Critical Apparatus for this Page
View an Image of this PageCattley Pratt ReferencesCommentary on the Text
Names and Places on this Page
John SetonLondonRichard SmithRichard Ward
Person and Place Index  *  Close
John Seton

(1498? - 1567)

Chaplain to Bishop Gardiner [DNB; Venn]

John Seton was one of the official disputants in the Oxford disputations of 1554 (1563, pp. 932, 936-38, 967, 983 and 984; 1570, pp. 1591-93, 1615, 1625 and 1630; 1576, pp. 1358-59, 1378, 1387 and 1391; 1583, pp. 1428-30, 1448, 1457 and 1461).

[NB: A brief account of the Oxford disputations of 1554, printed only in 1563, mentions Seton debating with Cranmer 1563, p. 933)].

John Seton spoke with John Bradford in the early hours of the morning after Bradford's second examination. He told him of the behaviour of Latimer and Ridley, but Bradford told him that he would do nothing that could offend the people, and that John Harpsfield therefore wished to confer with the bishop of Durham. Seton called Bradford 'arrogant, proud, vaynglorious, and [that he] spake lyke a Prelate'. Bradford warned him not to judge him lest he be judged, but Seton insisted that the lord chancellor could be charitable. 1563, p. 1191, 1570, p. 1787, 1576, p. 1526, 1583, p. 1609.

[Back to Top]
Person and Place Index  *  Close

'One maister London' joined Tresham in responding to Cranmer's question as to the extent to which Christ, presented in the sacrament, was absorbed and digested into the human body (1563, p. 989; 1570, p. 1630; 1576, p. 1391; 1583, p. 1461).

Person and Place Index  *  Close
Richard Smith

(1500 - 1563)

1st Regius Professor of Divinity (1535 - 1548, 1554 - 1556, 1559 - 1560) (DNB)

According to Foxe, Richard Smith forced Hooper to leave Oxford University because of his evangelical convictions (1563, p. 1049; 1570, p. 1674; 1576, p. 1429; 1583, p. 1502).

Foxe prints a letter of Smith's, written in Edward VI's reign, to Cranmer, in which Smith offered to write in defence of clerical marriage and declared that it would be against his conscience to write against Cranmer's treatise on the Eucharist and the Reformed doctrine of Edward VI (1570, p. 1606; 1576, p. 1370; 1583, p. 1441).

[Back to Top]

Richard Smith was appointed as one of the official disputants in the Oxford Disputations of 1554 (1563, p. 932).

According to an account of the Oxford disputation of 1554, which was only printed in 1563, Anthony Smith was appointed to debate with Cranmer on Monday 16 April 1554 (1563, p. 933). Almost certainly Richard Smith was meant.

Cranmer, during his disputation on 16 April 1554, when pressed on alleged inaccuracies in his translations, countered that some translation had appeared in a work of Smith's. Queried about this by Weston, Smith refused to answer (1563, p. 951; 1570, p. 1602; 1576, p. 1367; 1583, p. 1437).

Smith is mentioned in a brief account of the Oxford Disputations, as disputing with Ridley (1563, p. 934; 1570, p. 1606; 1576, p. 1371; 1583, p. 1441).

Richard Smith was Ridley's main opponent during the Disputations; he also debated sporadically with Latimer and participated briefly in Cranmer's debate with John Harpsfield (1563, pp. 932-34, 958-59, 963-67, 974-75, 978, 981-85 and 988; 1570, pp. 1606, 1612-15, 1617, 1620-22, 1624-27 and 1629; 1576, pp. 1372, 1375-78, 1380, 1382-84 and 1386-88; 1583, pp. 1442-43, 1446-48, 1450-54, 1456-58 and 1461).

[Back to Top]

He was one of those who examined Thomas Causton and Thomas Higbed on 18 February 1555 (1563, p. 1104). He volunteered to rebut the joint confession of Thomas Causton and Thomas Higbed, but Bonner would not let him speak, ordering John Harpsfield to answer them instead (1563, p. 1107; 1570, p. 1719; 1576, p. 1468; 1583, p. 1541).

[Back to Top]
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Richard Ward

Bailiff of Derby.

Richard Ward persecuted Joan Waste of Derby. 1563, p. 1545, 1570, p. 2137, 1576, p. 1858, 1583, p. 1951.

1485 [1461]

Queene Mary. Harpsfield disputeth for his Forme. Cranmer aunswereth.

MarginaliaAnno 1554. Aprill.longing to a body.

Smyth Stay you Maister Tresham. I wyll aunswere to you Maister Doctor, with the wordes of Damascene: Transformatur panis, &c The bread is transformed, &c. But if thou wilt enquire how, Modus impossibilis, The manner is impossible.

MarginaliaThe Doctours in a doubt.Then two or three other added their aunswers to this question, somewhat doubtfully. A great hurley burley was among them: some affirming one thyng, and some another.

Cran. Doe you appoynt me a body, and cannot tell what maner of bodye? Either he hath not his quantitie, or els you are ignorant how to answer it.

Harps. These are vaine questions, & it is not meet to spend the tyme on them.

West. Heare me a while, Lanfrancus sometyme Bishop of Caunterbury, doth answer in this wise vnto Berengarius vpon such like questions: MarginaliaLanfrancus contra Berengariū.Salubriter credi possunt, fideliter queri non possunt: 

Cattley Pratt  *  Close
Cattley/Pratt, VI, 515, fn 1

[Weston does not give the quotation quite accurately; it is, "Credi salubriter potest (mysterium), vestigari utiliter non potest." Biblioth. Patrum, tom. iv. col. 225. Edit. Paris, 1576. - ED.]

They may be well beleued, but neuer faithfully asked.

Cranmer. If ye thinke good to aunswer it, some of you declare it.

Harps. He is there as pleaseth hym to be there.

Cranmer. I would be best contented with that aunswere, if that your appoynting of a carnall presence had not driuen me of necessitie to haue enquired for disputatiōs sake, howe you place hym there, sithence you will haue a naturall body.

MarginaliaThe Papistes would haue Christes body in the Sacramēt, but they cannot tell how.When agayne he was answered of diuers at one time, some denying it to be quantum, some saying it to be quantitatiuum, some affirming it to haue modum quanti, some denying it, some one thyng, some an other: vp start D. Weston, and doughtily decided (as he thought) all the matter, saying: It is Corpus quantum, sed non per modum quanti. i. It is a body (sayeth he) hauyng quantitie, but not according to the maner of quantitie.

[Back to Top]

Whereunto M. Warde, a great Sophister, 

Commentary  *  Close

Ward was described as a philosopher in 1563 (p. 988), this was changed to 'sophister' in later editions (1570, p. 1629; 1576, p. 1390; 1583, p. 1461).

Cattley Pratt  *  Close
Cattley/Pratt, VI, Appendix, ref. page 515, line 12 from the bottom

The first edition reads "philosopher" for "sophister."

thinkyng the matter not fully answered, did largely declare and discourse his sentence: How learnedly and truely I cannot tell, nor I thinke he hymselfe neither, ne yet the best learned there. For it was sayd since, that farre better learned then he, layd as good eare to hym as they could, & yet could by no meanes perceyue to what ende all his talke tended. In deed he told a formall tale 
Commentary  *  Close

The description of Ward's argument as a 'goodly tale' (1563, p. 988) was changed to a 'formall tale' (1570, p. 1629; 1576, p. 1390; 1583, p. 1461), probably to avoid appearing to commend him.

to cloute vp the matter. Hee was full of quantum & quantitatiuum. MarginaliaM. Ward in the misty cloudes of dunses quiddities.This that followeth, was as it is thought, the effect, yet others think no. How be it we wyll rehearse the summe of his wordes, as it is thought he spake them.

[Back to Top]

Warde. We must consider (sayth he) that there are duæ positiones, Two positions. The one standeth by the order of partes, with respect of the whole. The other in respect of that which conteyneth. Christ is in the Sacrament in respect of the whole. This proposition is in one of Aristotles Predicamentes, MarginaliaAristotle must helpe to tell vs how Christ is in the Sacrament.called Situs. I remember I dyd entreat these matters very largely, when I dyd rule and moderate the Philosophicall disputations in the publike Schooles. This position is sine modo quantitatiuo, MarginaliaChrist sine modo quantitatiuo in the Sacramē by an ensample: you can neuer bring heauen to a quantitie. So I conclude that he is in the Sacrament, quantum sine modo quantitatiuo.

[Back to Top]

These words he amplified very largely, and so high he clymed into the heauens with Duns his ladder, and not with the scriptures, that it is to be marueled how he could come downe again without falling? To whom M. Cranmer said: Then thus do I make myne argument.

MarginaliaD. Cranmers argument.Cran. In heauen his body hath quantitie, in earth it hath none by your saying.

Ergo, he hath two bodies, the one in heauen, the other in earth.

Here some would haue answered him, that he had quātitie in both, and so put of the antecedent: but thus said M, Harpsfield.

Harps. I denye your argument, though some would not haue had hym say so.

Cran. The argument is good. It standeth vpon contradictories, which is the most surest hold.

Harps. I deny that there are contradictions.

Cran. I thus prooue it. Habere modum quantitatiuum & non habere, sunt contradictoria.

Sed Christus in cœlis, vt dicitis, habet modum quantitatiuū, in terra non habet:

Ergo, duo sunt corpora eius in quæ cadunt hæc contradictoria: MarginaliaAristotle. 4. Metaph. Impossibile est idem simul esse & non esse.Nam in idem cadere non possunt.

West I deny the Minor.

Harps. I aunswer, that the Maior is not true. For Habere quantum, & non habere, non sunt contradictoria nisi sic considerantur eiusdem ad idem, eodem modo & simpliciter.

West. I confirme the same: for one body may haue modum

quantitatiuum, and not haue: and idem corpus was passible and impassible, MarginaliaPassible & impassible cannot stād together in one subiect. one body may haue woundes, and not haue woundes.

Cran. This cannot be true at one tyme.

Weston. The ensample of the Potter doth prooue that I say: who of that that is clay now, maketh a pot or cuppe forthwith.Cran. But I say againe, that it is so but at diuers tymes: MarginaliaSimul & eiusdem respectu. & eodem tēpore, propter rerum pugnantiā. as one piece of meat to be rawe and sodden, cannot be at one time together. But you would haue it otherwise, that Christ should be here and in heauen at one time, & should haue modum quantitatiuum, and not haue: which cannot be but by such argument as I haue shewed you.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaChrists body to be passible & not impassible at the Supper it appeareth by these wordes, That shall be geuen for you.West. But I say, Christes body was passible and not passible at one * instant. Marginalia* That remayneth yet vnproued.

Seat. You may aske as well other questions, how he is in heauen? whether he sit or stand, and whether he bee there as he liued here.

Cran. You your selfe by putting a naturall presence, doe force me to question how he is here. Therfore, next I doe aske this question: Whether good and euill men do eat the body in the sacrament?

Harps. Yea, they do so, euen as the sunne doth shine vppon kings pallaices, and on dung heapes. MarginaliaHarpsfield seemed a little before to note the contrary, where he sayd: that the flesh of Christ to them that receaue him not worthely is not present pag. 1401.

Cran. Then doe I enquire how long Christ tarieth in the eater.

Harps. These are curious questions, vnmeet to be asked.

Cranmer. I haue taken them out of your Schooles and Schoolemen, which you your selues doe most vse: and there also doe I learne to aske how farre he goeth into the body.

Harps. Wee know that the bodye of Christ is receyued to nourish the whole man concernyng both body and soule: Eo vsq; progreditur corpus quousq; Marginalia* Sed species non progreditur vsque ad animam: Ergo, nec corpus Christi non pascit corpus & animam. These men would needes haue a bodely presence yet would they not, or els could not bring any reason how.* species.

[Back to Top]

Cran. How long doth he abide in the body?

Seat. S. Augustine saith, our flesh goeth into his flesh. But after he is once receiued into the stomacke, it maketh no matter for vs to know how far he doth pierce, or whether he is conueied.

Here M. Tresham and one M. London answered, that Christ beyng geuen there vnder such forme and quantitie as pleased him, it was not to be enquired of his tarying, or of his descending into the body.

Harps. You were woont to lay to our charge, that we added to the scripture: saying alwayes that we should fetch the truth out of the scripture, and now you your selfe bring questions out of the Schoolemen, which you haue disallowed in vs.

Cran. I say as I haue sayd alway, that I am constrayned to aske these Questions, because of this carnall presence, which you imagine: and yet I know right wel, that these questions be answered out of the Scriptures: As to my last question: How long he abideth in the body? &c. The scripture answereth plainly, that Christ doth so lōg dwell in his people, as they are his members. Wherupō I make this argument.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaD. Cranmers argument in the 2. figure & 2. mode.Ba-
They which eate the flesh of Christ, do dwel in hym,
and he in them.
But the wicked doe not remaine in hym, nor he in
Ergo, the wicked do not eate his flesh, nor drinke his

MarginaliaAunswere insufficient.Harps. I will answer vnto you, as S. Augustine saith, not that how so euer a man do eate, he eateth the body: but he that eateth after a certaine maner.

Cran. I cannot tel what maner ye appoint, but I am sure that euill men do not eate the flesh and drinke the bloud of Christ, as Christ speaketh in the sixt of Iohn.

Hatps. In the sixt of Iohn, some things are to be referred to the godly, and some to the vngodly.

Cranmer. Whatsoeuer he doth entreat there of eating, doth pertayne vnto good men.

Harps. If you do meane onely of the worde of eating, it is true: if concerning the thing, it is not so: And if your meaning be of that which is conteined vnder the word of eating, it may be so taken, I graunt.

Cran. Now to the Argument, He that eateth my fleshe, and drinketh my bloud, dwelleth in mee, and I in hym. MarginaliaEuill men do not eate the body of Christ.Doth not this prooue sufficiently, that euill men doe not eate that the good doe?

Tresh. You must adde, Qui manducat dignè: He that eateth woorthily.

Cran. I speake of the same manner of eatyng, that Christ speaketh of.

Weston. Augustinus ad fratres in Eremo, 

Cattley Pratt  *  Close
Cattley/Pratt, VI, 517, fn 2

This work is considered spurious. See Edit. Bened. tom. vi. Jenkyns, p. 73. - ED.

Sermon. 28. Est qui-

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.
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.
Humanities Research Institute  *  HRI Online  *  Feedback
Version 2.0 © 2011 The University of Sheffield