princes and cities they enumerate among the abuses that
laymen commune only under one form, and as, therefore, in
their dominions both forms are administered to laymen, we
must reply, according to the custom of the Holy Church, that
this is incorrectly enumerated among the abuses, but that,
according to the sanctions and statutes of the same Church it
is rather an abuse and disobedience to administer to laymen
both forms. For under the one form of bread the saints
communed in the primitive Church, of whom Luke says: "They
continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and
fellowship, and in breaking of bread." Acts 2:42. Here Luke
mentions bread alone. Likewise Acts 20:7 says: "Upon the
first day of the week, when the disciples came together to
break bread." Yea, Christ, the institutor of this most holy
sacrament, rising again from the dead, administered the
Eucharist only under one form to the disciples going to
Emmaus, where he took bread and blessed it, and brake and
gave to them, and they recognized him in the breaking of
bread. Luke 24:30, 31: where indeed Augustine, Chrysostome,
Theophylact and Bede some of whom many ags ago and not long
after the times of the apostles affirm that it was the
Eucharist. Christ also (John 6) very frequently mentions
bread alone. St. Ignatius, a disciple of St. John the
Evangelist, in his Epistle to the Ephesians mentions the
bread alone in the communion of the Eucharist. Ambrose does
likewise in his books concerning the sacraments, speaking of
the communion of Laymen. In the Council of Rheims, laymen
were forbidden from bearing the sacrament of the Body to the
sick, and no mention is there made of the form of wine. Hence
it is understood that the viaticum was given the sick under