A57277:104
A brief declaration of the Lords Supper with some other determinations and disputations concerning…
A brief declaration of the Lords Supper with some other determinations and disputations concerning the same argument by the same author / written by Dr. Nicholas Ridley, Bishop of London during his imprisonment ; to which is annexed an extract of several passages to the same purpose out of a book entitled Diallacticon, written by Dr. John Poynet.A brief declaration of the Lords Supper with some other determinations and disputations concerning the same argument by the same author / written by Dr. Nicholas Ridley, Bishop of London during his imprisonment ; to which is annexed an extract of several passages to the same purpose out of a book intituled Diallacticon, written by Dr. John Poynet.
London: printed for Richard Chiswell, 1688
A BRIEF DECLARATION OF THE Lords Supper.A BREEFE DECLARATION OF THE Lordes Supper.
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.
This answer will serve no more then the other. For here Chrysostom speaketh of such vessels, wherein was that which was called the body of Christ, although it was not the true body (saith he) of Christ, but the mystery of Christs body. Now of the vessels of the old law the writers do use no such manner of phrase: for their sacrifices were not called Christs body. For then Christ was not but in shadows and figures, and not by the Sacrament of his body revealed. Erasmus, which was a man that could understand the words and sense of the writers, although he would not be seen to speak against this error of Transubstantiation, because he durst not: yet in this time declareth plainly that this saying of the writer is none otherwise to be understanded.
This answer wil serue no more then the other. For héere Chrisostom speaketh of such vessells, wherin was that whiche was called the body of Christe, althoughe it was not the true body (saith he) of Christe, but the misterye of Christes bodye. Now of the vessels of the olde lawe the writers doo vse no such manner of phrase: for their sacrifices were not called Christes body. For then Christ was not but in shadows and figures, and not by the Sacrament of his body reuealed. Erasmus, which was a man that coulde vnderstande the woordes and sence of the writers, although hee would not be séene to speak against this errour of Transubstantiatione, because he durste not: yet in this time declareth plainly that this sayinge of the writer is none otherwise to be understanded.
Yet can I (saith the third Papist) find out a fine and subtle solution 1for this place, and grant all that yet is said, both allowing here the writer, and also that he meant of the vessels of the Lords Table. For (saith he) the body of Christ is not contained in them, at the Lords Table, as in a place, but as in a mystery. Is not this a pretty shift, and a mystical solution? But by the same solution then Christs body is not in the Lords Table, nor in the Priests hands, nor in the pyx, and so is he here no where. For they will not say, that he is either here or there, as in a place.