A68658:68
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.
At these words the papists do startle: and to say the truth, these words be so plain, so full, & so clear ⟨image 33⟩that they can not tell, what to say, but yet they will not cease to goo about to play the cuttles, and to cast their colours over them, that the truth, which is so plainly told, should not have place. This author wrote (say they) before the determination of the church. As who would say, what so ever that wicked man Innocentius the Pope of Rome determined in his congregations with his monks and friars, that must be (for so Duns sayeth) holden for an article and of the substance of our faith. Some do charge this author that he was suspected to be a Nestorian, which thing in Calcedon counsel was tried and proved to be false. But the fowlest shift of all,1 and yet the best that they can find in this matter, when none other will serve: is to say, that Theodorete understandeth by the word (substance) accidents and not substance in deed. This gloss is like a gloss of a lawyer upon a decree, the text whereof beginneth thus: Statuimus, that is, We decree. The gloss of the lawyer there (after many other pretty shifts there set forth) which he thinketh will not well serve to his purpose, and therefore at ⟨image 34⟩the last to clear the matter, he sayeth thus after the mind of one lawyer. Vel Dic (sayeth he) Statuimus, 2id est, abrogamus, yt is: or expound we do decree, that is, we abrogate or disannul. Is not this a goodly and worthy gloss? who will not say, but he is worthy in the law, to be retained of counsel, that can gloss so well, and find in a matter of difficulty, such fine shifts? And yet this is the law, or at least the gloss of the law. And therefore who can tell, what peril a man may incur to speak against it, except he were a lawyer in deed, which can keep him self out of the briers, what wind so ever blow?
At these wordes the papistes doo startle: and to saye the truthe, these wordes be so playne, so ful, & so cleare ⟨image 33⟩that they can not tell, what to saye, but yet they will not ceasse to goo about to playe the cuttles, and to cast their colours ouer them, that the truthe, which is so plainly told, should not haue place. This autor wrote (saye they) before the determinacion of the churche. As who wold saye, what so euer that wicked man Innocentius the Pope of Rome determined in his congregacions with his monkes and friers, that must be (for so Duns sayeth) holden for an article and of the substaūce of our faithe. Some do charge this autor that he was suspected to be a Nestorian, which thing in Calcedon counsail was tried and proued to be false. But the fowlest shifte of all,