A17659:78
A faithful and most godly treatise concerning the most sacred Sacrament of the blessed…A faythfull and moost godlye treatyse concernyng the most sacred Sacrament of the blessed…
A faithful and most godly treatise concerning the most sacred Sacrament of the blessed body and blood of our saviour Christ, co[m]piled by John Calvin, a man of no less learning and literature then godly study, and example of living. And translated into Latin by Lacius a man of like excellency. And now last of all, translated into English by a faithful brother, no less desirous to profit the weak brothers then to exercise the talent of the Lord to his honour and glory. In declaration whereof, he hath set before this little book an epistle to the reader much more effectuous then in the first edition. Whereunto the order that the church and congregation of Christ in Denmark doth use at the receiving of baptism, the Supper of the Lord, and wedlock: is added. Myles CoverdaleA faythfull and moost godlye treatyse concernyng the most sacred Sacrament of the blessed body and bloude of our sauioure Chryst, co[m]piled by Iohn Caluyne, a man of no lesse lernyng and lytterature then godly studye, and example of liuyng. And translated into Latin by Lacius a man of lyke excellencie. And nowe last of all, translated into Englyshe by a faythfull brother, no lesse desirous to profyt the weake brotheres then to exercise the talent of the Lorde to his honoure and glorye. In declaration whereof, he hath set before this lytle booke an epistle to the reader much more effectuous then in the fyrst edicion. Whereunto the order that the churche and congregation of Christ in Denmarke doth vse at the receyuying of baptisme, the Supper of ye Lorde, and wedlocke: is added. Myles Couerdale
London: printed by John Day for William Seres?, 1548
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.
First that comment hath no foundation at all in the scripture, neither hath it any testimony ⟨image 27⟩of the old congregation: and therefore can it by no means agree or stand with the words of the lord. Is not such an interpretation to violent and to much wrested? To say, that when Christ showing bread, calleth it his body, the substance of the bread is consumed, and that the body of Christ succeedeth in the place thereof? But it needeth not to call the matter into question, seeing that the bright & splendiferous verity is of it self able to confute so absurd a vanity. I let pass infinite testimonies both of the scripture and of the fathers also, wherein the sacrament is called bread. I say this only, that the nature of the Sacrament requireth: that the material bread remain for the visible sign of the body For it is a general rule among y• sacraments: that the signs which we see in them, ought to have some similitude with the spiritual thing that they represent. As we are therefore in baptism, certified that our souls be inwardly washed, when the water, y• washeth the filth of the body, is poured upon us to declare y• same thing: even so must there needs be in the supper material bread, that it may be declared unto us that the body of Christ is our food. For what declaration were it, if the quality witness should represent unto us that body. We know therefore manifestly, that unless the substance of bread do there remain, all the representation, which the lord (willing to accommodate him self to our infirmity) gave unto us: doth utterly decay and perish.
Fyrst that cōment hath no foundacion at al in the scripture, neyther hath it any testemonie ⟨image 27⟩of the olde congregation: and therfore can it by no meanes agree or stande with the wordes of the lorde. Is not suche an interpretacion to violent and to muche wrasted? To saye, that when Christ shewynge bread, calleth it his bodye, the substance of the bread is cōs•med, and that the bodye of Christe succedeth in the place thereof? But it neadeth not to call the matter into question, seinge that the bryght & splendiferouse veritie is of it selfe able to confute so absurde a vanitie. I let passe infinite testimonyes both of the scripture and of the fathers also, wherin the sacramente is called breade. I saye this onely, that the nature of the Sacramēt requireth: that the material bread remayne for the visible signe of the body For it is a generall rule amonge y sacramētes: that the signes whiche we se in them, ought to haue some similitude wyth the spirituall thinge that they represent. As we are therfore in baptisme, certifyed that oure soules be inwardlye washed, whē the water, y washeth the fylth of the body, is powred vpō vs to declare y same thing: euen so must there neades be in the supper materiall breade, that it may be declared vnto vs that the bodye of Christe is oure foode. For what declaracyon were it, yf the qualitie wytnes shoulde represent vnto vs that body. We knowe therfore manifestlye, that vnlesse the substance of bread do there remayne, al the representacion, whiche the lorde (wyllynge to accommodate hym selfe to oure infirmitie) gaue vnto vs: doth vtterly decaye and peryshe.