Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	body_n	bread_n	transubstantiation_n	2,166	5	10.9952	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10777	Certe[n] godly, learned, and comfortable conferences, betwene the two reuerende fathers, and holye martyrs of Christe, D. Nicolas Rydley late Bysshoppe of London, and M. Hughe Latymer sometyme Bysshoppe of Worcester, during the tyme of their emprysonmentes. Whereunto is added. A treatise agaynst the errour of transubstantiation, made by the sayd reuerende father D. Nicolas Rydley. M.D.LVI.	Ridley, Nicholas, 1500?-1555.; Latimer, Hugh, 1485?-1555. aut; Ridley, Nicholas, 1500?-1555. Brief declaracion of the Lordes Supper. aut	1556 (1556)	STC 21048; ESTC S115941	68,037	134

to his disciples and that whiche he tooke brake and gaue to his disciples he sayd hym self of it This is my bodye So it appeareth plainlye that Christ called verye bread his bodye But very bread can not be his bodye in verye substāce therof therfore it muste nedes haue an other meanyng whiche meanyng appeareth plainlye what it is by the nexte sentence that followeth immediatlie both in Luke and in Paule and that is this Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Doo this in remēbraūce of me wher vppon it seameth vnto me to be euidēt that Christ dyd take bread and called yt his bodye for that he wold institute therby a perpetuall remembraunce of his bodye specially of that singular benefyte of our redemptyon whiche he wold then procure and purchase vnto vs by his bodye vppon the crosse But bread retayning still his owne very naturall substance maye be thus by grace and in a sacramentall signification his bodye wheras elles the verie bread which he tooke brake and gaue them could not be in any wise his naturall bodye for that were confusyon of substances And therfore the verye wordes of Christ ioyned with the nexte sentence following bothe enforceth vs to confesse the verye bread to remayn still and also openeth vnto vs howe that bread maye be and is thus by his diuine power hys bodye which was giuen for vs. But here I remembre I haue redde in soome writers of the contrarie opinion An obiection whiche doo denye that that whiche Christ dyd take he brake For saie they after his taking he blessed it as Marcke doth speke Marc. 14. ād by his blessing he chaunged the naturall substance of the bread into the naturall substance of his bodye and so althowgh he tooke the bread and blessed it yet because in blessing he chaunged the substance of it he brake not the bread which then was not ther but onely the forme therof Vnto this obiection I haue ij playne answers Ansvuer boeth grounded vpon Godds woorde Thone I wyll here reherse thother aunsweare I will differ vntill I speake of the Sacrament of the bloude Mine aunsweare here is taken out of the plaine wordes of S Paule whiche doth manifestlie confound this phantastical inuention first inuented I wene of Pope Innocentius and after confirmed by the subtill sophister Dunse and latelye renued nowe in our daies with an eloquent stile and muche finesse of witte It is mente of a booke firste sette forth vnder the name of M. Antonius Constantius And after vuard of Ste ▪ Gard. Bishop of Vuinch But what can crafty inuention subtiltie in sophismes eloquence or finesse of witte preuaile against the infallible worde of god What nede we to striue and contēd what thing we breake for Paule saith speking vndoubtedlie of the Lordes table the breade saieth he whiche wee breake is it not the partakinge or felowshyp of the Lordes bodie Wherupō it foloweth that after the thankes geuing it is bread whiche we breake And how often in the Acts of the Apostles is the Lords supper signified by breakinge of breade They did perseuer saieth S Luke in the Apostles doctrine communion and breakyng of breade Act. 2. ibidem And againe they brake breade in euerie house And againe in an other place When they were come together to breake breade Act. 20. S Paule whiche setteth forth moste fullye in his writing boeth the doctrine and the vse of the Lordes supper and the sacramentall eatynge 1. Cor. 10.11 and drynkinge of Christes bodie and bloude calleth it fiue tymes breade breade breade breade breade The sacramentall breade is the misticall bodye The 2 reason and so is called in scripture 1 Cor. 10. as it is called the naturall bodye of Christe But Christes misticall bodye is the congregacion of Christians 1. Cor. 10. Now no manne was euer so fonde as to saye that that sacramentall bread is transubstantiated and changed into the substaunce of the congregatiō Wherfore no manne shoulde lykewise thynke or saie that the breade is transubstantiated and chaunged into the naturall substaunce of Christes humaine nature But my mynde is not here to wryte what maye bee gathered oute of scriptures for this purpose but onelye to wryte here briefelye those whyche seeme to me to be the mooste playne places Therfore contented to haue spoken thus muche of the sacramentall breade nowe I wyll speake a litle of the Lordes cuppe And this shal be my thirde argument grounded vpon Christes owne woordes The. 3. argument The naturall substance of the sacramentall wine remaineth stil and is the materiall substance of the sacramente of the bloude of Christe therfore it is likewise so in the sacramentall bread I knowe that he that is of a contrarie opinion will denie the former parte of my argumente But I will proue it thus by the plaine wordes of Christe himselfe Matt. 26. Mar. 14. both in Mathewe and in Marke Christes wordes be thus after the wordes saide vpon the cuppe I saye vnto you saieth Christe I will not drinke henseforth of this fruite of the vine tree vntill I shall drinke that newe in my fathers kingedome Here note how Christ calleth plainelye his cuppe the fruite of the vine tree but the fruite of the vine tree is very natural wine wherfore the naturall substance of the wine doeth remaine still in the sacramente of Christes bloude And here in spekinge of the Lordes cup it commeth vnto my remembrance the vanitye of Innocentius his phantasticall inuention whiche by Paules wordes I did confute before and here did promise somewhat more to speake and that is this Yf the Transubstantiacion be made by this worde blissed in Marke saide vpon the bread as Innocentius that Pope did saie then suerlie seing that worde is not saide of Christe neither in any of the Euangelistes nor in Paule vpon the cuppe there is no Transubstantiation of the wine at all for where the cause doth faile there can not folow the effecte But the sacramentall breade and the sacramentall wine do both remaine in their naturall substance alike and if the one be not changed as of the sacramētall wine it appeareth euidentlye then there is noe suche Transubstantiation in neither of them boeth All that put and afferme this change of the substaunce of breade and wine into the substance of Christes body and bloud called transubstantiation doe also saie and affirme this change to be made by a certaine forme of prescript wordes and none other but what they bee that make the chaunge either of the one or of the other vndoubtedlye euen they that do write moste finelie in these oure daies almoste confesse plainelie Vuinch in the ansvuer to the 48. obiection that they can not tell For although they graunt to certaine of the olde Soctours as Chrisostome ād Ambrose that these wordes This is my bodie are the wordes of Consecration of the sacrament of the bodie yet saie they these wordes maie well bee so

pronoune demonstratiue meaning the worde this if ye will know what it doth shewe or demonstrate whether the bread that Christ toke or no he answereth no but only one thing in substāce it pointeth wherof the nature or name it doeth not tell but leaueth that to be determined and tolde by that which foloweth the word is that is by predicatum as the Logician doeth speake and therfore he calleth this pronowne demonstratiue this indiuiduum vagum that is a wanderynge proper name whereby we maie pointe out and shewe any one thing in substance what thing soeuer it be That this imagination is vaine and vntruly applied vnto those wordes of Christ this is my body it maie appeare plainly by the wordes of Luke and Paul saide vpon the cup conferred with the forme of wordes spoken vpon the cuppe in Mathew and Marke for as vpon the bread it is saide of all this is my bodie so of Mathewe and Marke is saide of the cup this is my bloud Then if in the wordes This is my bodye the woorde this be as Dunse calleth it a wanderynge name to appointe and shewe furthe anye one thinge whereof the name or nature it doeth not tell so muste it bee lykewyse in those woordes of Mathewe and Marke vpon the Lordes cup This is my bloud But in the wordes of Mathewe and Marke it signifieth and pointeth out the same that it doth in the lordes wordes vpon the cuppe in Luke and Paule where it is saide This cuppe is the newe testamente in my bloude c· Therefore in Mathewe and Marke the pronowne demonstratiue this doeth not wander to poynte onelie one thynge in substaunce not shewyng what it is but telleth it plainelie what it is no lesse in Mathewe and Marke to the eye then is done in Luke and Paul by putting to this word cuppe boeth vnto the eye and vnto the eare ▪ For taking the cuppe and demonstrating or shewing it vnto his disciples by this pronowne demonstratiue this and sayng vnto them drynk ye all of this it was then all one to saye This is my bloud as to say This cupp is my bloud meaning by the cuppe as the nature of the spech doth require the thing cōteyned in the cupp so likewise withowt all dowbte when Christ had taken bread geuen thankes and broken it and geuing it to his disciples sayd Take and so demonstrating and shewing that bread which he had in his handes to saye then This is my bodye and to haue sayd this bread is my bodye As it were all one if a man lacking a knyffe and going to his oysters wold saye to another whom he sawe to haue ij knyfes Syr I praye yow lend me th one of your knyfes were it not nowe all one to answer him Syr hold I will lende yow this to eate your meate but not to open oysters with all ād hold I will lend yow this knyf to eate your meate but not to open oysters This similitud serueth but for this purpose to declare the nature of spech whithall wher as the thing that is demonstrated and shewed is euidētly perceaued and openly knowen vnto the eye But o good Lord what a wonderfull thing is it to see howe soome Vuinch in the ansvuer to the 13 obiectiō men doo labour to teache what is demonstrated and shewed by the pronowne demōstratiue this in Christes wordes when he saith This is my bodie this is my bloud howe they labour I saye to teache what that this was then in dede when Christ spake in the beginning of the sentence the word this before he had pronownced the rest of the wordes that followed in the same sentence so that their doctrine maye agree with their transubstantiation which in dede is the verye foundacion wherin all their erroneous doctrine doth stand And here the transubstantiators doo not agree amongest them selfes The papistes them selfes doo not agree no more then they doo in the wordes which wrought the transubstātiacion when Christ did first institute his sacrament Wherin Innocentius Bisshopp of Rome of the latter dayes and Duns as was noted before do attribute the worke vnto the word benedixit blessed But the rest for the most part to Hoc est corpus meum This is my bodye c. Dunse therfore with his secte because he putteth the chaunge before must nedes saye that this when Christ spake it in the beginning of the sentēce was in dede Christes bodye For in the chaunge the substance of bread did departe and the chaunge was nowe doone in benedixit sayth he that went before And therfore after him and his that this was then in dede Christes bodye thowgh the word did not import so muche but onely one thing in substance which substāce after Duns the breade being gone must nedes be the substance of Christes bodye But they that putt their transubstantiacion to be wrought by these wordes of Christ This is my bodye and doo saye that when the hole sentence was finished then this chaunge was perfected and not before they can not saie but yet Christes this in the beginninge of the sentence before the other wordes were fully pronoūced was breade in deede For as yet the change was not done and soe longe the bread must nedes remainer and so longe as the substance of the bread doth remaine so long with the vniuersal consent of al trāsubstantiators the natural substance of Christes body cānot come and therfore muste their this of necessitie demonstrate and shew the substance which was as yet in the pronouncing of the first worde this by Christ but breade But how cā they make and verifie Christs words to bee true demostrating the substance whiche in the demonstration is but breade and saie therof This is my bodie that is as they saie the naturall substance of Christes bodie except they wolude saie that the verbe is signifieth is made or is chāged into and so thē if the same verbe is be of the same effecte in Christes wordes spoken vpon the cuppe and rehearsed by Luke and Paule the cuppe or the wine in the cuppe must be made or turned into the newe testament as was declared before Vuinch is become a Neutrall There bee some amonge the transubstantiators whiche walke soe wilely and soe warely betwixte these ij aforesaide opinions allowinge them both and holding plainelye neither of them boeth that me thinke they maie be called Neutrals Ambidexters or rather suche as canne shifte on boeth sides They plaie on boeth partes for with the latter they doe allowe the doctrine of the laste sillable whiche is that transubstantiation is done by miracle in an instante at the sound of the laste sillable um in this sentēce hoc est corpus meum And they do alow Dunses phantastical imaginacion of indiuiduū vagum that demonstrateth as he teacheth in Christes wordes one thing in substaunce then beinge after his mynde the substaunce of the bodie of Christe A marueilous thing howe anye manne can agree with both these

Certē godly learned and comfortable conferences betwene the two Reuerende Fathers and holye Martyrs of Christe D. Nicolas Rydley late Bysshoppe of London and M. Hughe Latymer Sometyme Bysshoppe of Worcester during the tyme of theyr emprysonmentes Wherunto is added A Treatise agaynst the errour of Transubstantiation made by the sayd Reuerende Father D. Nicolas Rydley M.D.LVI Ryghte deare in the sighte of the Lorde is the death of his sainctes Psal. 116. To The Reader GRace and peace c. Good Christian Reader her are sett forthe for thine instruction and comforte certen learned and comfortable conferences Betwene the two Reuerende and godly fathers M. Rydley and M. Latymer whose bodies the Romishe tyrannie of late hathe tormented and fier hathe consumed whose sowles mercie hathe embraced and heauen hathe receiued yelding th one vnto the enemie to deathe for testimonie of the truthe commending thother vnto god in suer hope of lyfe Wher vnto is also added a learned treatise and a cleare confutation of the fonde and wicked opinion of Transubstantiation written by the said M. Ridley And forasmuche as these their scrolles and writynges wer by goddes good prouidence preserued and as it wer raked owte of the asshes of thauthors cōteinīge as well cōfortable cōsolatiō for suche as are in the schole of the crosse as also goode ād profitable admonitiō for them which eyther of ignorāce either of infirmitie or by flattering of them selfes with vayne pretenses do yelde vnto the wicked worlde the reuerence due to the reuerende fathers the zeale towardes the setting forthe of the tried truthe and the readye goode will to conforte and confirme weake consciences would not suffer the any lenger to wante these smalle treatises and yett no smalle treasures That as in life thei profited the by teaching and in deathe by example so after death they may doe the goode by writing And albeit the matter of it selfe is sufficiente to commend it selfe yet it cannot be but the worthines of the writers will encrease creditte and giue no small authoritie to the writynges M. Latymer came earlier in the morning and was the more auncient workeman in the lordes vineyarde Matt. 20. who also may verie well be called as diuerse learned men haue termed hym the Apostle of Englād as one much more worthie of that name for his true doctrine for his sharpe reprouinge of sinne and superstition then was Augustine bisshop of Canturburie for bringing in the popes monkerie and false religion M. Ridley came later aboute theleuenth howre but no doubte he came when he was effectuallye called and frō the time of his calling became a faithfull labourer terrible to the enemies for his excellent learning and therfore a meete man to ridde owte of the lordes vineyarde the sophisticall thornes of the wrangling aduersaries which dyd well appeare in all disputations and conferences that wer in his tyme and partlye doth appeare in these shorte treatises folowing But what shal it nede in manye wordes to prayse them whose lyfes wer moste commendable whose deathes wer most glorious in office and vocation bothe lyke in labour and trauail bothe faithfull in learning and iudgemēt both sounde in minde and maners bothe milde but in goddes cause bothe stoute For neither threatned deathe neither loue of present lyfe could shake the foundation of theyr faithe firmely grounded apon the suer rocke Christe Matt. 7. They redemed libertie of conscience with the bondage of the bodie and to saue their lyfes they wer content to lose their lyfes This was not the worke of the fleshe but the operation of goddes mightie spirite who hathe euer frome the beginning not onlye builded but also enlarged his churche by the sufferance of his sainctes and sealed his doctrine with the bloude of his martyrs as S. Augustine speaking of the persecutions in the primatiue church doth well declare in theis wordes Ligabantur includebantur caedebantur De ciuita Dei lib. 22 cap. 6. torque bantur urebantur multiplicabantur That is to saye The Christians wer bounde wer emprisoned wer beaten wer tormented wer brente and yet wer multiplyed Yf Iustinus Martyr when he was yet an heathen Philosopher as he confesseth of hym selfe was moued to embrace the fayth and religion of Christe Apolog. 1 in beholding the constante patience of the martyrs which suffred for Christe in his tyme how muche more oughte the patiente suffringe and voluntarie death of these notable fathers with many other learned godlye men in our dayes whose names are writtē in the booke of lyfe not only moue but also pearce ād perswade all godly heartes constantely to remayne in the truthe knowen For vndoubtedly the truthe of the cawse they suffred for is moste euidente by goddes worde and hath ben so fully taughte so clearly sette forthe by many and sundrye writynges that it is open to the Consciences of all the worlde euen of the verie aduersaries themselfes that persequute it greater is theyr damnation excepte it be to such whome the godde of thys worlde 2. Cor. 4. malice ambition auarice or ignorance hath blynded Which thynge nedeth none other proofe especially for the realme of englande but only to call to mynde with what conscience and constancie these pyllers of the church that can nott erre haue walked in Religion these twentye yeares by paste how they not longe agoo receiued and allowed thynges which with fyre and fagotte they persequute now and shranke frome that thē which now they moste earnestly mainteyne And allthoughe ther appeared in the latter dayes a shadow of stowtenesse in a few yet it was in dede nothynge For it sprange not owte of any zeale to the cawse or clearenesse of conscience but rather owte of a lyke subtylle and foxye presumption as the Syrians once conceiued when they putte themselfes in the daunger of Kinge Achab sayeng 3. Reg. 20. Beholde we haue hearde that the kinges of the howse of Israel are pitefull and mercyfull For owte of all dowte K. Henry theyghte coulde as easely haue obteined at winchesters handes and others a conformytee in puttyng downe the Masse and all the reaste what so euer hath ben done by order sence if he hadde earnestly minded it as the abolisshinge of the pope monkerye pylgremages reliques with lyke baggage all which are now agayne thinges well estemed and couered as all the resydew is with the clooke of the Catholike church But to returne to the matter we haue in hāde in this littel treatise goode read thow shalte perceiue another māer of spirite thow shalte thīke if thow thi selfe be not verie dulle that thow hearest men speake which hadde learned the lessō of thapostles that is Acto 4. to obei godde rather thē mā ād hadde not learned the Romisshe Epicures lesson to applye fayth and religiō to the presente state of policie to turne with the tyme and serue all seasons men before death deade vnto the worlde accowmptynge with S. Paule all other thynges to be

were a laboure to greate for to gather and to tedyous for the reader but one or twoo places of euerye one The whiche howe plaine and howe full and cleare they bee againste the erroure of Transubstantiation I referre it to the iudgemente of thindifferente reader And nowe I wil likewise rehearse the saiynges of other three olde aunciente writers of the Lattin Churche and soe make an ende Tertulliā And firste I will begin with Tertullian whom Cypriane the holy Martyr so highlie estemed that whēsoeuer he would haue his booke he was wōt to say geue vs now the Master Lib. 4. contra Martionē This olde writer in his 4. booke against Martion the heritike saith thus Iesus made the bread which he toke and distributed to his disciples his body saiyng This is my body that is to say saieth Tertullian a figure of my bodie In this place it is plaine that after Tertullians exposition Christ ment not by calling the bread his body and the wine his bloude that either the bread was his natural bodie or the wine his naturall bloude but he called them his bodye and his bloud because he would institute them to be vnto vs Sacramentes that is holie tokens and signes of his bodie and of his bloud that by them remembringe and firmelie beleuing the benefites procured to vs by his body whiche was torne and crucified for vs and of hys bloude whiche was shedde for vs vpon the crosse and soe with thankes receiuinge these holye sacramentes according to Christes institution myghte by the same be spirituallie noryshed and fedde to thencrease of all Godlines in vs here in oure pylgremage and iorney wherin we walke vnto euerlasting life This was vndoubtedlie Christe our Sauiours mynde and this is Tertullians exposition The wranglynge that the papistes doe make to elude this saiynge of Tertullian is so far out of all frame that it euen wearieth me to thinke on it Vuinch in his āsuuer to the 161. obiect Tertullyan writeth here saye they as none hath done hitherto before him This saiyng is to to manyfest false S. Augustine and other olde awthors likwise doo call the Sacrament a figure off Christs bodye And wher they saie that Tertullian wrott this whē he was in an heat off disputation with an heretike coueting by al meanes to ouercō his aduersarye As who saye he wolde not take hede what he dyd saye ād specialy what he wold write in so high a matter so that he might haue the better hand off his aduersarie Ys this credible to be trewe in any godly wyseman Howe much lesse then is it worthy to be thowght or credited in a man off so great wyt lernyng and excellency as Tertullian is worthely esteamed euer to haue bene Lykwise this author in his first booke against the the same heretike Martion writeth thus God dyd not reiect bread which is his creature for by it he hath made a representation off his bodye Nowe I prai you what is this to say that Christ hath made a representation by breade of his bodye but that Christ hath Lib. 1. cōtra Mar. instituted and ordeined bred to be a sacrament for to represent vnto vs his bodye Nowe whether the representation of one thinge by another requireth the corporall presence of the thinge which is so represented or no euery man that hath vnderstanding is hable in this pointe the matter is so cleare of it lsefe to be a sufficient iudge The second doctor and wryter off the latine churche whose saiynges I promised to set furth S. August is S. Augustine off whose lernyng and estimation I neede not to speake for all the churche of Christ both hath and euer hath had hym for a man of moost singular learning witte and dilygence both in setting fourth the true doctrine of Christes religion and also in the defense off the same againste heretikes This awthor as he hath written most plenteously in other matters off our faith so like wise in this argument he hathe written at large in manye off his workes so plainli against this error of transubstantiation that the papistsloue least to heare of him off all other writers partly for his authoritye and partly because he openeth the matter more fully then any one other doth Therfore I will reherse moe place off him then heretofore I haue done of the other And firste what can be more playne then that whiche he writeth vppon the 89. psalme speking of the sacramente of the Lordes bodye and bloud and rehersing as yt were Christes wordes to his disciples affter this maner Yt is not this bodie which ye doo see that ye shal eate neither shall ve drincke this bloud which the Soudiares that Crucefye me schall spille or shedde I doe commende vnto you a misterie or a sacramente whiche spiritually vnderstanded shall geue you life Nowe if Christ hadde no moe naturall and corporall bodies but that one whiche they then presentlie boeth harde and saw And none other naturall bloude but that whiche was in the same bodie and the whiche the souldiers cruellye did after shedde vppon the Crosse and neither this bodie nor this bloude was by this declaration of S. Augustine either to be eaten or dronken but the misterie therof spirituallye to be understanded Then I conclude if this saiyng and exposition of S. Augustine be trwe that the misterie whiche the disciples shoulde eate was not the natural bodie of Christe but a misteri of the same spirituallye to be vnderstanded For as S. Augustine saieth in his 20. booke contra faustum Cap. 21 Christes fleashe and bloude was in the olde testament promised by similitudes and signes of their sacrefyces and was exhibited in deede and in trueth vpon the crosse but the same is celebrated by a sacrament of remembrance vpon the aulter And in his booke de fide ad Petrum Cap. 19 he saeth that in these Sacrifices meaninge of the olde lawe it is figuratiuelie signified what then was to be geuen But in this Sacrifice it is euidentlie signified what is alreadie geuen vnderstanding in the sacrifice vpon the aulter the remembraunce and thankes geuing for the fleashe whiche he offred for vs and for the bloude whyche he shedde for vs vppon the Crosse as is in the same place and euidentlye there it maie appeare Another euidente and cleare place wherein it appeareth that bythe Sacramentall breade whyche Christe called hys bodye he meante a fygure of hys bodie is vppon the thyrde Psalme Where Sancte Augustine speaketh thus in plaine tearmes Christe did admit Iudas vnto the feast in the whiche he commended to his disciples the fygure of hys bodye Thys was Christes laste supper before hys Passion Wherein he dydde ordayne the Sacrament of hys bodye as all learned menne doe agree S. Augustine also in his 23. Epistle ad Bonifacium teacheth howe Sacramentes doe beare the names of the thinges wherof they be sacraments boeth in Baptisme and in the Lordes table August Epi.