A14347:169
A discourse or treatise of Peter Martyr Vermilla Floor[n]tine, the public reader of divinity…A discourse or traictise of Petur Martyr Vermilla Flore[n]tine, the publyque reader of diuinitee…
A discourse or treatise of Peter Martyr Vermilla Floor[n]tine, the public reader of divinity in the University of Oxford wherein he openly declared his whole and determinate judgement concerning the sacrament of the Lords supper in the said University.A discourse or traictise of Petur Martyr Vermilla Flore[n]tine, the publyque reader of diuinitee in the Vniuersitee of Oxford wherein he openly declared his whole and determinate iudgemente concernynge the sacrament of the Lordes supper in the sayde Vniuersitee.
London: printed by Robert Stoughton i.e. E. Whitchurch for Nicolas Udall, 1550London: printed by Robert Stoughton i.e. E. Whitchurch for Nycolas Udall, 1550
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Now must we answer to the arguments of these men, where with they goo about to prove their transubstantiation. And as concerning the first, we answer, that Christ did promise us his flesh or his body and blood, to be our meat and drink and that in the sixth Chapter of John, which thing he doeth as oft as we do truly believe that he dyed for us, he did also perform the same, when at his last Supper he ordained this Sacrament, for he joined the signs to that spiritual eating. But they did most chiefly and principally lay against us this sentence. This is my body, about the verity of which saying is now all our controversy, but all our contention consisteth in this only point, how and in what manner it is his body for both parts, that is to wit, as well our adversaries as we do hold that it is a true proposition or sentence. And all our contention and strife is only about the sense or meaning of it.
Nowe muste we answere to the argumentes of these menne, where with thei gooe aboute to proue their transubstantiation. And as concernyng the first, we aunswere, that Christ did promisse vs his fleashe or his bodye and bloude, to be our meate and dryncke and that in the sixth Chapitur of Ihon, whiche thing he dooeth as ofte as we dooe truelye beleue that he dyed for vs, he dyd also perfourme the same, whan at his laste Supper he ordeyned this Sacramente, for he ioygned the sygnes to that spirituall eatyng. But they dyd most chiefelye and principally laye agaynste vs this sentence. This is my bodye, aboute the veritie of whiche sayinge is nowe all oure controuersie, but all oure contencion consisteth in this onelye poyncte, howe and in what mannier it is his bodye for bothe partes, that is to weete, as well oure aduersaries as we dooe holde that it is a true proposicion or sentence. And all oure contencion and striefe is onelye aboute the sense or meanynge of it.
They say, it is a plain sentence: & we on the other side put them in remembrance of that which Augustine teacheth in his book entitled de doctrina Christiana, ⟨image 47⟩