A01532:180
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 4: Division 4.Part 2 › Division 4: Diuision 4.
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.
1. By this exposition of his, our Saviour should say, This Cup, that is, this blood contained in the Chalice, is the New Testament in my blood. And so *Christs blood shall be not in the Chalice only, but in his blood; would any reasonable man say, My body is in my body; or, My blood is in my blood? But they care not what absurd language they fasten upon our Saviour, so it may make for their own turn.
1. By this exposition of his, our Sauiour should say, This Cup, that is, this blood contained in the Chalice, is the New Testament in my blood. And so *Christs blood shall be not in the Chalice onely, but in his blood; would any reasonable man say, My body is in my body; or, My blood is in my blood? But they care not what absurd language they fasten vpon our Sauiour, so it may make for their owne turne.
- *Not unlike Hugo Card. on Luke […]. Hic est calix in sanguine m•o, i. sanguis meus in calais.Not vnlike Hugo Card. on Luke 〈…〉. Hic est calix in sanguine m•o, i. sanguis meus in calice.
2. There is the blood of Christ really contained in the Chalice, and yet this blood is unbloodily offered. It is unbloodily offered, and yet it is really blood; yea there is nothing there but blood. True it is the ancient Fathers oft term the Eucharist oan unbloody sacrifice; which showeth their speeches, where they say, that p