Page:The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe Volume 3.djvu/482

 then," said he, "that after the consecration is made, there remaineth the substance of material bread; and that I do thus prove: that the consecration being done, while the bread is changed and transubstantiated into the body of Christ, as you say, either there doth remain the common substance of material bread, or contrariwise. If the sustance do remain, then is our purpose at an end. If contrariwise, then doth it follow, that by the decision of the singularity, the universal ceaseth any more to be."—John Huss answered, "Truly it ceaseth to be, in this singular material, bread, by means of this transubstantiation, when it is changed and transubstantiated into the body of Christ; but notwithstanding in other singularities it is made subject."

Then a certain Englishman by that argument would prove out of the first position, that there remained material bread. Then said John Huss, "That is a childish argument, which every boy in the schools knoweth:" and thereupon gave a solution. Then another Englishman would prove, that there remained material bread in the sacrament, because the bread after the consecration was not annihilated. Unto whom John Huss answered, "Although," said he, "the bread be not annihilated or consumed, yet singularly it ceaseth there to be, by means of the alteration of its substance into the body of Christ." Here another Englishman stepping forth, said: "John Huss seemeth unto me to use the same kind of crafty speech which Wickliff used, for he granted all these things which this man hath done, and yet in very deed was fully persuaded that material bread remained in the sacrament after the consecration." Which when John Huss had denied, saying, that he spake nothing but only sincerely and uprightly, according to his conscience; the Englishman proceeded to demand of him again, whether the body of Christ be totally and really in the sacrament of the altar. Whereunto John Huss answered: "Verily, I do think that the body of Christ is really and totally in the sacrament of the altar, which was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered, died, and rose again, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty." When they had disputed a good while to and fro, as touching universalities, the Englishman, who before would prove that material bread remained in the sacrament, because the bread was not annihilate, interrupting and breaking their talk, said: "To what purpose is this disputation upon universalities, which maketh nothing to the purpose, as touching faith? For as far as I can perceive or hear, this man holdeth a good opinion as touching the sacrament of the altar." Then another Englishman, named Stokes, said: "I have seen at Prague a certain treatise, which was ascribed unto this man John Huss, wherein it was plainly set forth, that after the consecration there remained material bread in the sacrament." "Verily," said John Huss, "saving your reverence, that is not true."

Then they returned again unto the witnesses of them who were spoken of a little before, who, every man for himself, affirmed, with an oath, that which he had said; among whom John Protyway, parish priest of St. Clement's in Prague, when he should come to confirm his testimony, added more, that John Huss should say, that St. Gregory was but a rhymer, when he did allege his authority against him. Unto whom John Huss answered, that in this point they did him great