An answer to A discourse against transubstantiation

About this Item

Title
An answer to A discourse against transubstantiation
Author
Gother, John, d. 1704.
Publication
London :: Printed by Henry Hills ...,
1687.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Tillotson, John, 1630-1694. -- Discourse against transubstantiation.
Transubstantiation.
Lord's Supper.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A41592.0001.001
Cite this Item
"An answer to A discourse against transubstantiation." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A41592.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 24, 2025.

Pages

FIFTH MOTIVE.

The very same Interpretation of other Scriptural Passages, wherein are grounded the chief Articles of Christian Belief, en∣forces the sequel of Transubstantiation.

For, I believe, adhering to Scripture as the Rule of Faith, that this Passage, the word was made Flesh, imports a Substantial * 1.1 Union. I believe the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, * 1.2 included in these words, I and my Father are one. I believe one Divine Essence of three distinct Persons revealed, in These three are one. Upon these Testimonies of Holy Writ Substantially un∣derstood, I quietly repose my belief of the Incarnation of our Saviour; the Son's Divinity; and of the sole and undivided nature of the Blessed Trinity.

This Method is further secur'd by the consent of all those who are, and pretend to be true Members of Christ's Religion.

Now if I follow this Determination, so authorized, and so certain; if I follow this motive of my own Conviction in other like Articles, extending the same uncontrol'd Interpretation, to this is my Body, I must necessarily grant this Inference, this is my Substantial Body. Thus my Faith seeks to be one; as Scrip∣ture is one, and God one Truth.

As this literal Reflection is sincere and pious; the figurative Explanation of our Saviour's Words wants no Fallacy nor Im∣piety. For, if I may presume to give this sense to our Saviour's Words, this is not my Substantial Body, this Presumption ought to be strongly grounded, as allowable, just, and in Equi∣ty to be follow'd. And if so, then I may lawfully give the same exposition to the three alledg'd Articles. For the Scripture ur∣ges not more out of this Passage, The word was made Flesh, the substantial connexion of the Second Person with Human Na∣ture; or out of these words, I and my Father are one, the iden∣tity of the Son with the Father; or out of, these Three are one, the unity of Nature in three Divine Persons; than out of this is my Body, the Substantial Body of Christ.

Page 13

If therefore I might lawfully understand our Saviour's words in an empty figurative exposition, saying, this is not my Sub∣stantial Body, I might rightly deduce (following the same in∣terpretation) then the word was not substantially made Flesh, and so deny the Mystery of the Incarnation; I and my Father are not substantially one, and so prosess Arianism; These three are not substantially one; and so dividing the Divine Nature, constitute many Gods. Can such a figurative Explanation be thought a sincere part of the True Religion, which under∣mines, and utterly destroys the whole Fabrick of Christianity? And ought not my own Motive in the most considerable My∣steries of Christianity, contained in Scripture, be to me the same in the determination of the true Sense of This is my Body?

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.