Fynallye, it was not laufull to eate or drynke the bloode not onelye of man, but also of a brute beaste, and the Apostles them selues moued by the rule of charyte, ded instytute that men shulde abstayne from bloode, somewhat fauourynge the infyrmyte of the Iewes. Now yf the Apostles had taught (as ye do) that in the sacrament hys verye fleshe and bloode is eaten and dronken with the teth and mouthe of faythfull and vnfaythfull, what coulde haue bene a greater occasyō to haue excluded the Iewes frō Christes fayth euen at ones? Thynke you that the Apostles wolde not haue bene to srupulous to haue dronken hys very bloode, seynge it was so playne agaynst Moses lawe, yf they had vnderstonde hym so grosselye as ye do? [Sidenote: Act .10.] Peter had a clothe sente downe from heauen, in whiche were all maner of beastes forbydden by the lawe, and was commaunded to fle and eate thē. And he answered, God forbyd, for I neuer eate any vncleane thynge, meanynge therbye that he neuer eate any thynge forbyddē by the lawe. Wherof it muste neades folowe, that eyther he neuer receyued the sacrament (whiche is playne false) or els that he more spyrytuallye vnderstode the wordes of Christes maundye then ye falselye fayne. For it was playnelye forbydden by the lawe, to eate or drynke any maner of bloode. [Sidenote: obiectyō.] And I knowe but one reason, that they haue which they counte as insoluble: how be it by Goddes grace we shall soone avoyde it. Their reason is this. Paule sayeth, he that eateth and drynketh this sacrament vnworthelye, shalbe gyltye of the bodye and bloode of the Lorde. Now saye they, how shulde they be gyltye of the Lordes bodye ād bloode whiche receyue it vnworthelye, excepte it were the verye bodye and bloode of the Lorde. [Sidenote: Solutiō.] This argument I saye, is verye weake and slender. For I can shewe manye examples by the whiche it may be dyssolued. For he that dyspyseth the Kynges seale or Letters offendeth agaynste hys owne parson, and yet the Letters or Seale is not hys owne parson. He that vyolentlye plucketh downe hys graces Armes, or breaketh hys brode Seale wyth a furyouse mynde or wyth vyolence, commytteth treason agaynste hys owne parson. And yet hys Armes and brode Seale are not hys owne parsō. He that clyppyth the Kynges coyne, commytteth treason agaynste the Kynges parson and the common wealth: and yet the money is neyther hys graces parson nor the common wealth. And therfore your argument is but weake and slēder. For euē as a man doth offende agaynste the Prynces parson by dyspysinge his Armes, Seale, or Letters, so doth a mā offende agaynste Christes bodye and bloode, by abvsynge the sacrament of hys bodye and bloode, although he be not there present, as the Kynges parsō is not presente in hys Armes, Seale, or Letters.