A01532:543
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.
4. How do these two stand together: The one is bloody, and the other unbloody: and yet the one is not so much as distinct from the other. Here is not a distinction (as they say) without a difference; but a difference (which is more strange) without a distinction. Did this fellow (think we) understand what he said? But if the sacrifice of the Mass be not so much as distinct from the sacrifice of the Cross, how doth Bellarmine tell us that kthe sacrifice of the Cross is of greater value then the sacrifice of the Mass; the one of infinite, the other but of finite worth.
4. How doe these two stand together: The one is bloody, and the other vnbloody: and yet the one is not so much as distinct from the other. Here is not a distinction (as they say) without a difference; but a difference (which is more strange) without a distinction. Did this fellow (thinke we) vnderstand what he said? But if the sacrifice of the Masse be not so much as distinct from the sacrifice of the Crosse, how doth Bellarmine tell vs that kthe sacrifice of the Crosse is of greater value then the sacrifice of the Masse; the one of infinite, the other but of finite worth.
- kBellarm de Miss. l. 1. c. 6.
Whereof lhe rendereth a two-fold reason:
- lIbid. lib. 2. cap. 4.