A19571:176
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.
An other reason have they of like strength.1 If the bread should remain (say they) than should follow many absurdities,2 and chiefly, that Christ hath taken the nature of bread, as he took the nature of man, and so joined it to his substance. And than as we have God verily incarnate for our redemption, so should we have him Impanate.
An other reason haue they of lyke strengthe.1 If the breade shoulde remaine (saye they) than shulde folowe many absurdities,2 and chiefely, that Christe hath taken the nature of breade, as he tooke the nature of manne, and so ioyned it to his substance. And than as we haue God verely incarnate for our redemption, so shoulde wee haue him Impanate.
- 1Chap. 9.
- 2The second argument for transubstantiationThe secōd argument for trāsubstantiation
Thou mayest consider,1 good reader, that the rest of their reasons be very weak and feeble, when these be the chief and strongest. Truth it is in deed, that Christ should have been ⟨image 39⟩impanate, if he had joined the bread unto his substance in unity of person, that is to say, if he had joined the bread unto him in such sort, that he had made the bread one person with him self. But for as much as he is joined to the bread but sacramentally, there followeth no Impanation thereof, no more than the holy ghost is Inaquate, that is to say, made water, being sacramentally joined to the water in baptism.