A01532:400
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 8: Division 8.Part 2 › Division 8: Diuision 8.
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.
And I marvel not to find this Minister to corrupt the sayings of the holy Fathers to his heretical purpose, sithence 1he maketh Bellarmine himself page 10. to speak like a Protestant, and seem to say against his own express doctrine, that the bread blessed and consecrated on the Altar is not, nor cannot be called Christs body: Whereas Bellarmine only disputeth against Luther teaching natural bread to remain still in the Sacrament, and making the sense of Christs words, This is my body, to be the same as if he had said, This bread is my body; saith this and no more, that Natural bread cannot be otherwise then figuratively and significantly affirmed to be Christs body: Speaking not at all of bread consecrated, and by consecration converted into the true body of Christ, yet still retaining the name of bread for the Accidents of bread still remaining, as this false fellow would have; frequently citing Authors which he understandeth not.
ANd I maruaile not to finde this Minister to corrupt the sayings of the holy Fathers to his hereticall purpose, sithence 1he maketh Bellarmine himselfe page 10. to speake like a Protestant, and seeme to say against his owne expresse doctrine, that the bread blessed and consecrated on the Altar is not, nor cannot be called Christs body: Whereas Bellarmine onely disputeth against Luther teaching naturall bread to remaine still in the Sacrament, and making the sense of Christs words, This is my body, to be the same as if he had said, This bread is my body; saith this and no more, that Naturall bread cannot be otherwise then figuratiuely and significantly affirmed to be Christs body: Speaking not at all of bread consecrated, and by consecration conuerted into the true body of Christ, yet still retaining the name of bread for the Accidents of bread still remaining, as this false fellow would haue; frequently citing Authors which he vnderstandeth not.
- 1N. P.