The. vii. chapyter

IN the fyfthe lefe thus he sayth, No meruayle was it though these […] Iewes abhorred the bodyly eatynge of Lhry fles fleshe, albe it our flellhefy papyftes beyng of the Iewes carnall opynyon, yet abhore it not.

What thynge more false, more folisshe, or more blasphemouse could any brute beste say than this? For the Iewes had an opinion that he wold haue them eate his fleshe in the very forme of flesshe / and (as saynte Austayne¹ sayth) they thought they shod eate it dede cutte out in gobbettes as sheprs flesshe is in the shamellys.

And now is not mayster masker ashamed to rayle, vppon all good chry sten people vnder the name of papystes, and saye that they be all of the Iewes carnall opinion. Doth any man that receyueth the blessed sacrament, thynke (as ye Iewes thought) that the flesshe of Chryste that he re ceyueth, is in forme of fleshe, cut out in gobbettes as shepys fleshe is sold in the shamells, and not in forme of brede? If mayster masker were now bare faced hym selfe, he were wonderfull shamelesse yf he coulde endure to loke any man in the face for shame.

Now as this was good readers wryten (as you se) moste falsefy that he sayth we be of the Iewes opiniō: so where he sayth yt we abhorre not to eate Chrystes flesshe in the sacrament / that is yet wryten ye se well as folysshly.

For the wyse goodnes of god hath as the olde holy doctours declare, ge uyn vs his flesshe not in forme of flessh, but in forme of brede, bycause we sholde not abhorre it. And therefore what horryble syghte seeth thys fole in ye blessed sacramēt, for whiche he sholde abborre to receyue it?

But where was there euer a more blasphemouse bestely worde spoken, than this frantyke fole speketh here: yt mocheth and rayleth vpon all good chrysten people in this. xv. C. yere. bycause they do not abhorre to receyue the blessed body of Cryste in such wyse geuen vs by Chryste, that no creature can abhorre it, but eyther deuyls or deuyls felowes […]

Footnotes

1. August. in enarra. in psalm, 98. ↩