A68658:22
A brief declaration of the Lords Supper, writtenA brief declaracion of the Lordes Supper, written
A brief declaration of the Lords Supper, written by the singular learned man, and most constant martyr of Jesus Christ, Nicholas Ridley Bishop of London prisoner in Oxford, a little before he suffered death for the true testimony of ChristA brief declaracion of the Lordes Supper, written by the syngular learned man, and most constaunt martir of Iesus Christ, Nicholas Ridley Bishop of London prisoner in Oxforde, a litel before he suffred deathe for the true testimonie of Christ
Emden: printed by E. van der Erve, 1555
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
1Thus than hitherto yet, we all agree. But now let us see, wherein the dissension doth stand. The understanding of it, wherein it chiefly standeth, is a steppe to the true searching forth of the truth. For who can seek well a remedy, if he know not before, the disease? It is neither to be denied nor dissembled, that in the matter of this Sacrament ⟨image 8⟩there be diverse points, wherein men (counted to be learned) can not agree. As whether there be any Transubstantiation of the bread, or no any corporal & carnal presence of Christs substance, or no: Whether adoration (due only unto God) is to be done unto the Sacrament or no: and whether Christs body be there offered in deed unto the heavenly father, by the priest or no: and whether the evil man receiveth the natural body of Christ or no. Yet nevertheless as in a man diseased in diverse parts, commonly the original cause of such diverse diseases, which is spread abroad in the body, do come from one chief member, as from the stomach, or from the head: even so all five aforesaid do chiefly hang upon this one question: which is, what is the matter of the Sacrament: whether is it the natural substance of bread, or the natural substance of Christs own body? The truth of this question truly tried out and agreed upon, no doubt shall cease the controversy in all the rest. For if it be Christs own natural body, borne of the virgin: than assuredly (seeing that all learned men in ⟨image 9⟩England so far as I know, both new & old, grant there to be but one substance) than I say, they must needs grant Transubstantiation: that is, a change of the substance of bread, into the substance of Christs body. Than also they must needs grant the carnal and corporal presence of Christs body. Than must the Sacrament be adored with the honour due to Christ him self, for the unity of the two natures in one person. Than if the priest do offer the Sacrament, he doth offer in deed Christ him self. And finally the murderer, the adulterer, or wicked man receiving the Sacrament, must needs than receive also the natural substance of Christs own blessed body, both flesh and blood.
1Thus thā hitherto yet, we al agree. But now let vs see, wherin the dissensiō dothe stande. The vnderstāding of it, wherin it chiefli stādeth, is a steppe to the true searching furthe of the truth. For who can seke well a remedie, if he knowe not before, ye disease? It is nother to be denyed nor dissembled, that in the mater of this Sacramēt