A01532:386
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 7: Division 7.Part 2 › Division 7: Diuision 7.
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.
But they will as soon prove that Christ turned the children that rhe blessed into bread, as that he turned the bread by blessing it into his natural body. Yea run over all the whole Chapter in Bellarmine swherein he propoundeth to himself to prove Transubstantiation out of Gods word, in the entrance whereunto he confesseth that the words of Christ may be taken as well our way as their way, but not Luther's way; and you shall find that there is never a word in it, much less any sound proof, either to prove that Christs words are so to be understood as they say, or that they are not to be understood as we say; but it is wholly spent in confuting of Luther's opinion, to wit, that bread remaineth together with Christs body in the Sacrament. Which opinion also bthemselves confess that Luther admonished by Melanchthon renounced before he died. He beginneth with ca first Argument, without any second, the sum and substance whereof was before related: Either his second (he saw) was unsound, and it seemed best therefore to suppress and conceal it, or else he wanted a second, and thought to let the first though without a fellow, stand still as first by the rule of the Civilians, who say, dThat is first, that hath none before it, though no other come after it: or, that is first that hath none before it, that is last that hath none after it. And so is this Bellarmines both first and last Argument there. And ⟨p. 138⟩6in Conclusion he is fain to fly to the Councils and pretended Fathers. sThough there were some ambiguity (saith he) in our Saviour Christs words, yet it is taken away by Councils; (what Councils think we? Surely none but such as themselves held within these 300. years as himself afterward showeth) and the consent of Fathers: which remaineth yet to be showed. As for the benediction, the best, nay the sole Argument, whereby he can prove such […] conversion wrought there is this;