Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	author_n	great_a	write_v	3,726	5	5.3359	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A68658	A 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	Ridley, Nicholas, 1500?-1555.	1555 (1555)	STC 21046; ESTC S115973	31,702	80

yet is not their nature chaūged but abydeth stil. And wher is thā the papistes transubstantiacion The same wrytour in y e secōde dialoge of y e same worke against thaforesaid heretike Eutiches wryteth yet more playnly agaynst this errour of transubstanciacion if any thing can be sayed to be more playne For he maketh the heretike to speake thus against hym that defendeth the true doctrine whom he calleth Orthodoxus As the sacramentes of the body and blood of our Lorde are one thing before the inuocacion and after the inuocaciō they be changed and are made an other so likewise the Lordes body saythe the heretike is after the assūpcion or ascension in to heauen turned in to the substance of God the heretike meaning therby that Christ after his assension remayneth no more a mā To this Orthodoxus answereth thus sayeth to y e heretike Thow art taken sayeth he in thyne owne snare For those mystical symboles or sacramētes after the sanctificacion doo not goo out of their owne nature but they tarye and abyde still in their substaunce figure and shape yea are sensibly sene groped to be y e same they were before c. At these wordes the papistes doo startle and to saye the truthe these wordes be so playne so ful so cleare 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 and yet the best that they can finde in this mater whan none other will serue is to saye that Theodorete vnderstandeth by the worde substaunce accidētes and not substaunce in dede This glose is like a glose of a lawer vpon a decree y e text wherof beginneth thus Statuimus that is We decree The glosse of the lawer ther after many other prety shiftes ther set furthe which he thinketh will not well serue to his purpose and therfore at the last to cleare the mater he sayeth thus after y e mynde of one lawer Vel Dic sayeth he Statuimus id est abrogamus y t is or expoūde we do decree that is we abrogate or disanull Is not this a goodly and worthy glose who will not say but he is worthy in the lawe to be reteyned of counsail that can glose so wel and fynde in a mater of difficultie such fyne shiftes And yet this is the lawe or at least the glose of the lawe And therfore who can tell what perile a man maye incurre to speake against it except he were a lawer in dede which can kepe him self out of the briers what wynde so euer blowe Hitherto ye haue hearde three wrytours of the Greke churche not all what they doo saye for that were a labour to great for to gather and to tedious for y e reader But one or two places of euery one the which how playne how ful and how cleare they be against the errour of transubstanciacion I referre it to the iudgement of the indifferent reader And now I will likewise rehearse the sayenges of other three olde auncient wytours of the latine church so make an ende And furst I will begynne with Tertullian whom Cipriane the holy martyr so highly estemed that whan so euer he wolde haue his boke he was wont to saye Geue vs now the Maister This olde wrytour in his .4 boke agaynst Marcion the heretike saieth thus Iesus made y e breade which he toke and distributed to his disciples his body sayeng This is my body That is to saye sayeth Tertullian afigure of my body In this place it is playne that after Tertullianes expolicion Christ ment not by calling the bread his body the wyne his blood that either the bread was the naturall body or the wyne his natural blood but he called thē his body and blood bicause he wolde institute thē to be vnto vs sacramentes that is holy tokens and signes of his body and of his blood that by them remēbring and firmely beleuing the benefites procured to vs by his body which was torne crucified for vs and of his blood which was shedde for vs vpō the crosse and so with thākes receauing these holy sacraments according to Christes institucion might by the same be spiritually nouryshed and fedde to the encrease of all godlynesse in vs here in our pilgrimage iournaye wherin we walke vnto euerlasting lyfe This was vndoubtedly Christ our saueours mīde and this is Tertullianes exposicion The wranglyng that the Papistes doo make to elude this sayeng of Tertullian is so farre out of frame that it euen wearieth me to thinke on it Tertullian wryteth here saye they as none hathe done hitherto before him This sayeng is toto manyfest false for Origene Hilarie Ambrose Basil Gregorie Nazianzene saint Augustine and other olde autors lykewyse doo call the sacrament a figure of Christes bodye And where they saye that Tertullian wrote this whan he was in a heate of disputacion with an heretike couetyng by all meanes to ouerthrowe his aduersarie As who saye he wolde not take hede what he dyd saye and specially what he wolde wryte in so hyghe a mater so that he might haue the better hande of his aduersarie Is this credible to be true in any godlye wyse man How muche lesse thā is it worthy to be thought or credited in a man of so great a wytte learning and excellencye as Tertullian is worthilye estemed euer for to haue ben Lykewyse this autor in his furst boke agaynst the same heretike Marcion wryteth thus God did not reiect bread which is his creature for by it he hath made a representaciō of his body Now I praye you what is this to saye that Christ hathe made a representacion by bread of his body but that Christ hade instituted and ordayned bread to be a sacrament for to represent vnto vs his body Now whether the representacion of one thing by an other requireth the corporal presence of the thing which is so represented or no euery man that hathe vnderstanding is hable in this point the mater is so cleare of it self to be a sufficient iudge The seconde doctour and wrytour of the latine churche whose sayenges I promysed to set furthe is S. Augustine of whose learning and estimacion I nede not to speake For all the churche of Christ bothe hathe and euer hathe hade hym for a man of most singular learnyng witte and diligence

apparailed ▪ maye represent a kyng or a prince in a playe Alas let men leaue lyeng and speake the truthe euery one not only to his neighbour but also of his neighbour for we are membres one of an other sayeth saint Paule The controuersie no doubt which at this daye troubleth the churche wherin any meane learned man either olde or newe dothe stande in is not whether the holy Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ is no better than a piece of cōmō bread or no or whether the Lordes table is no more to be regarded thā the table of any earthy man or no or whether it is but a bare signe or figure of Christ and nothing elles or no. For all doo graunt that S. Paules wordes doo require that the bread which we breake is the partaking of the body of Christ and also doo graunt hym that eateth of that bread or drinketh of y e cuppe vnworthily to be giltie of the Lordes death and to eate and drinke his owne damnacion bicause he estemeth not the Lordes body All doo graunt that these wordes of S. Paule whan he sayeth If we eate it auantageth vs nothing or if we eate not we want nothīg therby are not spoken of the Lordes table but of other common meates Thus 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 y e disease It is nother to be denyed nor dissembled that in the mater of this Sacramēt ther be diuerse poyntes wherin men counted to be learned can not agree As whether ther be any Transubstanciation of the bread or no any corporal carnall presence of Christes substaūce or no Whether adoracion due onlye vnto God is to be done vnto the Sacrament or no and whether Christes bodye be ther offred in dede vnto y e heauēly father by y e priest or no and whether y e euil man receaueth the naturall bodye of Christ or no. Yet neuerthelesse as in a man diseased in dyuerse partes commonlye the originall cause of suche diuerse diseases which is spredde abroade in the body doo come from one chefe membre as from the stomacke or from the head euen so all fyue aforesayed doo chiefly heng vpon this one question which is what is the mater of the Sacrament whether is it the naturall substaunce of bread or the natural substaunce of Christes owne body The truthe of this questiō truly tryed out and agreed vpon no doubt shal ceasse the cōtrouersie in al y e rest For if it be Christes owne natural body borne of the virgine than assuredly seing that all learned men in Englande so farre as I knowe bothe newe olde graūt there to be but one substaunce than I saye they must nedes graunt Transubstanciacion that is a chaūge of y e substaunce of bread into the substaunce of Christes bodye Thā also they must nedes graunt the carnall and corporal presence of Christes bodye Than must the Sacramēt be adored with y e honour due to Christ him selfe for the vnitie of the two natures in one persone Than yf y e priest do offre the Sacrament he dothe offre in dede Christ him selfe And finally the murtherour the aduouterour or wicked mā receauing the Sacramēt must nedes than receaue also the natural substaūce of Christes owne blessed bodye bothe fleshe and blood Nowe on y e other syde yf after the truthe shalbe truly tryed out it shalbe founde that the substaūce of bread is the naturall substaunce of the Sacrament although for the chaunge of the vse office and dignitie of y e bread the bread in dede sacramentally is chaunged into the bodye of Christ as the water in Baptisme is sacramētally chaūged into the fountayne of regeneration yet the natural substaunce therof remayneth all one as was before yf I say the true solucion of that former question whervpon al these controuersies do heng be that the naturall substaunce of bread is the material substaunce in the Sacrament of Christes blessed body than must it nedes folowe of the former proposicion confessed of all that be named to be learned so farre as I do knowe in Englande which is that ther is but one material substaunce in the Sacrament of the bodye and one only lykewise in the Sacrament of the blood that ther is no suche thing in dede and in truthe as they call Transubstanciacion for the substaunce of bread remayneth stil in the Sacrament of the bodye than also the natural substaūce of Christes humane nature which he toke of the virgine Mary is in heauē where it reigneth nowe in glorie and not here inclosed vnder the forme of bread than that godly honour which is only due vnto God y e creatour may not be done vnto the creature without idolatrie and sacrilege is not to be done vnto the holy Sacrament Than also the wicked I meane the impenitēt murtherour aduouterour or suche like do not receaue the natural substaūce of y e blessed body blood of Christ. Finally thā dothe it folowe y e Christes blessed body blood which was once only offred shedde vpō the crosse being auaileable for the sinnes of al the hole worlde is offred vp nomore in'the natural substaūce therof nother by y e priest nor any other thing But here before we go any further to searche in this mater to wade as it were to search trye out as we may y e truthe hereof in the scripture it shall do wel by the way to knowe whether they that thus make answere solucion vnto the former principal questiō do take awaye symplie and absolutly the presence of Christes body blood from the Sacrament ordayned by Christ and duely ministred according to his holy ordinaunce and instituciō of the same Undoubtedly they doo denye that vtterlye either so to saye or so to meane Hereof yf any man do or will doubt the bookes which are writtē already in this mater of them that thus doo answere will make the mater playne Now than wil you say what kynd of presence do they graunt what do they denye Bryefly they denie the presence of Christes body in the naturall substaunce of his humane assumpt nature and graunt the presence of the same by grace that is they affirme and saye that the substaūce of the naturall body and blood of Christ is onlye remaynyng in heauē and so shalbe vnto the later daye whan he shall come agayne in glorie accompanied with the Aūgelles of heauen to iudge bothe the quicke and the deade And that the same natural substaūce of the very bodye blood of Christ bycause it is vnited vnto the diuine nature in Christ y e secōde person of the Trinitie Therfore it hathe not onlye lyfe in it selfe but is also hable to geue dothe geue lyfe vnto so