A68658:28
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.
First let us repeat the beginning of the institution of the Lords supper, wherein all the three evangelists, and S. Paul almost in words do agree, saying that Jesus toke bread, gave than kes, brake, and gave it to the disciples, saying. Take, eat, this is my body. Here it appeareth plainly, that Christ calleth very bread, his body. For that which he toke, was very bread. In this all men do agree. And that which he toke, after he had given thanks, he brake: and that which he toke and brake, he gave to his disciples: & that which he toke, brake, and gave to his disciples, he said him self of it: This is my body. So it appeareth plainly, that Christ called very bread his body. But very bread cannot be his body in very substance thereof:1 therefore it must needs have an other meaning. Which meaning appeareth plainly what it is, by the next sentence that followeth immediately, both in Luke & in Paul. And it is this: Do this in remembrance of me. Whereupon it seemeth unto ⟨image 13⟩me to evident, that Christ did take bread, & called it his body, for that he would thereby institute a perpetual remembrance of his body: specially of the singular benefit of our redemption, which he would than procure and purchase unto us, by his body upon the cross. But bread retaining still his own very natural substance, may be thus by grace, (and in a sacramental signification) his body: whereas else the very bread which he toke, brake, and gave them, could not be in any wise his natural body. For that were confusion of substances, and therefore the very words of Christ joined with the next sentence following, both enforceth us to confess the very bread, to remain still, and also openeth unto us, how that bread may be and is thus by his divine power his body, which was given for us. But here I remember, I have red in some writers of the contrary opinion, which do deny that, that which Christ did take, he brake. For (say they) after his taking, he blessed it, as Mark doth speak. And by his blessing, he changed the natural substance of the bread in to the natural ⟨image 13⟩substance of his body: and so although he toke the bread, and blessed it, yet because in blessing he changed the substance of it, he brake not the bread, which than was not there, but only the form thereof.