REASON AND AUTHORITY OR THE MOTIVES OF A LATE Protestants Reconciliation TO THE Catholic Church TOGETHER With Remarks upon some late Discourses AGAINST Transubstantiation Publisht with Allowance LONDON Printed by Henry Hills Printer to the King 's Most Excellent Majesty For his Houshold and Chappel 1687. Reason and Authority OR THE MOTIVES OF A LATE Protestants Reconciliation TO THE Catholic Church THAT I may pay my due Respects to the Church of England to which I am indebted for a considerable part of my Education I think it just to publish those Motives which obliged me to take my leave of Her And if it shall appear that I have not rashly quitted her Communion but have used herein the utmost strength and dictates of my most Impartial Reason I hope She will excuse me if I have followed that light which She her self so pressingly recommends I shall therefore most Reverend Fathers communicate my Motives to you in a short but plain Method and if my Brevity in this shall not sufficiently express the strength of my Arguments censure not from thence the Faith which I profess For having perused many Excellent Authors which have treated more particularly and fully of it I purposely avoided a long Repetition of those things which you may find more largely and better handled in the Originals themselves I have been guided I hope by the grace of God and reason reducing things almost to Demonstration I have no Charm nor Conjuration upon me that I know of but shall be always ready to follow the strongest Evidence of common Reason I will not trouble you with all those circumstances which made me doubt but only tell you in short that by reading and discoursing with Catholic Men and Authors I did really doubt concerning the truth of my Protestant profession One main Reason of my Diffidence was this That I did not find in the Church of England a lawful Authority sufficient to oblige my reason and conscience to submit to her Decrees in matters of Faith necessary to Salvation Pag. 133. For Dr. Stillingfleet tells me All men ought to be left to Judge according to the Pandects of the Divine Laws because each Member of this Society is bound to take care of his Soul and of all things that tend thereto And Dr. Pag. 48 49. Ferne in his Case between the two Churches says further That in matters proposed by my Superiours as Gods Word and of Faith I am not tied to believe it such till they manifest it to me to be so and not that I am obliged to believe it such unless I can manifest it to be contrary because my Faith can rest on no humane Authority but only on Gods Word and Divine Revelation This is your constant Doctrine as to our faith or internal assent as may be proved by many of your best Authors and indeed the Justice of your Reformation cannot consist with stricter Principles for how can you bind our Consciences by a late usurpt Authority I speak as to declaring Articles of faith not of discipline when you would not submit your own to the greatest Authority under which our Ancestors were born and which was incomparably the most lawful the most esteem'd the most certain and most universal that ever appear'd in the Christian Church since the Apostles And accordingly Mr. Chillingworth of the just Authority of Councils and Synods says Any thing besides Scripture and the plain irrefragable indubitable consequences of It well may Protestants hold it as matter of Opinion but as matter of Faith and Religion neither can they with coherence to their own ground believe it themselves nor require the Belief of it of others without high and most Schismatical presumption Now these plain irrefragable and indubitable consequences must need be plain to every man who is not mad or a fool and so need no Authority But in all those which are less plain and such must be the Points controverted between Catholics and your selves I have my liberty for I am fully assured from the same hand that God doth not and that therefore Man ought not to require any more of any Man than this to believe the Scripture to be Gods Word to endeavour to find the true sense of it and to live according to it Having therefore worthy Fathers been taught English and Latin in your Grammar Schools and keeping the Holy Bible with me which contains all things necessary to Salvation and to which according to your Instructions I must at last appeal I resolved to give you no further trouble in this matter especially since as I said you could not teach me infallibly nor impose your Interpretations by vertue of any legal Authority which might ultimately conclude my Reason and secure my Conscience Finding that I was not only at liberty but advised also by your selves to work out my own Salvation and to stand upon my own bottome I thought it reasonable that my Enquiry should Set out from the very beginning and examine whether there was a God and indeed I found some learned men even among the greatest Philosophers speaking very doubtfully concerning this matter if not denying it 'T was not only the Fool had said in his heart there is no God but hear what Cardan Writes of our famous Aristotle L. 3. de Sap. Aristoteles says he tam callidè mundi ortum animae praemia Deos Daemones sustulit ut hae◠omnia apertè quidem diceret argui tamen non posset And the great Pontif Cotta to Velleius upon the same Question concerning a God Credo inquit si in concione quaeratur But in private it seems he was very easie in his Belief I will not mention Epicure and Lucretius their names are grown generally too scandalous but if you examine Anaxagoras Anacharsis Protagoras Euripides Diagoras and many others whose reputations carry no small Authority along with them you will observe such a suspension of mind concerning a Deity that if they were afraid positively to deny so neither would they confidently affirm Next supposing a Deity whether the World was govern'd by God The Epicureans totally deny it nullam omninò habere humanarum rerum procurationem Deos which Ennius also plainly professeth in these words Ego Deûm genus semper esse dixi dicam Coelitum Sed Eos non curare Opinor quid agat humanum genus Which opinion Grotius takes care to confute in his Cap. de poenis l. 2. And no wonder if the Heathens denied a Point full of so many difficulties since the Royal Prophet himself was almost stumbled at it My feet says he were almost gone my steps had well nigh slipt Then the Souls Immortality a very considerable Point seem'd so hard to Reason especially when I found it disputed in some Set philosophical Discourses and it's Mortality proved almost to a physical Demonstration and besides that the Christian Doctrine concerning it had not been determin'd above two hundred years in any Council that truly
Prophets in a hundred plain Texts I presume not unknown to your selves rather than your word in this Case I profess therefore tho my Reason is not able to cope with yours yet I 'll sooner suffer my self to be knockt down with a true Protestant Flayl than with such a Protestant Answer If you say the Catholic Church fell and was corrupt in Faith and Manners then I answer that Christ fail'd of his Promise and so good night to Christianity If you say the Catholic Church did not fall but kept the Unity of Faith Entire and Vncorrupt then I reply again shew me where and how I may find her And from this reasonable and important Request you shall never beat me whilst I live If you think fit to perswade me that the Church of Rome separated from the Church of England and that the Church of England is and ever hath been a part at least of the Catholic Church which always preserv'd the Faith entire and uncorrupt make it appear to me Fathers and I most heartily promise to become the most humble and obedient Subject that ever liv'd under any Government But I foresee many Difficulties which I fear will prove invincible as first It is evident that you separated from the Church of Rome and that within these few years and to prove that she separated from you will be I doubt no easie Task nor have I yet seen it done Next That you were involved in the same pernicious Errors with her ever since Augustin the Monk above a Thousand years since If my Computation be false blame your own Authors and rectifie my Judgment Now how you should rise a pure Church after having been buried so many Hundred years in a corrupt Church I do not easily understand I have heard indeed of some Rivers that have fallen into the Earth and risen up again many Miles off and of others which for many Miles in the Sea have still retain'd the natural sweetness of their own fresh Waters If these comparisons may hold in Religion yet how will you make them quâ—drate with the constant visibility and Demonstration in one case and the Succession of the Original Stream in the other if you say that that the Catholic Church was invisible or totally fell If you pretend to derive your Authority from the Church of Rome when She was in her Purity and Perfection let me tell you here will be a very long Prescription against you and I know not how your Jus postliminium can take place in this case But if it would you must be restor'd by an Act of the same Supream Authority you own'd her you held of her you reciev'd your Doctrine and your Orders from her Besides as hath been said She could by no means grant away her Authority independent from her shew me that lawful Authority which restor'd you and I submit Shew me your extraordinary Calling by those Marks appointed and practis'd in such Cases both under the Old and New Law even to our own Century I mean undoubted Miracles and I acquiesce If you tell me no time can prescribe against Divine Truth nor is Authority necessary to reform an Error In a general Sense I grant both But the Question here is concerning Truth and Error themselves No body doubts but that a certain Divine Truth is to be reciev'd and a certain Error to be avoided but we are now seeking for that Authority which shall declare this Truth and set forth this Error Error or Sin is the breach of a Law for without the Law Rom. 7. Sin is dead whence St. Paul says That he had not known Lust except the Law had said thou shalt not covet Now as Sin supposes a Law so Law requires an Authority And as the one so the other must be visible And to shew that this Authority is absolutely necessary we find our Saviour giving it to his Apostles and themselves exercising and recommending it to others so S. Paul advises Titus Titus 2.15 To speak exhort and rebuke with Authority But what need Instances of this kind Our Saviour hath left us a Law of Faith which in some of the most necessary Points is not clear and self-Evident whence the Arians of old Men of great Learning denied the Trinity and Divinity of our Saviour and they made a very considerable Body Authority condemn'd them and interpreted the Law in those Cases according to our present Orthodox Faith The Socinians and Antitriniturians rebel against it to this day and are neither unlearned nor inconsiderable Luther tells us That Christ is a Saviour of vile and little worth and wanted himself a Saviour Christus ille vilis In Confes Maj. de caen Dom. nec magni pretij Salvator est immo Ipse quoque Salvatore opus habet And that his Divinity suffer'd for us De consil part 2 pertinacissimè contra me pugnabant quod Divinitas Christi pati non posset Tom. 1. prop. 3. He tells us further That good Works are hurtful to Salvation and that Faith doth not Justifie except it be even without the least good Works Calvin also Bilsons Survey and Beza That Christ suffer'd in his Soul the pains of the damned that he prayed unadvisedly and was disturb'd in his Senses That the Divine Substance is not wholly in three Persons but distinct really and truly from Everlasting into three Persons and that there be three Divinities as there be three Persons Melanct in loco Com. c. de Christo Beza 's Confession p. 1. Anno Dom. 1585. Calvin in Act. Serveti Whence Neuserus a Learned Calvinist and chief Pastor at Heidelburg revolting first to Arianism and thence to Mahometanism writ to Gerlachius a Protestant Preacher from Constantinople July 2. 1574. saying None is known to me in my time made an Arian who was not first a Calvinist and then names several such persons That God is the Author of Sin moving inclining and forcing the Will of man to Sin Calvin Instit l. 1. c. 18. and l. 2. c. 4. Zuingl Bucer and several of our Eminent English Reformers concur with them in most of these blasphemous and heretical Opinions Now Fathers if these Instances with many others which I abhor to mention be not sufficient and weighty enough to require a Supream Judge to determine the right Faith and to condemn and silence the wrong then look nearer at home among your selves and if all cannot prevail with you to believe That the Law wanted a Judge and that therefore Christ was pleased in his Wisdom and Goodness to leave us Judges as long as he intended his Law should be in force Then pray excuse me if my Reason and Piety and the reverent Notion which I have of a Just God and a Merciful Saviour totally force my Judgment and Conscience to dissent from you in this particular and let us proceed If you say the Church of Rome usurpt upon you I answer if such a thing was It was in Discipline only and
External Government and that but in some particulars with which I meddle not If you tell me a story of the Abbot of Bangor I answer the particular ground of it is evidently false and forg'd and at best all circumstances consider'd of little consequence The plain Truth is this The Brittains received the Christian Faith even in the days of the Apostles But being persecuted at home by the Romans Picts and Saxons Religion fled to the Mountains and bordering parts of Wales At the same time the Church of Rome was no less afflicted by the Heathen Emperours and no wonder if in these days and circumstances there was but little Correspondence between Rome and Wales But when the Church brought forth from her subterraneous Refuges and set upon a Hill began to enlarge her self and propagate the Gospel according to the Commands of our Saviour Go ye and Preach unto all Nations Gregory the Great sent Augustin the Monk into England somewhat before the year Six Hundred to see how Matters went here in this long interval of silence and distractions In short the Brittains knew him not and no wonder until he had confirm'd his Commission by Miracles and such as none yet ever denied The great Errors which he found among them were chiefly two Their Asiatic Error concerning the keeping of Easter and dissent from the use of the Roman Church in the administring of Baptism And altho in some other Matters they differ'd from the Church of Rome yet Augustin promised to tolerate those provided they would rectifie these which the Brittish Bishops consented to and confessed That it was the right way of Justice and righteousness which Austin taught Si his tribus mihi obtemperare vultis ut Pascha suo tempore celebretis ut ministerium Baptizandi juxta morem Rom. Apost Ecolesiae compleatis Ut genti Anglorum una nobiscum praedicetis Verbum Domini Caetera quae agitis quamvis Moribus nostris contraria aequanimiter cuncta tolerabimus Cum Brittones confitentur Intellexisse se veram esse viam Justitiae quam praedicaret Augustinus Beda Hist l. 2. c. 2. Hence we may observe That the two great faults which Austin found with the Brittains were about Easter and Baptism that the Brittains at first highly oppos'd this Innovation but that in all other Substantials they agreed That Austin is severely accus'd for bringing into England the Popish Superstition and all other Points by name controverted between us at this day is plain from neer twenty Eminent Protestant Authors both at home and abroad And that the Brittish Bishops did not except against any of these save only Easter and Baptism is confest Now after all this can we believe that the Brittains who earnestly contradicted Austin in these smaller Points and were so tenacious of their own Customs would have silently recieved so many and imcomparably much greater Points of Faith had they in like manner disagreed from him therein Credat Judaeus Apella The consequence which I draw from all this is that the same Doctrines these two Points excepted which Austin taught the Saxons had been deliver'd to the Brittains from the Apostles If you understand otherwise I shall be glad to be better informed Or if you can give us a better Authority than venerable Bede you will do well to produce it In the mean time when we consider the great Learning and Holiness of St. Gregory so esteem'd by all sober men the Piety of Austin himself and of Bede who writes the Story He must be a bold man who without better proof than I have hitherto seen dares accuse these three great Persons and the whole Christian World at that time of Idolatry and all those other damnable Crimes then taught of which you are pleased to say the Church of Rome at present is guilty If you go higher and object a Letter of Pope Eleutherius to King Lucius I demur But I take it for granted that these old Arguments are thredbare and will not hold Water otherwise I would humbly advise you to insist totally upon them for if you can make out your Lawful Supream Independent Authority in determining Matters of Faith without Appeal trouble not your selves nor abuse your Friends with Sophistical Artificial Pamphlets about Judges and Guides in Controversies Reason and Sense against Faith and Obedience and I know not what to that purpose but stick close to your Authority make it out plain and you carry all before you In good earnest Reverend Fathers I see but one way how you 'l evade these Difficulties which press hard upon you and it is this That you have an Infallible Rule Gods Holy Word containing all things necessary to Salvation And Mr. Chillingworth tells us p. 92. The Scripture is a Rule as sufficiently Perfect so sufficiently Intelligible in things necessary to all that have understanding whether learned or unlearned Now if the Scripture be a Guide and a Judge as well as a Rule Then have you been to blame all this while that you have not told us particularly where the Catholic Church was for certainly where the Bible is and where all men that have understanding whether learned or unlearned by reading it hold all things necessary to Salvation there the Catholic Church is whether at Rome or in London and I will not believe so ill of any who in such Case read the Scripture as to imagine that they wilfully oppose a Truth which is clear to them and Mr. Chillingworth tells me p. 367. That Believing all that is clear to me in Scripture I must needs believe all Fundamentals and so I cannot incur Heresie which is opposite to some Fundamental In a word wheresoever there is or was a Bible and a Man of understanding whether learned or unlearned that read it there was a certain number of the true Catholic Church pure and uncorrupt For the same hand again tells us p. 101. The Scripture sufficiently informing me what is Faith must also of necessity teach me what is Heresie that which is straight will plainly teach us what is crooked So here is not only a Member but according to my understanding the Representative of the whole Catholic Church for here is Authority and Infallibility and further than that I seek not But if the holy Bible be a certain Rule but withal that this Person of understanding whether learned or unlearned be not sufficiently qualified to find out certainly all things necessary to Salvation and of necessity to teach what Heresie is and I confess I shrewdly suspect that there may be many in the World who cannot with a wet Finger perform all this then are we to seek again for a Judge and an Authority and are got no further than we were sixteen Hundred years since when the Scripture was first acknowledged to be the Word of God But to do Justice worthy Fathers to you and to my self let us further consider these and many other seeming Absurdities which appear at first sight such
might find a fit parallel for Mr. Arnauld he takes a long Journey to Vienna the rather I suppose that he might pay his respects to the King of France and his Army as he return'd home again for he tells us That by the like Demonstration as Mr. Arnauld's one might prove that the Turk did not invade Christendom because if he had the most Christian King who had the greatest Army in Christendom in a readiness would certainly have employed it against him Now our Discourser without crossing the Seas might have given as proper an instance even from his own Doors for who could easily imagine that the Real Substantial Presence of Christs Natural Body in the holy Sacrament should have been believ'd and profest by the Church of England in the days of King James the First and yet that in the Reign of King James the Second the figurative Doctrine in exclusion of the Real Presence should be so firmly and peaceably establisht among us as that not so much as one single Church of England Man at least that I have heard of tho highly dignified by honourable and profitable Employments in and by the said Church of England should write one word in Vindication of their ancient Church Nor one small Pamphlet to oppose the Innovation of these usurping Sacramentories But these things worthy Fathers concern you more than me and lest you should quite forget that there ever had been any such Doctrine profest by your Church of England I shall humbly take the liberty by and by to refresh your memories Much more might be said to shew from what loose Conjectures our Discourser would prove the Innovation of the Doctrine of the Real Presence and that it entred not into the Latin Church before the Eighth Century But since I design nothing of Answer more than to satisfie you worthy Fathers and my self that I have not rushly rejected the Authority of so Learned a Person as our Discourser seems to be without good reason and due consideration this which is already said is I suppose sufficient for that purpose I come now to what he calls the Third pretended Ground of this Doctrine of Transubstantiation that is The infallible Authority of the present Church to make and declare new Articles of Faith First there is a great difference between making an Article of Faith and declaring and Article of Faith I know no power upon Earth that can do the first but certainly the second is within the Jurisdiction of the lawful Church Governours or otherwise General Councils would be very insignificant Assemblies Now if Transubstantiation should prove to be no more than the true Faith concerning the blessed Sacrament declar'd or explain'd then our Discourser hath no reason to quarrel with Church Authority or fear any Inconveniences should happen from the Exercise of such a Power First I have sufficiently shewn at least in my Opinion that the Doctrine of the Real Presence that is of the Natural Body of Christ substantially truly and literally existing in the Sacrament tho' not after a Corporal and Natural manner to have been the constant Doctrine of the Catholic Church from the Apostles to the great Council of Lateran when in the presence of the Ambassadors of the Greek and Roman Emperours as also of the Kings of Jerusalem England France Spain and Cyprus this word Transubstantiation was agreed upon by neer Thirteen Hundred Fathers to be a proper Explicative Term of the Apostolical Doctrine and belief of the Real Presence or change of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ of this enough hath been said But because our Discourser is pleas'd to call the Doctrine of the Real Presence barbarous and impious p. 35. I have thought fit to add to the rest the Testimonies of Bishop Andrews and the Learned Casaubon in the name of King James the First and the Church of England and some others of the most Learned Fathers and Professors of the true English Church I will begin with Bishop Andrews Resp ad Apol. Bell. c. 1. p. 11. The Cardinal says he cannot be ignorant except wilfully that Christ said This is my Body but not after this manner This is my Body We agree in the object and differ only in the manner Concerning the Hoc est or this is We firmly believe that it is Concerning the after this manner i.e. by the Bread Transubstantiated into the Body of the manner how it is done as by or in or with or under or through there is not a word concerning it We believe the true Presence no less than your selves but we dare not confidently define any thing concerning the manner of this Presence nor are we over curious to enquire into it c. Again ib. c. 8. p. 194. Speaking of the Conjunction of Christs Body with the Symbols he says There is that Conjunction between the visible Sacrament and the Invisible Thing of the Sacrament as between the Divinity and Humanity of Christ where except you would savour of Eutychianism the Humanity is not transubstantiated into the Divinity And a little further The King hath establisht it that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist and to be truly there ador'd And we with Ambrose adore the Flesh of Christ in the Mysteries Some possibly may be ingenious enough to interpret all this to signifie a meer figurative Presence as they have done many clear passages of the Fathers but they must interpret for themselves not for me But let us hear what Is Casaubon writes to Cardinal Perron by the Kings Command concerning the Real Presence of Christs Body in the Eucharist who saying that the Contest was not about the Truth but only the Manner of the thing returns this reply p. 50. His Majesty wonders since your Eminence confesseth that you do not so solicitously require that Transubstantiation should be believed as that we should not doubt concerning the Truth of the Real Presence That the Church of England should not long since have satisfied you in that particular which hath so often profest to believe it in her public Writings And then for Explication of the Doctrine of the Church of England recites the fore-mention'd words of Bishop Andrews Quod Cardinalem non latet Come we next to Mr. Hooker Eccl. Polit. l. 5. Sect. 67. p. 357. Wherefore should the World continue still distracted and rent with so manifold contentions when there remaineth now no Controversie saving only about the subject where Christ is Nor doth any thing rest doubtful in this but whether when the Sacrament is administred Christ be whole within Man only or else his Body and Blood be also externally seated in the very Consecrated Elements themselves Again p. 360. All three Opinions do thus far accordin one That these holy Mysteries received in due manner do instrumentally both make us partakers of the Grace of that Body and Blood which were given for the Life of the World and besides also impart unto us even in
booty with you for if this be a confutation of what was before alledged from Beza I profess I shall never quarrel with him about it nor desire any other hand than Beza's even in this very passage to express my Belief of the Real Presence of Christ's Natural Body in the Sacrament What a strange Answerer is this sure he thinks because Catholics submit their Sense and Reason in some things to Divine Revelation and the Authority of the Church therefore they have not Reason enough to judge in other Cases that three and one make four as well as two and two Next he brings in Cranmer and Ridley when he was among his Geneva Brethren I suppose and he might as well have nam'd himself and his Eminent Discourser against Transubstantiation And what if these two first were of the same opinion concerning the Real Presence with these two last It only proves that one at London contradicted himself at Geneva and the other Men ten times more learned than himself Our Answerer that he may take breath before he comes to our English Divines above-named for I perceive he finds that he is like to have a tough piece of work on 't charges the Oxford Author with disingenuity chiefly in favour of Doctor Burnets History of the Reformation Alas I am apt to believe tho' I know neither the Discourser nor this Answerer not so much as by Name but only by their Works I am apt I say to believe that this Discourser is much better acquainted with Church History than the Doctor and applies it with much more Sincerity and Truth than he hath done I confess were I worthy to advise I should counsel this Answerer to flesh himself first upon some Authors of a lower Classis for I doubt he is here over-match'd and hath got as we say a Bear by the Tooth What the Learned Historian means by the Wisdom of that time P. 58. in leaving a liberty for different speculations as to the manner of the Presence I cannot understand except that they did in that time generally believe the Real Presence as hath been before exprest but would not certainly determine the manner that is as Bishop Andrews hath said before whether it was per or in or cum or sub or trans but if there be no such Real Presence in any manner I know not what this Liberty of Speculations signifies as to the manner when the thing is not really after any manner and if not as our Answerer seems all along to affirm this then might indeed be great Wisdom or humane Policy not too rudely to choke the tender Ears of their late establisht Reformation But how it can consist with true Piety and a Church pretending to reform Errors we shall best find by this consideration If Men had liberty to believe that Christ was really present after any manner it follows necessarily that Christ was adorable there where he was so present But if the Church in its Wisdom did certainly know that Christ was not really present after any Manner then the Church in its Wisdom gave Men liberty to be Idolaters for our Answerer hath been pleas'd to deliver us his Opinion from Doctor Taylor p. 69. who there says That to give Divine worship to a Non Ens must needs be Idolatry For Idolum nihil est in mundo saith St. Paul and Christ as present by his Humane Nature in the Sacrament is a Non Ens for it is not true there is no such thing he is there by his Diviner Power and Blessing c. but for any other presence it is Idolum And that the practice of the Learneder part of the Church of England nay of the whole Church of England it self if we will believe the Articles of Henry the Eighth in the beginning of the Reformation or King James in the strength of the Reformation was accordingly Idolatrous I am most abundantly satisfied until some stronger Pen than our Answerers shall fully confute what is already extant to that purpose In the mean time leaving the Matter of Fact to the Doctors Conscience we will follow our Answerer He is come now to Bishop Jewel who tells us p. 60. That Christs Body and Blood indeed and verily is given unto us that we verily eat it that we verily drink it c. yet we say not either that the substance of Bread and Wine is done away that is Transubstantiation which is not our Dispute or that Christ's Body is let down from Heaven or made really or fleshly present in the Sacrament If by really he means fleshly I subscribe to all this as to the Real Presence He goes on That spiritually i. e. modo spirituali and with the mouth of our Faith we eat the Body of Christ and drink his Blood even as verily as his Body was verily broken and his Blood verily shed upon the Cross If the Bishop was not an Eutychian then certainly his Body was verily that is substantially and truly broken upon the Cross Thus far then we punctually agree But the Bishop explains himself The Bread he tells us is an earthly thing and therefore a Figure as Baptism in Water is also a Figure 'T is confest Now lest we should think that by this Figure the Bishop intended to exclude the substance he adds immediately But the Body of Christ that thereby is represented and is there offer'd to our Faith most true is the thing i. e. the Body of Christ it self and not the Figure As much of this as the Answerer pleases we have reason to be thankful to him for it But he now comes to Answer for the venerable Mr. Hooker You have heard what hath been offer'd from the Discourser The Answerer tells us from Mr. Hooker p. 61. That the parts of the Sacrament are the Body and Blood of Christ because they are causes instrumental upon the receipt whereof the participation of his Body and Blood ensueth And that the Real Presence of Christs most blessed Body and Blood is not therefore to be sought for in the Sacrament but in the worthy Receiver of the Sacrament All this is most consistent with the Protestant Notion of the Real Presence here contended for Next Bishop Andrews comes upon the Stage and first the Answerer tells us as from himself only that this Bishop insinuates P. 62. That the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist was much the same as in Baptism the very Allusion which the Holy Fathers were wont to make to express his Presence by in this holy Sacrament That the Bishop and the Holy Fathers might mean that Christ is present in the Sacrament as in Baptism Catholics do not deny for they also constantly affirm the same thing as much as either But if our Answerer pretends to perswade us that either the Bishop or Fathers or Catholics mean him only so present as to exclude the presence also of his natural Body in the Sacrament that remains to be prov'd which hath not been done