A01532:191
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.
§ 4. Thus having leapt a page back, he now jumpeth ⟨p. 80⟩again as fa•re forward; where he lighteth again upon Pope Gelasius (for so is his work styled in all editions of him, and so by Fulgentius he is proved to be; howsoever they would fain shift him of, because he is so expressly against their Transubstantiation, as he is also against their mangling of the Sacrament, and giving the bread without the Cup, which ihe condemneth as gross Sacrilege) and with him upon Theodoret, that speaketh in effect the same with him.
§ 4. Thus hauing leapt a page backe, he now iumpeth ⟨p. 80⟩againe as fa•re forward; where he lighteth againe vpon Pope Gelasius (for so is his worke stiled in all editions of him, and so by Fulgentius he is prooued to be; howsoeuer they would faine shift him of, because he is so expressely against their Transubstantiation, as he is also against their mangling of the Sacrament, and giuing the bread without the Cup, which ihe condemneth as grosse Sacriledge) and with him vpon Theodoret, that speaketh in effect the same with him.
- iGelas. Papa apud Grat. de consecrat. dist. 2. c. Comperi•us. Sine grandi sacrilegio non potest provenireGelas. Papa apud Grat. de consecrat. dist. 2. c. Comperi•us. Sine grandi sacrilegio non potest prouenire
Theodoret and Gelasius both aver that the Elements in the Eucharist after consecration retain still not the same shape and form only, but the same Nature and Substance. Can any thing be more plain? or any testimony more pregnant? Yet this nimble-headed Doctor wanteth not