do I find the least syllable of any promise made by the Emperour to him that the Council should not proceed against him according to Law. He came upon his good behaviour and in his own defence confiding in his own prudence and abilities as well as in the Emperour's Letters in which there is no sign of these two promises 1. that he should not be imprison'd if by any misdemeanour he deserv'd it 2. that he should not be executed if legally condemn'd Both these promises were plainly included in the Extraordinary Safe-conduct which the Tridentine Council granted to the Protestants And therefore as I told you in the beginning The Case was quite different Read Soave and if you believe him you 'l begin to be asham'd of your objection * p. 348 Conc. Trid Sess 15. 18. The Synod doth make Faith to all Priests Princes Persons of what condition soever ... Safe conduct to come remain PROPOSE speak IN THE SYNOD to HANDLE EXAMINE WHAT THEY THINK FIT. give Articles confirm them ANSWER the OBJECTIONS of the Council DISPUTE with those whom it doth elect declaring that the CONTROVERSIES in this Council shall be handled according to the HOLY SCRIPTURE Traditions of the APOSTLES approv'd COUNCILS Consent of the CATHOLICK CHURCH Authority of the Holy FATHERS adding that they SHALL NOT BE PUNISH'D upon PRETENCE OF RELIGION or OFFENCES COMITTED or which WILL BE COMMITTED ... and shall RETURN when it shall seem good unto them WITHOUT LET with SAFETY OF THEIR ROBE HONOUR PERSONS but with the knowledg of the Deputies of the Synod that provision may be made for their Security granting that in this Safe conduct ALL those CLAUSES be held to be included which are NECESSARY FOR REAL FULL ASSURANCE Adding that if any of the Protestants either in coming or in Trent or in returning SHALL COMMIT ANY ENORMITY which shall NULLIFIE THE BENEFIT OF THIS PUBLICK FAITH he shall be PUNISH'D BY THEIR OWN Protestant JUDGES so that the Synod may be satisfied and on the other side if any Catholick in coming hither remaining here or returning SHALL COMMIT ANY THING which may VIOLATE THIS SAFE CONDUCT he shall be punish'd by the Synod WITH APPROBATION OF THE GERMAN Protestant 's THEMSELVES who shall be present in Trent .... which things it promiseth faithfully in the name of all faithfull Christians Ecclesiastical Secular If Huss Jerome had come to Constance with such a Safe-conduct they had neither been imprison'd nor executed With such a one as this the Bohemians went afterwards to Basil were civilly used return'd quietly home With this the Wittenberg Protestants went to Trent remain'd quiet there return'd without receiving any affront That no more of the Protestants follow'd their example in going thither was their own fault They knew very well they might have gone remain'd return'd securely if they pleas'd Consider all this at leisure and then tell me if you can what 's become of your Excuse XI The Councils of Constance Sienna had declared it lawfull to break the faith of any Safe-conduct whatsoever A. Read the Decrees you 'l plainly see the contrary The Council of Constance dos not say 't is lawfull for any whosoever they are to violate the faith of their promises but only declares that no Secular Power can legally hinder the exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction because it is not only independent of it but manifestly superior to it in matters of Religion T is a common Maxim of the Law Superior legibus aut pactis Inferioris non ligatur And in all appearance the design of the Council was to satisfie the World that although the Emperour had pretended to grant an Extraordinary Safe-conduct such as exempts a man from Justice as well as Violence it could not have hindred the supreme Power of Pope Council from proceeding according to the Canons in Causes which are purely of Religion This was the reason why the Protestants would not rely upon the Emperour 's Safe-conduct Nor can I blame them for it See Soave p. 298. Duke Maurice wrote to the Emperour that his Safe-conduct was not sufficient For in the Council of Constance it was determin'd that THEY MIGHT PROCEED AGAINST THOSE THAT CAME TO THE COUNCIL THOUGH THEY HAD SAFE-CONDUCT FROM THE EMPEROUR And that therefore the Bohemians would not go Basil but under the Publick Faith of the whole Council See p. 307. The Ambassadors went all together to the Presidents told them that the Emperour had given the Protestants a Safe-conduct but that they were not contented with it alledging that it was decreed in the Council of Constance and really executed that THE COUNCIL IS NOT BOUND BY THE SAFE-CONDUCT OF ANY WHOSOEVER HE BE therefore they required one from the Synod These Protestants you see understood the Council in the same sense as I do How come you to understand it otherwise Let the Decree speak for it self judge case betwixt us It runs thus Presens Sancta Synodus ex QUOVIS SALVO CONDUCTU per Imperatorem Reges alios Seculi Principes HAERETICIS vel de Haeresi diffamatis putantes eosdem sic a suis erroribus revocare quocunque vinculo se adstrinxerint CONCESSO NULLUM Fidei Catholicae vel JURISDICTIONI ECCLESIASTICAE praejudicium generari vel IMPEDIMENTUM PRAESTARI POSSE seu DEBERE declarat QUOMINUS dicto Salvo-conductu non obstante LICEAT JUDICI competenti ECCLESIASTICO de hujusmodi personarum erroribus IN QUIRERE aliàs contra eos DEBITE PROCEDERE eosdemque PUNIRE QUANTUM JUSTITIA SUADEBIT si suos errores revocare pertinaciter recusaverint etiamsi de Salvo conductu confiss ad locum vonerint Judicii aliàs non venturi Nec sic promittentem cum fecerit quod in ipso est ex hoc in aliquo remansisse obligatum Conc. Const Sess 17. The Council does not say that any one who makes a promise is not obliged in conscience to keep it to the utmost of his just lawfull power But only declares that every man's Promises Obligations of performance are confined within the limits of his own Jurisdiction which he cannot lawfully exceed And that therefore No man either can promise or be by promise oblig'd to perform any more This is the plain sense of those words Nec ipsum promittentem Imperatorem Regem vel alium quemvis Seculi Principem cum fecerit quod in ipso est quod nimirum ex officio jure suo potest ac debet ex hoc Salvo conductu in aliquo quod Jurisdictioni obsit Ecclesiasticae remansisse ulteriùs obligatum Can you blame this Doctrine Does not every body know 1. that any man may promise every man ought to perform what lies in his power 2. that no man can either promise to encroach upon a power superior to his own or be oblig'd to perform it The 1. Act of the Council of Sienna proceeds upon the same principles
upon the Confirmation chang'd their joy into grief All the Officers complain'd of the losses they should receive in their offices if that Reformation were executed ... Supplications also Memorials were given to the Pope by those who having bought their Offices foreseeing this loss demanded restitution ... The Pope having diligently consider'd thereof deputed eight Cardinals to consult upon the Confirmation to think upon some remedies for the complaints of the Court ... He concludes It is certain that they who did procure the Council had no aim but to pull down the Pope's Authority And while the Council did last every one did speak as if it had power to give Laws to him After all you think to mortifie me with objecting that the corruptions of the Court the abuses tolerated in the Church are at great as ever But you must give me leave to tell you 1. I am not obliged to take your bare word for 't 2. Whether it be true or false 't is nothing to my present purpose If false you are to blame for saying so If true 't is none of the Council's fault Having proceeded legally having made good Laws the Council has done its part 't is ours to do the rest My business is to defend the Council I have nothing to do to rake the dunghill of the Church Has the Decalogue less Authority because the greatest part of mankind are so disobedient Or is the Ghospel less Sacred because there are so few who live according to the maxims of it If this be the onely reason why you Protest against the Council of Trent because the Decrees of Reformation are not every where in all things punctually observ'd I see no reason why you may not with as good a grace Protest against the Ghospel the Ten Commandments I have now done with your Objections And although I am not of the Poet's mind that Brevity is always good be it or be it not understood Yet I have endeavour'd to be as short as possibly I could because when I deal with a man of your parts a word is enough to the wise few words are best As for Soave whom you so much admire I desire to ask you a few questions before I tell you what I think of him Suppose a mortal enemy of yours should Libel you by the way of History call you Rogue Rascal in the very Preface and at the same time perswade his Reader that he follows exactly the truth Would you have me take this Author for an Oracle Would you not think me reasonable if I suspected almost every word he said And ought not I to do the Council as much Justice as I would my Friend T is certain that Soave was a mortal enemy of the Council In the very beginning he declares it He says * p. 2. it has caused the greatest deformation that ever was calls it the Iliad of the Age which is as kind a compliment to the Fathers as if he had call'd them a pack of Villains He tells us indeed in the same place that he is not possess'd with any passion which may make him erre and this was well enough said But how shall a body do to believe him If it were your own case I 'm sure you would not like my being credulous And how do I know but that an Enemy of the Council may deserve as little credit as an Enemy of yours Another reason why I do not like him is because he takes upon him to write men's private thoughts with as much assurance as he writes their words and actions He hardly ever speaks of any intelligence coming to Rome but he entertains his Reader with a pleasant Scene in which he brings the Pope alone upon the Stage discoursing with himself his secret apprehensions deliberations upon every matter such thoughts as no wise man would trust his neighbour with although he were the best surest friend he had in the world How Soave could possibly come to any certain knowledg of such things I am not able to comprehend And truly if a man in one case will tell me more than he can know I have just reason to be afraid that in another he 'l tell me more than he dos know A third reason which weighs more with me than all the rest is this You tell me on the one side He was a Popish Frier And on the other I cannot believe but that although perhaps for some reasons he did not openly profess it He was really a Protestant It appears so plainly by his censuring the Decrees of Doctrine as well as those of Reformation by the severe reflections of his own which he intermixes with those of the Lutheran Criticks that I do not conceive how any man of sense who reads him with attention can be of another opinion Had he been a barefaced Protestant I should be more inclined to believe him There is something of integrity honour in a man that openly professes what he is And although passion prejudice may blind him yet I am apt to think that such a person will never deceive me more than he deceives himself But a Protestant that lives dies in the profession of a Popish Frier How can I believe his words when the most serious of his actions are only so many lies For my own part I would as soon make choice of a Catholick Jew to comment upon the Ghospel to write the life of Christ as I would choose a Protestant Frier to write the History of a General Council Before I end my Letter give me leave once more to mind you of the Discourse we had when we saw one another last We both agreed that * C. II. p. 1. it were a very irrational thing to make Laws for a Country leave it to the inhabitants to be the Interpreters Judges of those Laws for then every man will be his own Judge by consequence no such thing as either Right or Wrong that * ibid. therefore we cannot suppose that God Almighty would leave us at those Uncertainties as to give us a Rule to go by leave every man to be his own Judge that * ib. Christ left his Spirit Power to his Church by which they were the Judges even of the Scripture it self many years after the Apostles which Books were Canonical which were not that * ibid. p. 2. the Judgment of the Church is without Appeal otherwise what they decide would be no farther to be follow'd than it agrees with every man's private Judgment that because in the Apostles Creed we believe in the Holy Catholick Church therefore we ought to believe in the first four General Councils which were true legal Representatives of it And lastly that if the Council of Trent were prov'd to be as General as free as legal in all it's circumstances as any of the first four Councils were then you must needs own your self obliged in Conscience to submit to it to leave of Protesting against it This last part I have here endeavour'd to prove out of Soave himself your own Historian who always makes the worst of things never speaks a favourable word but when the Power of Truth constrains him to it If I have not perform'd according to expectation 't is your own fault who are to blame for having a better opinion of me than I deserve I am no Doctor nor Graduate but every way unfit to be a Champion of the Cause Yet having receiv'd your Commands I have just reason to expect that you will easily pardon a man who in this occasion is guilty of no other crime than being ready to shew himself Your Obedient Servant N. N. Sept. 22. 1686. Page 70. line 1. read rewarded p. 75. * 4. r. ch 14. p. 76. l. 8. r. his 9. book p. 85. l. 26. r. many p. 86. l. 29. r. the year 831. p. 89. l. 8. dele de p. 114. l. 21. r. his 2. book p. 152. l 27. r. shut out p. 161. l. 6. r. it has p. 165. l. 1. r. your p. 168. l. 5. r. haereticis p. 172. l. 3. dele an p. 176. l. 26. r. in this p. 189. l. 22. r. to Basil p. 190. l. 9. r. the case ibid. l. 13. r. HAERETICIS p. 194. l. 1. r. another p. 225. l. 3. r. Charles II. p. 240. * 2. r. 590. FINIS
Divines neither are nor ought to be indifferent in matters of Religion so that if only Neuters may be judges there will be none left in the Church and we must go abroad no body knows where to look for ' em This was the substance of their Answer which I here set down in the Latin to satisfie your curiosity Nunquam praxim hanc Ecclesiarum fuisse ut Pastores quoties exorientibus erroribus ex officio se opponerent propterea jure suffragiorum aut de illis ipsis erroribus judicandi potestate exciderent Ita enim omnem everti judiciorum Ecclesiasticorum ordinem efficique ne Pastores officio suo fideliter fungi queant .... Eos qui in doctrinâ aut moribus scandalorum autores sunt semper Censores suos Consistoria Classes Synodos ceu partem adversam rejicere .... ad eum modum Arianis aliisque olim hereticis adversus Orthodoxos Pastores semper licuisset excipere The English Divines deliver'd their opinion in these terms 1. Huic sententiae refragatur perpetua praxis omnium Ecclesiarum Nam in Synodis Oecumenicis Nicaeno c. ii qui antiquitus receptam doctrinam oppugnarunt ab illis qui eandem sibi traditam admiserunt approbarunt examinati judicati damnati sunt 2. Ipsius rei necessitas huc cogit Theologi enim in negotio religionis neque esse solent tanquam abrasae tabulae neque esse debent Si igitur soli neutrales possent esse judices extra Ecclesiam in quâ lites enatae sunt quaerendi essent 3. Ipsa aequitas suadere videtur Nam quae ratio reddi potest ut suffragiorum jure priventur omnes illi Pastores qui ex officio receptam Ecclesiae Doctrinam propugnates secus docentibus adversati sunt Si hoc obtinuerit nova dogmata spargentibus nemo obsisteret ne ipso facto jus omne postmodum de illis controver siis judicandi amitteret Pray give me leave now to ask Why might not the Parties be Judges in the Council of Trent as well as in the Synod of Dort If in one case the Remonstrants were oblig'd to submit to the Protestants Why were not the Protestants oblig'd to submit to the Catholicks in the other The Synod was sorc'd to pretend some disparity and for want of a better alledg'd this that the Protestants and Remonstrants were under the same Magistracy And what if if they were We are not now talking of Civil Assemblies but of Ecclesiastical Dos the division of Civil Power destroy the Unity of the Catholick Church which we believe in our Creed Or if there be any reason why when any Schisme arises the Authority of the Whole is devolved to the major part does not the same Reason conclude as evidently in favour of a General as of a National Council IX To make it better appear which was the major part the Protestants ought to have had a decisive voice in Council A. 1. Binius says that the Council premitted this caution that if the Protestants were allow'd for once to give a Placet it should be no prejudice to the right honour of the present future Councils which looks as if the Council were not fully resolv'd to deny this to them if much insisted upon 2. They who openly maintain such doctrines as have been formerly condemn'd in General Councils are cutt of from the Catholick Church they are not Members of it therefore can have no right to a decisive voice 3. If it had been permitted they were still certain to be over-voted by 270. Bishops to whom if you add the Catholick Divines by the same rule as the Protestants there remain'd no ground for any hopes This the Protestants saw well enough therefore were willing to wave all Ecclesiastical Judges Soave tells you how they shuffled in this point One time they proposed a Decision by Laicks indifferently chosen in an equal number on both sides Another time they appeal'd to * p. 73. a godly free Council which is not the Tribunal of Pope Priests only but of all the Orders of the Church not excluding the Seculars Here indeed the Clergy were admitted to this godly free Council but it was only by way of spectators to see what the Laity would please to do there for * ibid. the Pope making himself a party to the cause it was just that the manner and form of the proceeding should be letermin'd by the Princes This was the * ib. Answer of 15. Princes 30 Cities assembled in Smalcalda 1535. Again about two years after when the * p. 76. Emperour sent his Vice-Chancellor to exhort them to receive the Council they answerd that they had always demanded a free Christian Council that every man may freely speak Turks Infidels being excluded Here you see that every man who call'd himself a Christian no matter how otherwise qualified was to have a free Vote in Council only Turks Infidels were to be excluded Judge you what a free godly Council this was like to be Mean time all this was only a copy of their countenance They clearly foresaw that the much greater part of those to whom God has committed the care of his Church would certainly condemn their errors They were already self-condemn'd as to Authority And therefore they never intended to appear in any legal Council but hated the very thought of it Although though the Name of a Council was very plausible and fit to be made use of for a time to amuse the world with 〈◊〉 an opinion of the Reformers that they were not proud obstinate but always willing to hear reason desirous to be better informed The Duke of Prussia was more sincere when Canobius came to invite him He * p. 413. answer'd plainly without any mincing or disguising of the matter that he was of the Augustan Confession therefore could not consent to a Popish Council Yet after all to do the Protestants justice I must needs confess that as soon as they were no longer in fear of the Emperour they began to unmask speak as plainly as the Duke did Read Soave's Annals 1562. he says that * p. 599. so soon as the Diet was assembled in Francfort the Prince of Condé sent to treat an union of the Huguenots with those of the Confession of Ausburg and in particular to make a joynt demand for a free new Council in which the resolutions of Trent might be examin'd the French men of the old Catholick Religion giving hope also that they would agree unto it ... But the Dutch Protestants were most averse from a Gouncil so long as Germany might be in peace without it And therefore a book was printed in Francfort full of reasons why they neither would nor could come to Trent with protestation of the nullity of all that was or would be done in that place One thing which makes me less wonder they could never agree to any
or opportunity to proceed to a declaration thereof Nevertheless when Lorain came to Council * p. 598. The Bishop of Liria to inform him of all the reasons of the Spaniards did recapitulate with great eloquence whatsoever they had said in this matter And added besides that nothing was more in favour of the Lutherans than to say that Bishops are instituted by the Law of man. When Lorain gave his suffrage he proposed the reasons on both sides he * p. 596. concluded in the end that the Question was boundless and exhorted the Fathers to leave it omitting jure divino saying instituted by Christ But notwithstanding this * ibid. The French Prelates who spoke after Lorain did not use the same ambiguity but maintain'd openly that the Authority of Bishops was de jure divino Again in another Congregation * p. 598. The French made proof of their liberty They said that the Institution Jurisdiction of Bishops was de jure divino as well as that of the Pope that there was no difference but in degree of Superiority and that the Pope's Authority is confined within the limits of the Canons relating commending the stile of the Parliaments of France that when any Pope's Bull is presented which containeth any thing contrary to the Canons receiv'd in France they pronounce it to be abusive forbid the execution Have you never heard that such boldness as this even in a free Parliament has been enough to send a man to the Tower And yet Soave confesses They were heard with much patience Consider well these passages from the beginning to the end of this Dispute and tell me then what liberty was wanting in the Council XXVII If the Prelates were so bold took such liberty How was it possible for the Council to end so quietly A. In some matters they had full * p. 728. satisfaction as in the clause Proponentibus Legatis In some a considerable part opposed as in the Doctrine of Residence which therefore according to the * p. 538. general Maxim of the Council could not be determin'd In others as the Institution of Bishops the Pope's Authority although their arguments had been urged repeated amplified in several Congregations yet still the major part was of another opinion it was therefore impossible to come to any determination And you know how natural it is for reasonable men to be quiet and silent when they plainly see it is in vain to speak XXVIII Was not the Pope's Authority at length made use of to restrain their liberty under pretence of their abusing it A. Soave himself who never makes-the best of things is pleas'd to tell us quite another story Lorain who at his first coming to Trent had oppos'd the * p. 583. declaration of these points had * p. 596. exhorted the Fathers to leave it * p. 684. proposed the omission of the two Articles of the Institution of Bishops and Authority of the Pope as things wherein the parties were too passionate And very fitly says your Author * ibid. an Order came from the Emperour to his Ambassadors to use all means that the Authority of the Pope should not be discuss'd in Council which his Majesty did because he saw the major part inclined to enlarge it ... The Ambassadors having treated with the Legates in conformity hereof as also with Lorain other principal Prelates did cause this Article to be omitted as also that other of the Institution of Bishops But first they made many consultations about it that all might rest contented XXIX Why were the Popes of those times so afraid of a General Council Why so averse from it Why did they to secure themselves shift sides so often betwixt the Emperour King of France A. You might as well have ask'd me Why dos a Pilot fear a storm Why is he so averse from it Why dos he trimm the boat so often S. Peter's Ship in those days was grievously toss'd almost coverd with the waves But our Lord who seem'd to sleep at length arose commanded the winds the Sea there follow'd a great Calm XXX Why did they avoid defer so long the General Reformation Why were Bulls given secretly to the Legates to suspend or transfer the Council as occasion serv'd Why did they openly declare that a Council is ever dangerous when the Pope's Authority is question'd A. You 'l never have done with these cramp-questions except a man give you as good as you bring Is not the Reformation of Abuses in the Church as dangerous as the Redressing of Grievances in the State If our Nation were in the same ferment as under the reign of Charles I. would you blame his Majesty for pretending to prorogue or dissolve as he pleases And have we not ever since great reason to believe that a Parliament though otherwise excellent in it self is always dangerous when the King's Authority is question'd In those tumults of Ecclefiastical Affairs Reformation was a dangerous business And had the Reformers been let slip at the Abuses they would perhaps have worry'd the whole Church If S. Paul was in perils among false Brethren the Successor of S. Peter was no less * p. 284. Not only the Protestants did impugn his Authority but many Princes also would restrain it many Bishops did think to moderate it * p. 205. The Spaniards had a secret which they communicated only among themselves to make great the Episcopal Authority so that the Pope could not restrain it The French had * p. 532. ever pretended to limit the Pope's power subject it to the Canons Councils * p. 349. The Emperour's Ambassadors had given the Protestants hope to moderate the Papal Authority said that they expected to see a Gate laid open by their negotiation that afterwards they might second it and Julius III. had intelligence that the Emperour had a design to advance himself by debasing of the Papacy This was enough to make the Popes of that Age take care to look before they leap'd But yet this was not all if Soave says true The * p. 17. Governours of Countries regarded not much what the Council might determine concerning Doctrines but desired it might be such a one as might reduce the Priests Friers to their beginning hoping that by that means the regalities temporal jurisdictions might return unto them And therefore they said it was in vain to call a Council where the Bishops other Prelates only should have a deliberative voice because they ought to be reform'd and it was necessary that others should have the charge thereof who could not be deceiv'd by their proper interests Here you see in plain English what the Reformation was like to come to 1. The design was laid to bring the Ecclesiasticks to their beginning They were to be brought to their Staff and Scrip again sent about their business
operations of a Man. But mang learned men who read Gelasius and Theodoret want either skill or patience to understand them They find these words the substance of bread remains and are so much transported with the joyfull news of any thing that looks but like an argument against the Old Religion they have undertaken to reform they do not well consider what the word may signifie but willingly suppose the Sense is just the same as they would have it set their hearts at rest and look no farther * I have now sufficiently examin'd what the Fathers say concerning the outward form of the Sacrament what they mean by calling it a type a sign or figure what they understand when they call it the substance or nature of bread I now come close to the main point of the Question What they have taught constantly believ'd during the first eight Centuries concerning the inward substance of the Sacrament Whether they believ'd it was the substance of bread wine or the substance of Christ's body blood SECOND PART Paschasius Rathertus a French Monk Native of Soisson in Picardy wrote a book in the year 831. de Corpore Sanguine Domini at the request of one of his Scholars call'd Placidius an Abbot to whom he dedicated it He makes it his business to explain prove three points 1. that the body blood of Christ are truly and substantially present 2. that the substances of bread wine remain no longer after Consecration 3. that the body is the very same which was born of the Virgin suffer'd on the Cross rose from the Sepulcre He was the more willing to write this book because some people out of ignorance began to doubt of several truths relating to the Sacrament This I gather from an epistle of Paschasius to Frudegard where I find these words Although some people are out of ignorance mistaken nevertheless as yet no body openly contradicts this doctrine which all the World believes professes Our Adversaries take a great deal of pains to persuade us that Paschasius was the first broacher of this Doctrine from him they date the first Rise of it about the beginning of the IX Age although it did not take root nor was fully settled established till towards the end of the eleventh They add that this was the most likely time for the Enemy to sow his Tares when the Christian World was lull'd asleep in ignorance and superstition that the generality of people being quiet secure were ready to receive any thing that came in under a pretence of mystery in religion but the men most eminent for piety learning in that time made great resistance against it This is the Account which now is generally given by our modern Writers and particularly by the Author of a late Discourse against Transubstantiation T is easily said and the contrary is as easily prov'd Read Leo Allatius in his 3. book of the perpetual agreement betwixt East West and you will find Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople saying that the bread wine are not an image or a figure But that they are transmuted into the body blood of Christ Read Haymo Bishop of Halberstadt in his Treatise De Corpore Sanguine Domini you may find it in the 12. Tome of the Spicilegium his words are these We believe therefore and faithfully confess hold that the substance of bread wine by the operation of the Divine Virtue is substantially chang'd into another substance that is Body Blood ..... The tast of bread wine remains the figure the nature of the substances being wholly chang'd into the body blood of Christ Read Theodorus 〈◊〉 Abucara in the Bibliotheca Patrum printed at Lions you will find that in his 22. Opuscule he says The Holy Ghost descends by his Divinity changes the bread wine into the body blood of Christ I omit several others who lived in the same Age with Paschasius and all witness that the Church believd the mystery of Transubstantiation T is well known that the 3. part of Paschasius's doctrine occasion'd some disputes about the manner of speaking They allow'd the body to be the same in substance but not altogether the same because it is not in the same form it has no corporal motion or action in a word it is present in some respects after the manner of a spirit imperceptible to sense all in the whole all in every part This Spiritual presence of his body was much urg'd against Paschasius to prove the body is not absolutely the same But nevertheless if we do not preferr darkness before light we cannot but see that They who wrote against the third part did not write against the second and they who quarreld with his way of speaking did not deny the mystery of Transubstantiation as appears by the testimonies of his pretended Adversaries Amalarius in the 24. ch of his 3. book says We believe the simple nature of bread wine mixt with water to be chang'd into a reasonable nature to wit the body blood of Christ Rabanus Archbishop of Mentz in the 10. ch of his 7. book to Theotmarus De sacris ordinibus Who says he would ever have believ'd that bread could have been chang'd into flesh wine into blood unless our Saviour himself had said it who created bread wine all things out of nothing These men were also Authors of the same IX Age And after all these testimonies I leave you to judge whether the IX Age did not generally believe the mystery of Transubstantiation or whether Paschasius was the first that broacht it in the Western Church I do not insist upon the authority of Bertram either one way or other but however I shall give you a short account of him as much as may suffice to justifie my letting him alone The first question which he proposes in the beginning is * pag 1. whether the body of Christ be done in a mystery or in truth that is to say according to his own words whether it contain some secret thing or whether the bodily sight do outwardly behold whatsoever is done I have not hitherto met with any Author of the IX Age that ever said Our eye sees all that our faith believes but we are to suppose that some body said so or else that Bertram was mistaken He answers with a great deal of truth that * p. 5. it cannot be call'd a mystery wherein there is nothing covered with some veil removed from our bodily senses Outwardly says he the form of bread is set out but inwardly a thing far differing * p. 6. London-Edit 1687. which is not discern'd to be Christ's body by the carnal senses Afterward he compares this Sacrament with that of Baptism and finally in the 18. page he concludes Therefore the things that are seen things that are believ'd are not all one This was indeed a