A boke made by John Fryth, prysoner in the Tower of London: answerynge unto M. Mores letter, which he wrote agaynst the fyrste lytle treatyse that John Fryth made, concernynge the sacramente of the body and bloude of ChristFrith, John
Religion
A boke made by John Fryth, prysoner in the Tower of London: answerynge unto M. Mores letter, which he wrote agaynst the fyrste lytle treatyse that John Fryth made, concernynge the sacramente of the body and bloude of Christ
Frith, John
Dissenters, Religious -- England; Lord's Supper -- Early works to 1800; More, Thomas, Saint, 1478-1535
[Sidenote: Fryth.] ¶ The beynge of our bodye in two places at ones is
agaynste nature, and scrypture cā not allow it. But that two bodyes
shulde be in one place seameth more reasonable. For I haue good
experyence that though my bodye can not be in two places at ones (both
in the tower and where I wolde haue it besyde) yet blessed be god in
this one place, I am not without cōpanye. But yf master More meane that
in one proper & severall place, maye be two bodyes at ones, that I wyll
denye, tyll he haue laysure to proue it. And yet at the length I am
sure, hys proue shall not be worth a podynge prycke. For I am sure it
muste be, _Ratione porositatis ut in igne & ferro: nam penetracionem
dimensionum nunquam probabit._ And then he is as nyghe as he was before.
[Sidenote: More.] ❧ Now hys laste reason wyth which he proueth yt
impossyble for the bodye of christe to be in two places at ones, is
this: You can (sayeth he) shewe no reason whye he shulde be in many
places at ones & not in all. But in all places he can not be: Wherfore
we muste cōclude that he can not be in many places at ones. This is a
mervelous cōcluded argumente. I am sure that euery chylde may soone see
that this consequent can neuer folowe vpō these two premysses of thys
antecedent.
[Sidenote: Fryth.] ¶ When I made thys reason & compyled my tretyse I had
no regarde to the cavyllacyons of sotle sophysters. For I thought no
sophysters shulde haue medled wyth that meate. But neuerthelesse syth
now I perceyue that they pryncipallye are porynge vpon yt, seakynge some
praye to sette their teth a warke, in this boke I haue samwhat prouyded
for thē, and haue brought suche harde bones, that yf they be to busye,
maye chaunce to choke thē. And yet is not the argumēt so feable as he
fayneth. For the fyrst part (if he lyst to cōsyder the sēce & mynde, &
be not to curyous) where I say that they cā shewe no reasō why he shulde
be in many places & not in all, is thus to be vnderstōd of wyse mē, that
the very reasō & cause that he shulde be in many places must be, because
the body is so ānexed with the godhed, that yt is in euery place as the
Godhed is. Thys I saye, muste be the cause and reason of hys beynge in
many places. And neyther you nor no man els cā iustely asygne any other.
Now of this maior or fyrste proposycyon thus vnderstonde doth the
conclusyon folowe dyrectlye. For yf this shulde be the cause (as they
muste neades graūte) and thys cause proued false by scrypture: then
muste they neades graunte that the thynge whiche so foloweth of this
cause, muste neades be false. And so is my purpose proued, and they
concluded. As by example. The Astronomers saye: that the naturall course
of the sonne is from the Weste to the Easte. Nowe yf a man shulde aske
them what ys then the cause that we see hym daylye take the contrary
course, from the East to the Weste agaynste hys nature: they answere.
Because the heyghest spere (whose course is from the Easte to the Weste)
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account