A01532:198
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.
If lying and out-facing would serve the turn, this man would be sure ever to give his Adversary the overthrow. Hear you but Theodoret at large; and then judge, if this man have not either *a brazen brow, or a leaden brain, or both.
If lying and out-facing would serue the turne, this man would be sure euer to giue his Aduersarie the ouerthrow. Heare you but Theodoret at large; and then iudge, if this man haue not either *a brazen brow, or a leaden braine, or both.
- *Quomodò Canus Autorem Legendae (ut• appellant) Aureae, ait hominem fuisse ferry oris & plumbei cordis. Loc. come. l. 11. c. 6. Reg. […]. Sed & frontis aereae, vel aheneae, rectissimè addidisset.Quomodò Canus Autorem Legendae (vt• appellant) Aureae, ait hominem fuisse ferr•i oris & plumbei cordis. Loc. com. l. 11. c. 6. Reg. 〈…〉. Sed & frontis aereae, vel aheneae, rectissimè addidisset.
The work of Theodoret is a Dialogue, wherein he bringeth in disputing an Orthodox Divine against an Heretic, ⟨p. 82⟩that held that nafter Christs resurrection his Humanity lost it own nature, and his flesh was turned into his Deity; in the same manner as these Transubstantiators now say that the Bread in the Eucharist looseth it own nature, and is really changed into Christs natural body. In debating of this Question they light upon the Eucharist, and fall to dispute how the Bread is there said to be Christs body, and what change is wrought on it. The Heretic would have it changed to fit his turn, as our Papists now hold. The Orthodox Divine saith it is no more turned into Christs body, then Christs body is now turned in heaven into his Deity. But you shall have them both verbatim in their own words.