A01532:10
A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation wherein the same is declared, by…A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation vvherein the same is declared, by…
A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation wherein the same is declared, by the confession of their own writers, to have no necessary ground in Gods Word: as also it is further demonstrated to be against Scripture, nature, sense, reason, religion, and the judgement of t5xxauncients, and the faith of our ancestors: written by Thomas Gataker B. of D. and pastor of Rotherhith.A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation vvherein the same is declared, by the confession of their owne writers, to haue no necessary ground in Gods Word: as also it is further demonstrated to be against Scripture, nature, sense, reason, religion, and the iudgement of t5xxauncients, and the faith of our auncestours: written by Thomas Gataker B. of D. and pastor of Rotherhith.
London: printed by John for William Sheffard, 1624London: printed by Iohn for William Sheffard, 1624
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
To the Reader.
BE pleased (I pray thee) to understand in a word, as the occasion of undertaking, so the motive of publishing this Controversy. Having had some Conference with an Honourable Lady nobly descended, whom some Factors for Rome had endeavoured to pervert, about the Point of Transubstantiation, and Christs corporal presence in the Eucharist; I was by her requested to deliver her in writing, the sum of that that had passed then by word of mouth from me, as well in way of Answer to the exceptions taken to our Doctrine, as in way of opposition to the Roman tenet therein. Whereupon within a few days after, having digested it as well as straits of time would permit, and added some further enforcements of the general heads then insisted on, I delivered it verbatim as here thou now hast it. Which writing being imparted to one of those Factors, a speedy answer was promised, and (after long expectation of it) at length performed, such as here it is exhibited (under the letters of N. P. put for a Nameless Popish Priest) without word or syllable detracted, ⟨image 4⟩added, or altered. Unto which I soon after dispeeded a Reply; which was to the same Honourable Personage also not long after represented. Now having hitherto heard of nothing returned further thereunto, (albeit some years be past since the exhibition of it) I have thought good by the advice of some judicious Friends to publish all together (my Reply only in some few places enlarged) as well thereby the more fully to clear some objections urged commonly (to the simpler sort especially) against our Faith and Doctrine concerning that Sacrament, and our exposition of some passages of holy writ, either concerning, or supposed to concern the same; as also further to discover (to such especially as are not so well acquainted therewith) the gross and palpable frauds and falsehoods, with such Popish Factors too frequent, which in the advised reading and perusing hereof may easily and evidently be descried. And this is all that (not listing to detain thee long from the discourse it self) I was desirous by way of Preface to fore-acquaint thee withal. The Lord vouchsafe thee and us all true understanding, sound judgement, and a love of the truth both in this and in all other things.