit us for our salvation, in such a way that we receive a like fruit from them as when the Gospel is preached to us: whence it follows that what Saint Paul says of preaching applies also according to us to the Sacraments. Wherefore we agree that God by them deploys in part his power in salvation to all believers, and that the message of our reconciliation with God is contained therein. For since we have always declared that this sentence of Saint Augustine pleases us very well — namely, that the Sacraments are as visible words — we also hold without contradiction that our salvation is advanced by them, as by preaching.

For the rest, if one asks what this communication with Jesus Christ is, it is also so described therein that one cannot say that we imagine it as in a picture or in the air. It is that the principal virtue of faith appears therein, to incorporate us in Jesus Christ and to unite us with him, in such a way that he makes us participants of all graces and makes us feel their effect: for he does not spread his life in us, except insofar as he is our head, from whom the whole body receives its bonds and joints, and from whom the virtue flows in each member, to the end that they may all be together edified in their body.

After, we add this fuller declaration of which I touched not long ago: namely, although the Sacraments may be marks or ensigns of our Christianity before men; likewise goads to incite us to give thanks to God, and means to exercise us in his fear; finally, that they may be as bonds to oblige us to him — yet that their principal end is to testify to us the grace of God, to represent it to us and seal it. Secondly, that they are not simple mirrors or images that are put before our eyes, but that in them the spiritual graces of God are communicated to us, as our souls feel their effect if we have such faith as belongs. The words are these: Since the testimonies and seals that God has given us to ratify his grace are true and infallible, there is no doubt that he does not accomplish in us all that he figures by the Sacraments: that is, that we may enjoy Christ who is the source of all goods; then, that by the virtue of his death we may be reconciled to God and renewed in holiness of life, and in sum obtain justice and salvation. We add also shortly after that, in distinguishing between the signs and the things signified, we do not separate the one from the other to strip the Sacraments of their truth, but rather confess that those who embrace the promises of God offered to them there receive likewise Jesus Christ with all his goods and gifts.

If I had to do with Papists, I would gather more carefully a wealth of passages both from Scripture and from the ancient doctors, to show that God has never pronounced anything, and that nothing has ever been believed and received in the Church touching the Sacraments, that we have not summarily comprised in the words I have recited. But since those who plead against us have on their lips, “Word of God, Word of God” — it is marvellous if they have not shame to contest further. They cannot deny that it is too great an absurdity to elevate and magnify the Sacraments above the Word, seeing that they are nothing but its seals and accessories. Now they will find that all that applies to the doctrine one preaches, we have also appropriated to the Sacraments. In sum, if they recognise God as the unique author of our salvation, what more do they want one to attribute to the Sacraments, than to hold them for inferior instruments of which God uses according to our infirmity to distribute to us his grace?

On the other hand, there is no need to fear that one may despise the Sacraments when one says that not only are they pledges and tokens of all the goods that God has once given us in Jesus Christ, and that we receive each day: but also that the secret virtue of the Holy Spirit is conjoined with what is there represented, so that they may not be vain and empty paintings without substance.

Now, how necessary it is on the other side to prevent the superstition into which the world might be led in too greatly magnifying the Sacraments —not only is this known by the experience that has always been from the creation of the world, but also each can judge it of himself, attending to the rudeness that we feel in our nature. For as we are earthly — without being abused from elsewhere, and without our eyes being dazzled by the high titles that shall be attributed to the Sacraments — the external signs will attract us only too much to them. If with that we hear excessive praises, we are so rapt thereby that there will scarcely be found one in a hundred who does not imagine some foolish devotion. Thence it comes that the majority place and attach thereto the confidence of their salvation, and assign to them against all reason what is proper to God alone. In which one sees how blind is the obstinacy of those who set themselves against us. For although they are constrained to cry out against the Papists, yet, for fear that it should seem they agree with us, they do not dare openly to declare their intention. Worse still, for fear of approaching to this moderation that we maintain, they involve themselves knowingly, and leave the readers in suspense and trouble.

To the end that one may not think I charge them wrongly, I will show to the letter that there is nothing at all in our Accord that can offend those who are of good character, or that prevents them from acquiescing therein without reply. To the end of preventing all superstition, we say there in the first place that those who amuse themselves at bare signs, and rather do not at all regard the promises annexed thereto, go about it inconsiderately. By these words, we understand only what has been very well said by Saint Augustine, and what each confesses to be true: namely, that the elements become Sacraments when the Word is added thereto — not because one merely pronounces it with the mouth, but insofar as it is received by faith. And it is the cause why Jesus Christ says to his disciples that they are pure and clean, for the Word they had heard, and not for the Baptism by which they had been washed. For if all the visible figures that one puts forward for Sacraments are not founded in the Word of God, and do not proceed from it, not only are they useless trifles, but also deadly impostures — what will it be to look at the external Sacrament without being attentive to the promise, but a pure illusion? Certainly, if we bring there only the eyes to speculate, having the ears stopped so as not to hear anything of what God promises therein, they will differ in nothing from the fine mysteries of the Pagans.

For so it is, although we confess that a great part of the ancient ceremonies that the Pagans have had may have had their source from the tradition of the holy Fathers: yet because being empty of doctrine they retained no truth, and could not edify the faith, we say that they have been bastard, vicious, and false. In brief, if the external sign draws no flavour and savour from the promise, there is neither salt nor sense in it, as one says. For what do we gain that a mortal and earthly man throws water on our head in baptising us, if Jesus Christ did not pronounce from heaven that it is he who purges and cleanses us by his blood, who renews us by his Spirit? What would it serve us to eat a little piece of bread, and to drink three drops of wine, if that voice did not resound from on high: that the flesh of Jesus Christ is the true food of our souls, his blood is truly the spiritual drink? Thus it is with good right that we conclude that we are not made participants of Jesus Christ and his spiritual gifts by the bread, the wine, and the water: but that we are led to him by the promise, to the end that he may give himself to us, and that dwelling in us by faith, he may accomplish what is promised and offered to us by the signs.

I do not see what it is that one can find to object to this doctrine, unless one thinks to honour the Sacraments well by stopping at what one sees therein, without understanding what God proposes therein, which would be nothing but a frivolous mummery.

This is why we have again exhorted the faithful in our Accord to address themselves to Jesus Christ, to the end of not seeking anywhere else anything at all of what is proposed to them in the Sacraments, as also the Sacraments being pledges and earnests of what is found in Jesus Christ, send us back solely to him. In so doing, we follow the rule that God gave to Moses in instituting the Tabernacle with its accessories and dependencies — that is, that he should refer and frame all things to the pattern that had been shown to him on the mountain. For it is not without cause that Saint Stephen in Acts 7, and the Apostle in chapter 8 of Hebrews, weigh so much this passage and stop upon it. Now as this was formerly the true means of correcting the rudeness of the Jews, and of withdrawing them from that error to which they were given — it was to put Jesus Christ before their eyes, and to retain them entirely to him, to the end that they might not be abused at the visible tabernacle and the sacrifice of brute animals — so also today, if we do not wish to be deceived in giving ourselves overmuch to external signs, we must elevate our senses to this spiritual pattern, to which the Scripture brings us back. And indeed, Jesus Christ, in ordaining the Sacraments, has not wished to enclose or captivate us in impediments that might retain us to the world, but rather has addressed to us ladders by which we might mount on high to come to Christ, who will not be found anywhere else. Now it is the fact that we ought to have our contentment in him alone: otherwise, I ask you, what would it be? For he is not dead and risen to send us to insensible elements, in order to seek our salvation therein, as if he were no longer the matter and cause thereof, but rather, wishing to remain in his entirety, has given us aids to bring us to himself.

There follows in our Accord another article tending to correct a superstition which is only too common and very evil: that is, that the world supposes that the Sacraments by their own virtue bring us the grace of God, and work so in us that our salvation is attributed to them. We say therefore that what is given us by the Sacraments is not by their own virtue, but according as it pleases God to deploy the force of his Spirit therein. Now the human spirit cannot contain itself from imagining that the grace of God is enclosed in the signs, and that by this means does not place them in the stead of God himself: whence it comes that God is stripped of his praise, inasmuch as one attributes to dead and insensible creatures what is proper to him. Behold therefore the sum of our doctrine, which we have set forth in clear and pure words: that God alone perfects all that we have from the Sacraments — indeed by his secret virtue, which is contained in him. Yet to the end that one could not reply that the Sacraments also have their office and property — otherwise they would have been given in vain — we prevent this objection by saying that God works by them in such a way that he does not resign to them his virtue so as to derogate from the efficacy of his Spirit.

What is it that these good and worthy men who torment us will require here beyond this? If they want God to use the Sacraments as instruments of his grace, we say it is so. If they want our faith to be aided, nourished, and confirmed by them, we affirm it. If they want the virtue of the Holy Spirit to be manifested therein, to the end that they may profit for the salvation of the elect, we agree to it. Behold the knot of the whole question: namely, whether one ought to attribute to God entirely all the parts of our salvation; or whether, in the use of the Sacraments, he quits to them some portion and strips himself of it. And who is it who would dare to put this in difficulty, if he has not lost all shame? We allege Saint Paul to support our doctrine, who says that the ministers — whether they plant or water — are nothing, and could profit nothing, if God did not work alone.

Now, when we speak thus, one sees clearly that we do not intend to take away or diminish anything from the Sacraments, provided that what is proper to God remains to him. One knows how Saint Paul in other passages magnifies the preaching of the Gospel: whence comes it therefore that he seems to wish to abolish it here — unless it is reason, when one compares God with creatures, that he alone should be recognised as author of all good, and that he uses all that is in his hand to make it avail as it pleases him? For the rest, what wrong does one do to earthly elements, if one does not rob God of his honour to vest and adorn them with it?

As to the sentence that we add, taken from Saint Augustine — namely, that it is Jesus Christ who baptises inwardly; likewise, that it is he who makes us participants of himself in the Supper — it is to declare to us the dignity of these two mysteries. For from thence one must understand that these are not human acts, seeing that the Son of God, who is their author, presides over them, and in which he deploys his virtue as if he stretched out his hand from heaven. And then there is nothing more useful than to withdraw our senses from the regard of mortal men and of signs that are earthly elements, to the end that our faith may stop entirely at Jesus Christ, as if he were there present. For the rest, this also serves to maintain in Jesus Christ his right, to the end that it may not seem that in ordaining men as ministers of external signs, he resigns to them the praise of the spiritual effect that he retains towards himself.

As to what we say that the Sacraments do not profit indifferently to all, but only to the elect of God, in whom the Holy Spirit works by his secret efficacy: this is so clear that there is no need to hold long discourse thereon.

For if one wishes to make the effect of the Sacraments common to all, beyond the fact that the Scripture contradicts such reveries, experience also resists it. For as the voice of a preacher cannot of itself pierce the hearts, and does not give itself an entry to change men: but when the Gospel is preached to many, those whom God the heavenly Father draws to himself gather thereto — as also Isaiah speaks of it, that none believes the Word except the arm of God be revealed to him — so no one profits in the external use of the Sacraments, unless it be given to him from on high: and this is in the pure and liberal gratuity of God, to work in those that seem good to him.

Yet in speaking thus, we do not intend to derogate in any way from the Sacraments, so that they do not remain in their entirety. For when Saint Augustine restricts the effect and virtue of the Supper to the body of the Church — which he says consists of those whom God has predestined to salvation — he does not intend to annihilate towards the reprobate the grace that is offered us in the Supper, if one esteems what this Sacrament means and what it imports: but only he signifies that the fruit thereof is not common to all. Now, because there is nothing that prevents the reprobate from enjoying Christ, but their own unbelief, all the fault ought to be imputed to them, as it resides in them. In brief, the representation of the sign is never in itself fruitless, but only of those who deprive themselves of it and, by their malice, are frustrated of it. For it is a very true thing that we draw no other fruit from the Sacraments than what each receives in the vessel of his faith.

Thus it is with good right that we reject the invention of the Sorbonnist doctors — namely, that the Sacraments of the new law — as they say —profit all those who place no bar of mortal sin: for it is a superstition too gross and foolish, indeed a sorcery, to esteem that the simple use of the Sacraments makes the grace of God to flow into us. Now, if it is necessary that faith intervene, no one of sound judgment will be able to deny that God — who wishes to relieve our infirmity by such aids — also himself gives faith, which, being borne and lifted up on high by means of the Sacraments, mounts to Jesus Christ to possess his goods.

And indeed it is fitting for us to hold this as resolved: as it would not suffice that the sun should enlighten the world and spread its rays everywhere, if the eyes were not first given to us to receive its clarity and to enjoy it — so also God would enlighten us in vain and without fruit by external signs, if he did not open our eyes. Moreover, as the heat of the sun in giving vigour to living bodies causes or raises stench in carcasses, so the Sacraments will give rather the odour of death than of life to all those who have not the soul of faith to be vivified.

For the rest, so that no one might think that by this doctrine the virtue of the Sacraments is diminished, or that the truth of God is annulled and brought low by the unbelief and malice of men: we have, as I believe, well remedied this in declaring that nonetheless the Sacraments remain in their entirety to offer the grace of God to those who render themselves unworthy of it. And although the unbelievers do not receive what is offered to them, yet nothing falls for that from the promises of God. We do not treat here the question that was foolishly debated formerly, namely, whether the unworthiness of the Ministers corrupts the Sacraments. For the institution of God ought to be so sacred to us that one must not esteem its force from elsewhere. Thus, the virtue of the Sacraments does not depend on men, so that they could change anything on their side. When, therefore, the Minister of Baptism and of the Supper were an Epicurean or a despiser of God and all his mysteries, the faithful would not fail to receive just as well by his hand the washing of regeneration and the spiritual nourishment of their souls, as if an Angel descended to them from heaven.

Not that we ought to be negligent in reforming vices: for if those who call themselves pastors are debauched people, and pollute the holy place they occupy by their wicked life, all the faithful in public, and each in private, ought to endeavour to purge the sanctuary of God from such infection. But if it happens that a wicked hypocrite insinuates himself, or that by ambition or favour one prevents that the dissolute Ministers unworthy of their estate should be repressed as quickly as were to be wished — however detestable their impiety may be — yet it derogates nothing from the Sacraments: because Jesus Christ takes from himself alone what he bestows on us therein, and does not borrow it from the Ministers. Wherefore what the Papists have devised — namely, that the intention of him who consecrates is required to make the Sacraments avail — we doubt not that it is a damnable and perverse invention.

Yet when we say that God is ready to do and accomplish in his faithful what he figures to them by the Sacraments — even though the Ministers of them may be disloyal — this is not to say that we receive therein anything but by faith: whence it follows that the unbelievers return therefrom also as empty and indigent as when they came thither. So much so that the virtue of the Sacraments is not at all diminished by their vice or fault. All unbelievers shut the door to God so that his grace has no entry into their souls. We say that for that God does not withdraw his hand, but rather — in order to be firm and constant in his purpose — he offers and gives what men refuse to accept, and by this means battles with his infinite goodness against their malice. But these are two very different things: that God is faithful to accomplish what he demonstrates by the sign, and that man, on his side, gives room to the promise to enjoy the grace it contains. For before a man receives what is given to him, he must be capable of it, according to what is said in Psalm 81: Open your mouth, and I will fill it.

Wherefore, those who cry that the Supper of Jesus Christ will be nothing but a vain and fruitless figure if the unbelievers do not receive therein as much as the faithful, show well enough that they are people destitute of sense and reason. If they said that the body and blood of Jesus Christ are given to all indifferently as far as the part of God is concerned, we would be in agreement: but to wish to make it believed that one receives Jesus Christ without faith — this is a folly as absurd as if one said that wheat germinates in fire. And I ask you, by what title do they give themselves leave to separate and dismember Jesus Christ from his Spirit? For that is a detestable sacrilege. They wish the unbelievers to receive Jesus Christ, who have not a single drop of his Spirit. What does that mean, unless they were striving to enclose the Son of God again in the sepulchre?

If they reply that Saint Paul in saying that those who participate in the Supper unworthily are guilty of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, signifies that they receive the body and blood as the faithful do: the response is easy — that quite to the contrary, if Jesus Christ entered into them and were lodged therein, he would deliver them from all condemnation. When, therefore, they are condemned, it is a sign that they have no part with him who is the justice of God. But inasmuch as they trample vilely underfoot the pledge that Jesus Christ gives us of the sacred communication that we have with him, it is no wonder if, on account of such contempt — indeed sacrilege — they are reputed guilty of the body and blood of Christ.

Thus, it is too gross a folly for such people to think that this menace of Saint Paul falls only on those who handle with their hands, chew with their teeth, and swallow in their gullet the body of Christ.

Moreover, I demand what manner of reception they wish to forge for us here. For Saint Paul notably declares that faith is the sole means by which Jesus Christ dwells in us: thus, faith being removed, it would have to be that if someone received Jesus Christ, it could only be for one minute of time, and that immediately he vanished away — which is too childish a reverie.

Let us rather follow Saint Augustine, who speaks as a man duly exercised in the Scripture, saying that just as the angel of Satan was given to Paul, to the end that by it he might be perfected in Christ, to the contrary, the bread of the Lord was given to Judas to subject him still more to the devil. Now, he had said a little previously that the other disciples, in eating the bread, had received the Lord, but that Judas had only eaten the bread of the Lord, in order to conspire against him.

In another passage, he also weighs — as it is with good reason — these words of Jesus Christ: that those who will have eaten his flesh and drunk his blood will never die. And thereupon he says that those who receive the virtue of the Sacrament, and not the visible sign, obtain eternal life. Those — says he — who eat within, and not without: of the heart, and not of the teeth.

Finally, he concludes that the sign of this is proposed to us at the table of the Lord: and that some receive it to their perdition, some to life, but when the substance of the Sacrament is received — namely Jesus Christ — to all those who are participants of him it never turns but to life and salvation.

And to the end that the intention of this good doctor may not be obscure, I will here deduce at more length certain sentences of his, suitable to this purpose. After having said that, the spiritual bread of which Jesus Christ speaks requires a hunger in the inner man; he adds that Moses, Aaron, Phineas, and certain others, having pleased God, ate the manna, and are not dead. And why? Since they took the visible food spiritually, they desired and tasted it as spiritual, to be spiritually satisfied thereby. As today — says he — we receive in the Supper visible bread, but it is another thing, the Sacrament from the virtue thereof. A little after he says again: he who does not remain in Christ, or in whom Christ does not remain, does not eat spiritually his flesh nor drink his blood — although he chews visibly with the teeth the signs of the body and blood: but it is only to his damnation that he takes the sign of a thing so worthy and high: because, being polluted, he presumes to approach the Sacraments of Christ. We see that he does not give the substance of the Supper to those who are profane and impure, but only a visible reception of the sign.