Critical Apparatus for this Page
Commentary on the Text
Names and Places on this Page
Unavailable for this Edition
1369 [1344]

Queene Mary. Disputation in the Conuocation house about the reall presence.

MarginaliaAn. 1553.Christ ascendyng tooke his fleshe which he receiued of the virgin Mary, away with him: and also left his flesh behynd him, MarginaliaHow Christ left his flesh behinde hym.which are we that be his elect in this world, which are the members of Christ, and flesh of his flesh: as very aptly S. Paule to the Ephes. in the 5. chap. doth testifie saying: MarginaliaEphe. 5.We are flesh of his flesh, and bones of his bones. And if percase any man will reply, that he entreateth there of the Sacrament, so that this interpretation can not so aptly be applyed vnto hym in that place, then will I yet interprete Chrisostome an other way by himselfe. MarginaliaChrysostome expounded by Chrisostome.For in that place a few lynes before those woordes, whiche were here no rather read, are these wordes: that Christe after he ascended into heauen, left vnto vs indued with hys sacramentes, hys flesh in mysteries, that is, sacramentally. And that mysticall flesh Christ leaueth as well to hys church in the sacrament of Baptisme, as in the sacramental bread & wyne. And that s. Paul iustly doth witnes, saying: MarginaliaGal. 3.As many of vs as are baptised in Christ, haue put vpō vs Christ. And thus you may vnderstand that S. Chrisostome maketh nothyng for your carnall and grosse presence in the sacrament, as you wrongfully take him.

[Back to Top]

Now in this meane while M. Pye rounded the Prolocutor in the eare to put Philpot to silence and to appoynt some other, mistrusting lest he would shrodely shake theyr carnall presence in conclusion, if he held on long, seyng in the beginnyng he gaue one of their chiefe foundations suche a plucke. Then MarginaliaWeston.the Prolocutor sayd to Philpot, that hee had reasoned sufficiētly enough, and that some other should now supply his rowme. Wherwith he was not well content, saying: Why sir, I haue a dosen Argumentes concernyng this matter to be proposed, and I haue not yet scarce ouergone my first Argument: for I haue not brought in any confirmation therof out of any auncient writer (whereof I haue for the same purpose many) being hytherto styll letted by your ofte interrupting of me.

[Back to Top]

Wel quoth the Prolocutor you shal speake no more now, & I cōmaund you to hold your peace. You perceiue, quoth Philpot, that I haue stuffe enough for you, and am able to withstand your false supposition, and therfore you cōmaund me to silence. MarginaliaA good solution for all his argumentes.If you wyl not geue place, quoth the Prolocutor, I wyll send you to prison. This is not, quoth Philpot, according to your promise made in this house, nor yet according to your bragge made at Paules Crosse, that men should be answered in this disputation, to whatsoeuer they can say, since you wyl not suffer me of a dosen argumentes to prosecute one.

[Back to Top]

Thē M. Pie toke vpō him to promise that he should be answered an other day. Philpot seing he might not proceede in his purpose, being therwith iustly offended, ended, saying thus: A sort of you here, which hitherto haue lurked in corners, & dissēbled wt God & the world, are now gathered together to suppresse þe sincere truth of gods holy word, & to set forth euery false deuise, which by the Catholike doctrine of the scripture ye are not able to mainteine.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaM. Elmar agayne steppeth forth.Then stepped forth M. Elmar Chapleine to the Duke of Suffolke: whom M. Moreman tooke vpon him to answeare. Against whō M. Elmar obiected diuers and sundry authorities for the confirming of the argument he toke the day before in hand to proue, that Marginaliaοὐσία.οὐσία in the sentēce of Theodoret brought in by M. Cheyney, must nedes signifie substāce, & not accidence. Whose reasons & approbatiōs, because they were al grounded & brought out of the Greke I do passe ouer, for that they want ther grace in Englishe, & also their proper vnderstanding. But his allegations so incōbred M. Moremā, MarginaliaMoreman desired a day to imagine some crafty shift.þt he desired a day to oueruiew thē, for at that instant he was without a conuenient answeare.

[Back to Top]

Then did the Prolocutor cal M. Haddō Deane of Exeter, & Chaplein to the Duke of Suffolke, MarginaliaWatson confounded by M. Haddon.who prosecuted Theodoretes authoritie in confirming M. Elmars argument. To whō D. Watson tooke vpō him to geue answer: who after long talke was so cōfounded, that he was not able to answere to the worde Mysterium. But for as much as he seemed to doubt therein, M. Haddon tooke out of his bosome a Latine author to confirme his saying, & shewed the same to M. Watson, asking him whether he thought þe trāslation to be true, or that the Printer were in any fault. MarginaliaM. Watson for a bare shift putteth a fault in the Printer.There maye be a fault in the Printer, quoth Watson, for I am not remēbred of this word. Then did maister Haddon take out of his bosome a Greke booke, wherein he shewed forth with his finger the same wordes, which M. Watson could not deny. His arguments further I omit to declare at large, because they wer for the most part in Greke, about the bulting out of the true signification of οὐσία. 

Commentary  *  Close

The text reads (1563, p. 912; 1570, p. 1576; 1576, p. 1344; and 1583, p. 1414) that James Haddon's arguments on the fourth day of the 1553 Convocation, relating to a passage in Theodoret, would not be repeated because they were in Greek. This abridgement was Philpot's, and Foxe was merely repeating it (see Trew report, sigs. C8r-D1v). But Foxe had an account of this expurgated portion of the debate which he never printed, and it survives in his papers (BL Harley MS 422, vols. 38r-40r. This document was printed in R. W. Dixon, A History of the Church of England (6 vols), London, 1884-1902, IV, pp. 81-85.

[Back to Top]

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaM. Pearne agaynst transubstantiation.Thē stept forth M. Perne, & in argument made declaration of his minde against transubstantiation, & confirmed the sayings & authorities alleged by M. Elmar & M. Haddon. To whō the Prolocutor answered, saying: I muche

maruel, master Perne, that you wyll say thus, for so muche as on fryday last you subscribed to the contrary. Which his saying master Elmar did mislike, saying to the Prolocutor that he was to blame so to reprehend any man, partly for that this house (quoth he) is an house of free libertie for euery man to speake his cōscience, and partly for that you promised yester day that notwithstāding any man had subscribed, yet he should haue free libertie to speake his mind. And for that the night did approche, and the time was spent, MarginaliaD. Weston prayseth their learning to flater them, but he aunswereth not their argumentes.the Prolocutor geuing them praises for their learning, did yet notwithstanding conclude, that all reasoning set apart, the order of the holy church must be receiued, & all things must be ordered therby.

[Back to Top]
¶ The acte of the fift day.

MarginaliaOctober 27.ON fryday the. 27. of Octob. D. Weston the Prolocutor did first propoud the matter, sheweing that the Cōuocation had spent two dayes in disputation alredy about one only doctor, which was Theodoret, & about one only word, which was οὐσία. Yet were they come the third day to answer al things that could be obiected, so that they would shortly put out their argumēts. So MarginaliaM. Haddon Deane of Exeter disputeth agaynst M. Weston, Morgan, & Harpsfield.M. Haddon Deane of Exeter, desired leaue to appose M. Watson, which with.ij. other mo, that is, Morgan & Harpsfield, was appointed to answeare. M.Haddō demaūded this of him, whether any substāce of bread or wine did remaine after the cōsecration. Thē M. Watsō asked of him againe, whether he thought there to be a real presence of Christs body or no? M. Haddō said, it was not meete nor orderlike, that he which was appointed to be Respondēt, should be Opponent, & he whose duetie was to obiect, should answer. Yet M. Watson a long while would not agree to answere, but that thing first being granted hym. At last an order was set, & master Haddon had leaue to go forward with his argument.

[Back to Top]

Then he proued by Theodorets wordes, a substance of bread & wine to remaine. For these are his wordes: MarginaliaThe wordes of Theodoretus alleaged.The same they were before the sanctificatiō, which they are after. M. Watson said, that Theodoret meant not the same substance, but the same essence. MarginaliaA Popish distinction betwene substāce & essēce. Whereupon they were driuē againe vnto the discussing of the Greke woord οὐσία, and master Haddon proued it to meane a substance, both by the Etimologie of the word, and by the wordes of the Doctor. For οὐσία (quoth he) cōmeth of the Participle ών, which descēdeth of the verbe εἰμὶ, & so commeth the noune οὐσία, which signifieth substance.

[Back to Top]

Then master Watson answeared that it had not that significatiō only. But M. Haddō proued that it must needes so signifie in that place. Then he asked Watson when the bread & wyne became Symboles? Wherunto he answered: after the consecration and not before. Then gathered M. Haddon this reason out of his author.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaArgument of M. Haddon.Da-
The same thing, saith Theodoret, that the bread and
wyne were before they were Symboles, the same
they remaine styl in nature and substance, after theyare Symboles.
ti-Bread and wine they were before:
si.Therfore bread and wine they are after.

MarginaliaWatson is driuen to a shamefull shift, to deny the author when he can not aunswere.Thē master Watson fel to the denyal of the author, and said he was a Nestorian: & he desired that he might answer to master Cheyney, which stoode by, for that he was more meete to dispute in the matter, because he had granted and subscribed vnto the real presence. MarginaliaM. Cheyny.M. Cheyny desired pacience of the honorable men to heare hym, trusting that he should so open the matter, that the veritie should appeare: protesting furthermore, that he was no obstinate nor stubburne man, but would be conformable to al reason: & if they by their learnyng, which he acknowledged to be much more then his, could answere his reasons, then he would be ruled by them, & say as they said: for he would be no authour of schisme, nor hold any thing contrary to the holy mother the church, which is Christs spouse. Doctor Weston liked this wel, & cōmended him highly, saying that he was a wel learned and a sober man, and well exercised in all good lernyng, and in the Doctors, and finally a man meete for his knowledge to dispute in that place: I pray you heare hym, quoth he. Then master Cheyny desired such as there were present to pray two wordes with hym vnto God, and to say, MarginaliaM. Chenyes prayer.Vincat veritas, Let the veritie take place and haue the victorie: and all that were present cryed with a loude voyce, Vincat veritas, vincat veritas.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaWeston.Then said Doct. Weston to hym, that it was hypocriticall. Men may better say (quoth he) Vicit veritas, Truth hath gotten the victorie. Master Cheyny said againe, if he woulde geue hym leaue, he woulde bryng it to that poyntt

that
Go To Modern Page No:  
Click on this link to switch between the Modern pagination for this edition and Foxe's original pagination when searching for a page number. Note that the pagination displayed in the transcription is the modern pagination with Foxe's original pagination in square brackets.
Find:
Type a keyword and then restrict it to a particular edition using the dropdown menu. You can search for single words or phrases. When searching for single words, the search engine automatically imposes a wildcard at the end of the keyword in order to retrieve both whole and part words. For example, a search for "queen" will retrieve "queen", "queene" and "queenes" etc.
in:  
Humanities Research Institute  *  HRI Online  *  Feedback
Version 2.0 © 2011 The University of Sheffield