A19571:117
A Defence of the True and Catholic Doctrine of the Sacrament
A defence of the true and catholic doctrine of the sacrament of the body and blood of our saviour Christ with a confutation of sundry errors concerning the same, grounded and stablished upon God's holy word, [and] approved by the consent of the most ancient doctors of the Church. Made by the most reverend father in God Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England and Metropolitan.A defence of the true and catholike doctrine of the sacrament of the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ with a confutacion of sundry errors concernyng the same, grounded and stablished vpon Goddes holy woorde, [and] approued by ye consent of the moste auncient doctors of the Churche. Made by the moste reuerende father in God Thomas Archebyshop of Canterbury, primate of all Englande and Metropolitane.
Imprinted at London : In Poules churcheyarde, at the sign of the Brazen serpent, by Reginald Wolfe. Cum privilegio ad imprimendum solum, Anno Domini. M.D.L. 1550Imprinted at London : In Poules churcheyarde, at the signe of the Brasen serpent, by Reginald Wolfe. Cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum, Anno Domini. M.D.L. 1550
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.
He writeth in his second apology, that the bread, water, and wine in this sacrament, are not to be taken as other common meats and drinks be, but they be meats ordained purposely to give thanks to god, and therefore be called Eucharistia, and be called also the body and blood of Christ. And that it is lawful for none to eat or drink of them, but that profess Christ, and live according to the same. And yet the same meat and drink (saith he) is changed into our flesh and blood, and nourisheth our bodies.
He wryteth in his seconde apologie, that the bread, water, and wine in this sacrament, ar not to be taken as other cōmon meates and drinkes be, but they bee meates ordeyned purposely to geue thankes to god, and therfore be called Eucharistia, and be called also the body and bloude of Christ. And that it is laufull for none to eate or drynke of them, but that professe Christ, and lyue accordyng to the same. And yet the same meate and drynke (saith he) is chaunged into our fleshe and bloud, and norisheth our bodies.
By which saying it is evident, that Justinus thought, that the bread and wine remained still ⟨image 28⟩for else it could not have been turned into our flesh and blood, to nourish our bodies.
By which saiyng it is euident, that Iustinus thought, that the bread and wine remained still ⟨image 28⟩for els it could not haue been tourned into our fleshe and bloud, to nourishe our bodies.
1Next him was Ireneus, above. 150. years after Christ, who (as it is supposed) could not be deceived in the necessary points of our faith, for he was a disciple of Polycarpus, which was disciple to saint John the Evangelist. This Ireneus followeth the sense of Justinus wholly in this matter, and almost also his words, saying, that the bread, wherein we give thanks unto God, although it be of the earth, yet when the name of God is called upon it, it is not than common bread, but the bread of thanks giving, having two things in it, one earthly, and the other heavenly. What meant he by the heavenly thing, but the sanctification which cometh by the invocation of the name of God? And what by the earthly thing? but the very bread, which (as he said before) is of the earth? and which also (he saith) doeth nourish our bodies, as other bread doth which we do use?