A57277:87
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.
A marvellous thing, how one man can agree with both these two, they being so contrary the one to the other. For the one saith, the word this, demonstrateth the substance of bread: and the other saith no not so, the bread is gone, and it demonstrateth a substance which is Christs body.1
A merhailous thinge, how one man can agrée with both these two, they being so contrary the one to the other. For the one saithe, the woorde this, demonstrateth the substance of bread: and the other saith no not so, the bread is gone, and it demonstrateth a substance whiche is Christes body.1
- 1Guard. to the 4. obiectiou.Gard. to the 4. obiectiou.
Tush saith this third man, ye understand nothing at all. They agree well enough in the chief point, which is the ground 1of all: that is, both doth agree and bear witness, that there is Transubstantiation. They do agree indeed in that conclusion: I grant. But their process and doctrine thereof do even aswell agree together: as did the false witness before Annas & Caiaphas against Christ: or the two wicked Judges against Susanna. For against Christ the false witnesses did agree no doubt to speak all against him. And the wicked judges were both agreed to condemn poor Susanna: but in examination of their witnesses, they dissented so far that all was found false that they went about, both that wherein they agreed, and also those things, which they brought for their proofs.
Tushe saith this third man, yée vnderstand nothing at all. They agree well inough in the chéef poynte, whiche is the ground 1of all: that is, both doth agrée and beare witnes, that there is Transubstantiation. They do agrée indéed in that conclusion: I graunt. But their processe and doctrine therof doo euen aswell agrée togeather: as did the false witnes before Annas & Caiphas against Christ: or the two wicked Iudges against Susanna. For againste Christe the false witnesses did agrée no doubt to speak all againste him. And the wicked iudges were both agréeed to condemne poore Susanna: but in examination of their witnesses, they dissented so far that al was found false that they went about, both that wherin they agréeed, and also those thinges, which they brought for their proofes.