A27011:130
Roman tradition examined, as it is urged as infallible against all mens senses, reason,…
Roman tradition examined, as it is urged as infallible against all mens senses, reason, the Holy Scripture, the tradition and present judgment of the far greatest part of the Universal Church; in the point of transubstantiation; in answer to a book called A rational discourse of transubstantiation.Roman tradition examined, as it is urged as infallible against all mens senses, reason, the Holy Scripture, the tradition and present judgment of the far greatst part of the Universal Church; in the point of transubstantiation; in answer to a book called A rational discourse of transubstantiation.
S.l. : s.n., 1676
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. The words cited out of it are [Panis iste quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat, non effigie sed natura mutatus, omnipotentia verbi factus est Caro] But by [Natura] the Author plainly meaneth [the Relative Nature] and not the Substance. And it was not for nothing that Bellarmine contemneth him, who ever he was; for he is downright against Transubstantiation. Cap 2. He maketh the difference between this and common Meat to be, that, Corporalis substantiae retinens speciem, sed virtutis divinae invisibili efficientia probans ad esse praesentiam: It is but the presence of Divine Virtue that he affirms to be with the Species of corporeal substance. And plainer, cap. 3. [When the Lord had said, Do this in my remembrance, This is my Body, and this my Blood] as oft as by these words and this faith it is done, that supersubstantial Bread and Cup, by solemn blessing hallowed, profiteth to the life and health of the whole Man; being both a Medicine and a Sacrifice, to heal our infirmities and purge our iniquities. And showing the difference between the Common part of Christ's last Supper, and this Spiritual Food, he addeth, that, [when the perfideous mind of Judas touched this holy Meat, and the sanctified Bread entered his wicked Mouth, &c.] So that he calleth it sanctified Bread after the Consecration.
2. The words cited out of it are [Panis iste quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat, non effigie sed natura mutatus, omnipotentia verbi factus est Caro] But by [Natura] the Author plainly meaneth [the Relative Nature] and not the Substance. And it was not for nothing that Bellarmine contemneth him, who ever he was; for he is downright against Transubstantiation. Cap 2. He maketh the difference between this and common Meat to be, that, Corporalis substantiae retinens speciem, sed virtutis divinae invisibili efficientia probans ad esse praesentiam: It is but the presence of Divine Virtue that he affirms to be with the Species of corporeal substance. And plainer, cap. 3. [When the Lord had said, Do this in my remembrance, This is my Body, and this my Blood] as oft as by these words and this faith it is done, that supersubstantial Bread and Cup, by solemn blessing hallowed, profiteth to the life and health of the whole Man; being both a Medicine and a Sacrifice, to heal our infirmities and purge our iniquities. And shewing the difference between the Common part of Christ's last Supper, and this Spiritual Food, he addeth, that, [when the perfideous mind of Judas touched this holy Meat, and the sanctified Bread entred his wicked Mouth, &c.] So that he calleth it sanctified Bread after the Consecration.