A01532:26
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.
It is absurd therefore for any to reason thus, as many yet are wont to do; Christ saith, This is my Body: and we are bound to believe Christ: and therefore we must needs believe that Christ is corporally present in the Sacrament. Since that the words of Christ by our Adversaries their own confession may be most true, and yet no such thing at all be meant by them, or intended in them. And the same may well be showed, (as Caietan pointeth us to it) by the like. For must we not believe the Apostle as well as Christ? or must we not believe Christ as well in one place as in an other? But the Apostle saith, that kThe Rock was Christ: And yet no man believeth therefore that the rock was turned into Christ; though he believe the Apostles words in that place. Yea our Saviour himself saith; lThis Cup is the new Testament: and, mThis Cup is my Blood. And yet is no man so senseless as therefore to believe that the Cup which our Saviour then held, was turned either into the New Testament, or into Christs blood. As well therefore may a man prove that the Rock was turned into Christ, because ⟨p. 4⟩the Apostle saith nnot, The Rock signified Christ, but expressly, The Rock was Christ: or that the communicants themselves are turned into bread, because the Apostle saith, oWe are all one Bread: or that the Cup was turned either into the New Testament, or into Blood; because our Saviour saith, This Cup is the New Testament; and, This Cup is my Blood: as that the bread is turned into the Body of Christ, because our Saviour saith of it, This is my Body. The Rock was Christ only symbolically and sacramentally, by representation and resemblance: and the Cup, that is, the wine in the Cup, (for so our Saviour saith it was, qthe fruit of the vine) was the New Testament, as r