A01532:470
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 11: Division 11.Part 2 › Division 11: Diuision 11.
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.
2. And so he hath a direct answer, why we deny that a body can be in diverse places at once; notwithstanding we believe and acknowledge Gods wonderful works of Creation, Resurrection, Christs Incarnation, and those unsearchable mysteries of the Trinity, and Hypostatical union, &c. because the one implieth a contradiction, those other do not.
2. And so he hath a direct answer, why wee deny that a body can be in diuerse places at once; notwithstanding we beleeue and acknowledge Gods wonderfull workes of Creation, Resurrection, Christs Incarnation, and those vnsearchable mysteries of the Trinitie, and Hypostaticall vnion, &c. because the one implyeth a contradiction, those other doe not.
And here let me entreat the Reader (since that these men so much press us with Gods omnipotency) to cast his eye back with me to those manifold aimpossibilities before mentioned, and by themselves acknowledged, even in this very business concerning the Sacrament. Whereby it may appear, that they make use of it only to serve their own turns, urging it then when it may stead them, and denying it then when it doth not. To recite again some one or two of them only, adding one or two more to them bLuther's opinion (saith Bellarmine) cannot be true: because cit is no way possible that one thing should not be changed, and yet should become another. And dIt is impossible (saith Lanfranc) that one thing should be turned into another, and not cease to be, so far forth as it is converted. eIt is impossible (saith this Defendant, that cannot endure here to hear of any impossibility) That a man should be a Rock, or a Vine. And