A68658:56
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.
1The second of the two new found answers, is yet most monstrous of all other, which is this. But let us grant (say they) that Origen spake of the Lords supper, and by the matter thereof was understanded the material substance of bread & wine: what than, say they? For though the material substance was once gone, & departed by reason of Transubstantiation, whiles the forms of the bread and the wine did remain, yet now it is no inconvenience to say, that as the material substance did depart at the entering in of Christs body under the aforesaid forms: so when the said forms be destroyed and do not remain, than cometh again the substance of bread & wine. And this say they, is very mete in this mystery, that that which began with the miracle, shall end in a miracle. If I had not read this fantasy, I would scarcely have believed, that any learned man ever would have set forth such a foolish fantasy: which not only lacketh all ground, either of God's word, reason, or of any ancient writer, but is also clean contrary to the common rules of school divinity: which is, that no miracle is ⟨image 28⟩to be affirmed and put without necessity. And although for their former miracle, which is their Transubstantiation, they have some colour, though it be but vain, saying, it is done by the power and virtue of these words of Christ, This is my body: yet to make this second miracle of returning the material substance again, they have no colour at all. Or else I pray them show me, by what words of Christ is the second miracle wrought. Thus ye may see, that the sleights and shifts which craft and wit can invent to wrest the true sense of Origene, can not take place. But now let us hear one other place of Origene, and so we will let him go.
1The seconde of the two newe foūde answeres, is yet most monstrous of al other, which is this. But let vs graūt (saye they) that Origen spake of ye Lordes supper, and by the mater therof was vnderstanded the material substaunce of bread & wyne: what thā, say they? For though ye material substaūce was once gone, & departed by reason of Transubstanciacion, whiles the formes of the bread and the wyne did remayne, yet now it is no inconueniēce to saye, that as the material substaūce did departe at the entring in of Christes body vnder thaforesayd formes: so whan the sayd formes be destroyed and do not remayne, than cometh agayn the substaunce of bread & wyne. And this say they, is very mete in this mysterie, that that which beganne wt the miracle, shall ende in a myracle. Yf I hade not redde this fantasie, I wolde scarcely haue beleued, that any learned mā euer wolde haue set furth suche a foolishe fantasie: which not onlye lacketh all grounde, either of Goddes worde, reason, or of any auncient wrytour, but is also cleane contrarie to the common rules of schole diuinitie: which is, that no miracle is