A01532:512
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 14: Division 14.Part 2 › Division 14: Diuision 14.
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.
Division 14.
Diuision 14.
Lastly, when pag. 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23. he argueth that Christs body cannot be in the Eucharist: first, because 1then it should be broken as the bread is broken. Secondly, it should be subject to many undecencies, as corruption, putrefaction, mice-eating and other foul abuses apt to happen to the bread and wine of the Sacrament. I answer him that Christs body being in it self now glorious and impossible, and after a spiritual and indivisible manner present in the Sacrament, cannot be in it self broken or otherwise abused then Angels in assumed bodies can be wounded, or then the Majesty of the divine person in Christ was by thorns torn, nails pierced, or other torments defaced: for all such indignities and painful alterations, were immediately only inflicted on the corporal nature of our Saviour defaced utterly by them, and touched not immediately the divine person, albeit personally therein subsisting: So all indignities and alterations ⟨p. 190⟩happening to the sacramental signs touch not at all the body it self of our Saviour impassibly and indivisibly under them, more then the majesty it self of the divine nature-present in all creatures is defiled in foul places, &c.
LAstly, when pag. 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23. hee argueth that Christs body cannot be in the Eucharist: first, because 1then it should be broken as the bread is broken. Secondly, it should be subiect to many vndecencies, as corruption, putrefaction, mice-eating and other foule abuses apt to happen to the bread and wine of the Sacrament. I answer him that Christs body being in it selfe now glorious and impossible, and after a spirituall and indivisible manner present in the Sacrament, cannot be in it selfe broken or otherwise abused then Angels in assumped bodies can bee wounded, or then the Maiesty of the diuine person in Christ was by thornes torne, nayles pierced, or other torments defaced: for all such indignities and painfull alterations, were immediately onely inflicted on the corporall nature of our Sauiour defaced vtterly by them, and touched not immediately the diuine person, albeit personally therein subsisting: So all indignities and alterations