A57277:65
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.
And here in speaking of the Lords Cup: it cometh unto my remembrance the vanity of Innocentius his fantastical invention, which by Pauls words I did confute before, and here did promise somewhat more to speak, and that is this: if this Transubstantiation be made by this word, Blessed, in Mark said upon the bread, as Innocentius that Pope did say: then surely seeing that word is not said of Christ neither in any of the Evangelists nor in S. Paul upon the cup: There is no Transubstantiation of the Wine at all. For where the cause doth fall, there cannot follow the effect. But the sacramental Bread and the sacramental Wine do both remain in their natural substance a like, and if the one be not changed, as of the sacramental Wine it appeareth evidently: then there is no such Transubstantiation in neither of them both.
And heer in speaking of the Lords Cup: it commeth vnto my remembrance the vanitie of Innocentius his fantasticall inuention, which by Paules woordes I did confute before, and héer did promise somwhat more to speake, and that is this: if this Transubstantiatione be made by this woorde, Blessed, in Mark said vpon the breade, as Innocentius that Pope did saye: then surely seeing that woord is not saide of Christe neither in any of the Euangelistes nor in S. Paule vpon the cup: There is no Transubstantiatione of the Wine at all. For where the cause dooth falle, there cannot follow the effect. But the sacramental Bread and the sacramental Wine doo both remain in their naturall substance a like, and if the one be not changed, as of the sacramental Wine it appeareth euidently: then there is no such Transubstantiatione in nother of them both.
All that trust and affirm this change of the substance of bread 1and mine into the substance of Christs Body and Blood called Transubstantiation: do also say this change to be made by a certain form of prescript words, and none other. But what ⟨p. 12⟩they be that make the change, either of the one, or of the other: undoubtedly even they that do write most finely in these our days, almost confess plainly, that they can not tell. For although they grant to certain of the old authors, as Chrysostom, and Ambrose: that these words This is my body, are the words of consecration