A16596:210
A double summons the one, to unfeigned repentance. The other, to the worthy receiving…A double summons the one, to vnfained repentance. The other, to the worthie receiuing…
A double summons the one, to unfeigned repentance. The other, to the worthy receiving of the Lords Supper. Delivered in two notable sermons: made, by that worthy martyr of Christ, John Bradford: who suffered in Smith-field An[n]o. Domini. 1555.A double summons the one, to vnfained repentance. The other, to the worthie receiuing of the Lords Supper. Deliuered in two notable sermons: made, by that worthy martyr of Christ, Iohn Bradford: who suffered in Smith-field An[n]o. Domini. 1555.
London: printed by George Purslowe, 1617
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.
Whereof it cometh, that the Fathers, as Chrysostom and others, do speak with so full a mouth, when they speak of the Sacrament: for their respect was to Christs words. If the School-men which followed had the same spirit which they had, then would they never have consented to Transubstantiation. For with great admiration some of the Fathers do say; that the bread is changed or turned into the body of Christ, and the wine into his blood: meaning it of a mutation or change, not corporal, but spiritual, figurative, Sacramental, or mystical. For now it is no common bread, nor common wine, being ordained to serve for the food of the soul. The School-men have understood it, as the Papists now speak of a substantial changing, as though it were no great miracle, that common bread should now be assumed into that dignity, that it should be called Christs body, and serve for a celestial food, and be made a Sacrament of his body and blood.
Whereof it commeth, that the Fathers, as Chrysostome and others, doe speake with so ful a mouth, when they speake of the Sacrament: for their respect was to Christs words. If the Schoole-men which followed had the same spirit which they had, then wold they neuer haue consented to Transsubstantiation. For with great admiration some of the Fathers doe say; that the bread is changed or turned into the body of Christ, and the wine into his bloud: meaning it of a mutation or change, not corporall, but spirituall, figuratine, Sacramentall, or mysticall. For now it is no common bread, nor common wine, beeing ordained to serue for the food of the soul. The Schoole-men haue vnderstood it, as the Papists now speake of a substantiall changing, as though it were no great miracle, that common bread should now be assumed into that dignity, that it should bee called Christs body, and serue for a celestiall foode, and be made a Sacrament of his body and bloud.
As before therefore I have spoken,1 I would wish that this Sacrament should be esteemed, and called of us Christian men, after Christs words: namely, the bread Christs body, and the wine Christs blood, rather then otherwise. Not that I mean any other presence of Christs body, then a presence of grace, a preserver to Faith, a presence spiritually: and not corporally, really, naturally, and carnally, as the Papists do mean. For in such sort Christs body is only in heaven, on the right hand of God the Father almighty, whether our faith in the use of the Sacrament, ascendeth and receiveth whole Christ accordingly.