A01532:306
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 6: Division 6.Part 2 › Division 6: Diuision 6.
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. If the one do not follow upon the other, Pope Nicholas was much to blame, when he inferred thereupon that Christs very body was sensually (that is as much, if not more then corporally) chewed and eaten in the Eucharist.
1. If the one doe not follow vpon the other, Pope Nicholas was much to blame, when he inferred thereupon that Christs very body was sensually (that is as much, if not more then corporally) chewed and eaten in the Eucharist.
2. If it be true that Bellarmine telleth us, that sby the Eucharist Christ remaineth carnally in us: which he citeth also, but with a foul hand, and *some of his own words foisted in, as a saying of S. Hilary's: then sure he must needs carnally be eaten of us. And to see how inconstant error is, and how contrary to it self: one while he saith that there is ta corporal eating of Christs body in the Sacrament; as their common tenet is: (and how is he not then corporally eaten?) and that Christ carnally thereby abideth in us: And yet again another while; out of Athanasius, that uthe eating of Christs body is not carnally to be taken, nor is xin a carnal manner to be understood.
2. If it be true that Bellarmine telleth vs, that sby the Eucharist Christ remaineth carnally in vs: which he citeth also, but with a foule hand, and *