A19571:118
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.
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?
1Next hym was Ireneus, aboue. 150. yeres after Christ, who (as it is supposed) could not be deceiued in the necessary pointes of our faithe, for he was a disciple of Polycarpus, which was disciple to saint Iohn the Euangelist. This Ireneus foloweth the sense of Iustinus wholly in this matter, and almoste also his woordes, sayenge, that the bread, wherein we geue thankes vnto God, although it be of the yearth, yet whan the name of God is called vpon it, it is not than common bread, but the bread of thankes geuyng, hauyng two thyngs in it, one earthly, and the other heuenly. What ment he by the heauenly thyng, but the sanctification whyche cometh by the inuocation of the name of God? And what by the earthly thynge? but the very bread, which (as he sayd before) is of the earth? and which also (he saith) doeth nourishe our bodies, as other bread dothe whiche we doo vse?