A19571:704
A Defence of the True and Catholic Doctrine of the Sacrament
A defence of the true and catholic doctrine of the sacrament of the body and blood of our saviour Christ with a confutation of sundry errors concerning the same, grounded and stablished upon God's holy word, [and] approved by the consent of the most ancient doctors of the Church. Made by the most reverend father in God Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England and Metropolitan.A defence of the true and catholike doctrine of the sacrament of the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ with a confutacion of sundry errors concernyng the same, grounded and stablished vpon Goddes holy woorde, [and] approued by ye consent of the moste auncient doctors of the Churche. Made by the moste reuerende father in God Thomas Archebyshop of Canterbury, primate of all Englande and Metropolitane.
Imprinted at London : In Poules churcheyarde, at the sign of the Brazen serpent, by Reginald Wolfe. Cum privilegio ad imprimendum solum, Anno Domini. M.D.L. 1550Imprinted at London : In Poules churcheyarde, at the signe of the Brasen serpent, by Reginald Wolfe. Cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum, Anno Domini. M.D.L. 1550
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.
The contents of the second book. The confutation of the error of Transubstantiation. fol. 17. The Papistical doctrine is contrary to Gods word. Eodē The Papistical doctrine is against reason. fol. 20. ⟨image 124⟩The Papistical doctrine is also against our senses. fol. 21. The Papistical doctrine is contrary to the faith of the old authors of Christs Church fol. 23. Transubstantiation came from Rome fol. 29. The first reason of the Papists to prove their Transubstantiation, with the answer thereto fol. 31. The second argument for Transubstantiation, with the answer. fol. 33. The third• argument, with the answer, fol. 34. Authors wrested of the Papists for their transubstantiation. fol. 34. Negatives by comparison fol. 36. Absurdities that follow of transubstantiation. fol. 43.
The contentes of the second booke. The confutation of the error of Trāsubstantiation. fol. 17. The Papistical doctrine is contrary to Gods worde. Eodē The Papistical doctrine is against reason. fol. 20. ⟨image 124⟩The Papistical doctrine is also against our senses. fol. 21. The Papistical doctrine is contraye to the fayth of the olde authors of Christes Churche fol. 23. Transubstantiation came from Rome fol. 29. The first reason of the Papistes to proue their Transubstantiation, with the answere therto fol. 31. The seconde argumente for Transubstantiation, with the aunswere. fol. 33. The third• argument, with the answere, fol. 34. Authours wrested of the Papystes for theyr transubstantiation. fol. 34. Negatives by comparison fol. 36. Absurditees that folowe of transubstantiation. fol. 43.
The contents of the third book. ¶The presence of Christ in the sacrament fol. 45. Christ corporally is ascended into heaven fol. •od. The difference between the true and the Papistical doctrine concerning the presence of Christs body fol. 46. The proof whereof by our profession in our common creed. fo. 48 An other proof by the holy scripture fo. 49 Also an other proof by ancient authors, fol. eodem. One body can not be in divers places at one time fol. 52. An answer to the Papists, alleging for them these words, This is my body fol. 56. The argument of the Papists fol. eod. The interpretation of these words, This is my body. fol. eod. Christ called bread his body, & wine his blood fo. 57. Bread is my body, wine is my blood, be figurative speeches fol. 59. To eat Christs flesh and drink his blood, be figurative speeches fol. eod. This is my body: This is my blood, be figurative speeches fol. 62. The bread representeth Christs body, and the wine his blood fol. eod. Signs and figures have the names of the things, which they signify fo. 64.