A01532:150
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.
Part 2 › Division 2: Division 2.Part 2 › Division 2: Diuision 2.
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.
§ 6. Well wotting that there was no such thing either in the Text, or gatherable (to use his own terms) out of it: he would fain find out some Author, that would say that for him, that the text it self will not; and allegeth therefore some few Testimonies. Concerning which I might well say, as he saith, if I would do as he doth, that they have been answered long since by the L. Morney, the B. Morton, D. Fulke, and others, and he doth not deal sincerely in concealing their Answers; and so turn my Reader over to them, as his manner is, when he hath nothing to answer. But I answer to them severally.
§ 6. Well wotting that there was no such thing either in the Text, or gatherable (to vse his owne tearmes) out of it: hee would faine finde out some Author, that would say that for him, that the text it selfe will not; and alleagdeth therefore some few Testimonies. Concerning which I might well say, as hee saith, if I would doe as hee doth, that they haue beene answered long since by the L. Morney, the B. Morton, D. Fulke, and others, and hee doth not deale sincerely in concealing their Answers; and so turne my Reader over to them, as his manner is, when he hath nothing to answer. But I answer to them severally.
1. Ambrose is alleged out of his books de Mysterijs, &c. and de Sacramentis: which books, howsoever ifor divers passages of them, and phrases used in them, they may well be doubted of whether they were written by him or no; and Possevine himself implieth that some have denied it, when he saith, that kall almost hold them to be his: and part of them (as we shall see anon) goeth commonly under another name: yet not to stand thereupon, but admit them for his. Nothing there said doth necessarily enforce any such Transubstantiation as the Romanists hold; yea some subsequent words, if they had been annexed, would evidently speak against it.
1. Ambrose is alleadged out of his bookes de Mysterijs, &c. and de Sacramentis: which bookes, howsoeuer