being term'd a Propitiatory Sacrifice and lastly the Doctrine of Transubstantiation The Mass is to you so hateful a Word that the Hating of it is amongst you a token of Love. And yet were it not that I confine my self to that briefness I began with it might abundantly be shewn that this Holy Word has always been us'd to signify the Celebration of the Eucharist 'T is now about thirteen hundred years since the time of St. Ambrose who in his Epistle to Marcellina says I began to say Mass And soon after I began to Pray unto GOD in the Oblation that he would help c. St. Telesphorus Pope and Martyr who might for his Age have seen St. John the Apostle testifies the Mass to have been in his Time ordaining many things in the Celebration of it Which very thing the Sectaries themselves confess For the Magdeburgians in their second Century cap. 10. blame him for Multiplying Masses encreasing their Ceremonies and tying them to a certain time Behold how whilst they unwarily accuse Telesphorus they acknowledge the Antiquity of the Mass Confessing even the Name to have been us'd in the very beginning of the Primitive Church But whatever becomes of the Name let us consider the thing it self We say that the Celebration of the Mass is a Sacrifice truly and properly Propitiatory You or rather some of you deny it for the more Learned agree at least tacitly with us Isaac Casaubon but few Months before his Death being in the Presence Chamber of the most Serene King of Great Britain I fell in Discourse with him as did also another Gentleman a Courtier but no Catholick whom were it necessary I could easily Name Passing from one thing to another we hap'ned amongst the rest upon the Eucharist which I earnestly defending You need not said Casaubon take all this pains I willingly profess and do assert it to be manifest from the Rites of the Antient Church that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice and not only a Sacrifice of Praise as many amongst us would have it but a Propitiatory Sacrifice Sacrificium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These were his very Words Thus did he in two Languages express what kind of Sacrifice he thought it to be I was not a little glad to hear him whilst the third person who was present at our Discourse wondred at this his Opinion affirming that he was more startled at these words than at an hundred Arguments of the Papists He can testify the Truth of this being still alive and daily attending on the King. And he has been so far from being a Catholick that it cannot be fear'd he would advantage us by speaking contrary to the Truth And the Oblation indeed of the Eucharist is so frequently by the Fathers call'd Sacrifice that the Sectaries no longer dispute with us about the Name but only about what is to be understood by it It cannot says Kemnitius be deny'd that the Antients when they spake of the Celebration of the Lords Supper us'd the words Sacrifice Immolation Oblation Host and Victim as also the Verbs to Offer Sacrifice and Immolate Hear therefore Sectary but St. Augustin alone and thou wilt say that the Church in his Age us'd not these Words as borrowed or Figuratively taken but understood them in their proper true and usual Sense that the Eucharist is a true Sacrifice properly so call'd and Propitiatory not for the Living only but also for the Dead He relates therefore in the ninth Book of his Confessions Ch. 11. that his dying Mother spake thus Lay this Body any where let not the Care of it trouble you in the least This only I desire of you that when you shall be present at our Lords Altar you will there remember me And again Chap. 13. he says of her She thought not of having her Body Sumptuously Bury'd c. She commanded us not this but only requested that she might be remembred at thy Altar where she had without one days Intermission constantly serv'd whence she knew the Holy Victim to be dispens'd by which the Hand-writing that was against us is blotted out He had also before Chap. 12. said more plainly Behold when her Corps was carry'd out we went and return'd without Tears Nor did I so much as weep at those Prayers we pour'd forth to thee when the Sacrifice of our Redemption was offer'd for her her Body now being plac'd near the Grave before it was deposited therein as the Custom there is but I was all the day in secret exceeding sad c. Thou hear'st now O Sectary not only St. Augustin's Mother not only St. Augustin but the very Custom and Sense of the Church in that Age. When the Sacrifice of our Redemption was offer'd for her Here thou hast three things That the Oblation of the Eucharist is a Sacrifice that 't is also Propitiatory For in vain or impiously would the Church offer a Sacrifice to our Lord for the Dead which could not render him Propitious to them Thou hast lastly The Church in that Age wherein you are wont to say she was yet Pure by Publick Consent Praying for the Dead Hence the Matter is so clear and certain that the Blindness of those is to be lamented who refuse so clear a Light. Now what is their Complaint against Transubstantiation Does the Word offend them Or the Thing that is signify'd by this Word They say 't is a Popish Fiction sprung up under Innocent III. in the Lateran Council To wit Because Transubstantiation is there manifestly Decreed Now I ask Sectary if Pope Innocent deliver'd this Faith to us who deliver'd it to the Greeks For certainly they wholly agree with us in this matter Would they who have rejected our Communion who hate the very Name of the Roman Pontifs have all generally admitted and inviolably held such a Doctrine of so great moment so newly as you would have it devis'd by the Latins But they have not the Word Transubstantiation What then They hold and believe th◠Thing For they believe that the Bread and Wine after Consecration cease to be such and that instead of them succeed the true Body and Blood of our Lord. Why then may we not believe that the Roman Church holds still the same Faith which she held before the Word Transubstantiation came into use when the Greeks at this very day use not the Word Transubstantiation and yet have in this matter altogether the same Belief with the Romans Was not the Holy Trinity believ'd to be Homousian or Consubstantial before the Word Homousian was ever taken up What matter is it if some Significative Word lately found out by Divines be received into use as long as the thing signify'd by it was before part of the Christian Faith though express'd in other Words and Phrases Now that the Christians before the time of Innocent the III. had the same Belief of the Eucharist as we now have may be easily shewn from approv'd Authors who preceded Innocent St.
JOHN BARCLAY HIS DEFENCE OF THE MOST Holy Sacrament OF THE EUCHARIST TO THE SECTARIES OF THE TIMES· BOOK II. CHAP. II. Englished by a Person of Quality With Allowance LONDON Printed by Mary Thompson at the Entrance into Old-Spring-Garden near Charring-Cross And Sold by Matthew Turner at the Holy-Lamb in Holbourn And John Lane at the Corner of Wild-street 1688· OF THE MOST Holy Sacrament OF THE EUCHARIST· CHAP. II. LET us now speak a little of the Eucharist if in treating of so great a Subject it may be lawful to say but little Do not thou O Lord leave us to whom thou hast left thy self but restore Sight to the blinded Sectaries that they may courageously acknowledge this thy Gift which is so wonderfully great that they believe it not only above themselves to Receive but also above thee to Give For as nothing more frequently deters the Jews from embracing the Christian Faith than their being oblig'd to believe in it that the living GOD the GOD of Abraham became Man led a mortal Life and died on a Cross So nothing more offends many of our Sectaries than the Excellency of this Sacrament whilst they cannot persuade themselves the Bounty of CHRIST could ever make him stoop so low as to permit that very Body to be held in the Hands of Priests and receiv'd by the Mouths of Sinners which having been once extended on the Cross now sits in Glory at the Right-hand of the Father But there is not O ye Sectaries any greater prejudice against you than the universal Agreement of all Christians in their Belief of the Eucharist at such time as you first began to appear and the exceeding great Disagreement amongst your selves in this your Errour Is it probable that there was then no Church in the World which had a right Belief of this Sacrament Or must we think the Spirit of Truth resides in you who in this so great Affair contest more fiercely with one another than with Us All Christians in the World Latines Greeks Armenians Abissines and Muscovites had at that time one and the same Sense of that Sacred Mystery They all I say except a few Hussites in Bohemia who as they were none of Ours so neither are they Yours there not being any amongst you altogether of this Opinion concerning the Eucharist agreed with Us and still do that under the Species or Appearance of Bread and Wine the Body and Blood of CHRIST are really Conceal'd that there is no Bread no Wine remaining that the Eucharist is therefore to be Ador'd because there is in it no other Substance but CHRIST himself But you O ye Sectaries were nothing mov'd with this general Consent of Christians You departed from them all that is you resolv'd to be Hereticks Nor did you all take one way but having once left the well known Path of the Church You wander'd in your own Inventions So that if any one enquires what your Thoughts are of the Eucharist you are fain to tell him a long Story which in the end wants an Oedipus to unfold it For so numerous are your Dissensions concerning this Point that there are reckon'd amongst you above fourty different Opinions altogether contrary to each other Nay farther you do not sufficiently explain or to speak more truly do not well understand what the several Sects amongst you hold Those of you which follow Luther confess that our Lords Body is really contain'd in this Sacrament though they think withall the Bread still to remain The Hugonots English Protestants and other Calvinists affirm on the contrary that it is nothing but meer Bread because say they CHRIST is sitting at the Right-hand of the Father and therefore cannot be in several places Others think otherwise But these two are the most eminent Opinions amongst you Let us now see how absurd they both are The Lutherans confessing CHRIST's Body to be really present deny nevertheless that 't is to be Ador'd And behold how excellently they Reason For say they CHRIST instituted not this Sacrament that it might be Ador'd but that it might feed our Souls Why do they not also say that Kings and Princes ride a Hunting for Recreation and not to be Reverenc'd by their Subjects And that they are therefore mistaken who when they meet their King as he is Hunting pay him the Respect due to their Soveraign CHRIST was on the Cross That he might save the Souls of many and bear the Reproach which was due to us not that he might be there Ador'd Hadst thou O Lutheran been then present wouldst thou have thought it a Crime to have Prostrated thy self on Earth and Ador'd him hanging on the Cross. What madness is it in thee not to Adore CHRIST wherever he is who wherever he is is GOD the Disposer of thy Life and Judge of thy Soul But this Opinion of the Lutherans which asserts the Bread to remain in the Eucharist is no less contrary to Scripture than to the Doctrine of the Primitive Church For if the Bread and CHRIT's Body were both there CHRIST would not have said This but here is my Body nor yet would he have said The Bread but In the Bread which I will give is my Flesh. And if the Church in the Apostles Time had not believ'd with Us that there is no Substance of Bread remaining in the Eucharist St. Justin Martyr would not have written that this Sacrament after the words of Consecration are pronounc'd Is the Flesh and Blood of that Incarnate Jesus but that after the Consecration that Flesh and that Blood are added to the Eucharistical Bread and Wine Nor yet would St. Cyril of Hierusalem have us'd these words This which We see is not Bread though the taste thinks it to be Bread but 't is the Body of CHRIST But he would rather have taught Us that the Bread which is seen is Bread and the Taste not deceiv'd in it but that with the Bread is joyn'd CHRIT's Body Nor do the Calvinists talk more wisely when they say that CHRIST's Body is not really present in the Sacrament but yet that we are really Partakers of it An Opinion so Foolish and so Destructive to it Self that they themselves understand it not For tell me O Sectary canst thou really receive CHRIST's Body and CHRIST not be really present But thou sayst He is always in Heaven and cannot be in several places at once Thou then being only on Earth and he only in Heaven how can his Body really come to thee And when at the same Instant thou Communicat'st at London another at Geneva by what Art can it be effected that ye should be really Fed with CHRIST's Body if CHRIST cannot be really present in two places at once Wilt thou say that thy Soul by Faith flies up into Heaven and is there really Fed with this Holy Food This is nothing to the purpose For though thou mayst by Faith by Thought by Will mount above the Stars and Converse in the midst of
Bernard dy'd fifty years before Innocent the III. was advanc'd to the Pontificat Now what can be more express than these words of his in his Sermon on our Lords Supper This is truly an Heavenly Favour this is certainly an abundant Grace this is surely a super excellent Glory that a Priest should hold his GOD and with his Hand give him to others But left he should repeal these Testimonies by such frivolous Exceptions as you for the most part use pretending that an universal Darkness had then over-shadow'd all Mankind and driven them into many and great Errors let us go back to those Ages which were even in your own Judgment uncorrupted We have already given you not only the Judgment of St. Augustin but also the Opinion and Practice of the Church describ'd by him That the Eucharist is a Victim whereby our Sins are effac'd that 't is a Sacrifice that 't is a Propitiation which is offer'd to GOD for the Dead You require those that are more Antient than St. Augustin St. Justin Martyr the very next Age after the the Apostles in his second Apology to the Emperor has these Words As by the Word of GOD our Saviour JESVS CHRIST was Incarnate and took Flesh and Blood for our Salvation So we are taught that by Prayers taken from GOD's Word the Eucharist by him made Food with which our Blood and Flesh are through mutation nourish'd is the Flesh and Blood of that Incarnate JESVS St. Hilary who liv'd in the third Age of the Church says in his eighth Book of the Trinity There is no room to doubt of the Truth of the Flesh and Blood For now both by the Profession of our Lord himself and our own Faith it is truly Flesh and truly Blood. St. Gregory Nyssen of the same Age in his Catechetical Oration chap. 37. We rightly believe that the Bread sanctify'd by the Word of GOD is truly chang'd into the Body of GOD the Word St. Chrysostom in his two and fiftieth Homily on St. Matthew speaks thus Why should he disdain to give thee his Body who did more that is laid down his Life for thee Let us hear therefore Priests as well as others how great how admirable a thing is granted us let us hear I Pray and tremble he has deliver'd us Flesh he has set before us himself Immolated And St. Cyril of Hierusalem more Antient than St. Chrysostom says in his fourth Catechism That a Christian Man knows and certainly holds this Bread which is seen by us not to be Bread though the Taste thinks it to be Bread but the Body of CHRIST and the Wine which is beheld by us though it seem Wine to the Sense of Tasting yet not to be Wine but the Blood of CHRIST What needs many Words No Age of the Primitive Church none of the Fathers dissented The Testimonies of all Ages and Writers have been formerly given thee by such as have thought good to handle this Argument more at large Let me now speak to thee O Sectary if thou desirest to be cur'd This is one of the greatest Affairs in the Christian Faith whether in the Eucharist be CHRIST himself or only Bread which is the Figure of CHRIST's Body In so great a matter and in which to err is certain Destruction consider whether side is supported by the safest Arguments As to the Scriptures 't would be Impudence to affirm that there are clearer or even as clear Words for you as these are for us This is my Body this is my Blood The Bread which I will give is my Flesh. Some places therefore are plain and clear of themselves and others which want Interpretation we expound according to the Sentiments of Men certainly great and numerous whose Wisdom Learning and Piety were remarkable and lastly as is most agreeable to the Divine Institution This is my Body Now if you would understand what the Sense of the Church was from the Apostles time it can no way better be understood than by that of the Fathers who then liv'd But there is not any one of the Fathers that have written of the Eucharist whom we approve not or whom we refuse for our Judge For though some of them may have sometimes us'd certain obscure Words which you also have endeavour'd to abuse for the support of your Heresies yet is there none of them that have spoken thus dubiously who has not also other Words extant which are plain and clear for us Nay most of them have so written that asserting our Opinion they cannot be so much as imagin'd to have the least Word or Expression which favours your Heresy Then if you have regard to the Consent of Christians it must be confess'd that not only the Latin and Greek Churches but all Christians throughout the whole World unanimously agree in our Opinion So that which way soever you seek for Arguments there are still more for us If the Learning of the Persons be respected we have far the greater part of Men famous for Knowledge if Ages we have unquestionably more if the number of Men you may well be asham'd to compare with us Thus being every way inferior to us you have nothing remaining but your Obstinacy and vain Incredulity which with you is call'd Prudence or Wisdom wholly consisting in such kind of Philosophy as this Can GOD do this or is it likely that he would what Inconveniencies hence arise how unworthy is this of the Divine Majesty After the same manner did the Heathens put up Queries against CHRIST and the Arians against the Trinity Away with this vain Solicitude You may possibly sometimes know why GOD's Works are done but never how Give me leave to use the Words of St. Ambrose Who says he 11 Hexam Chap. 1. seeing these things can with his weak understanding search out a possibility of the Reason All which the Divine Power not to be comprehended by humane Minds nor express'd by our Discourses has knit together by the Authority of his own Will. But if thou O Sectary art not mov'd by our Agreement let the blind Contention that is among your selves startle thee Since divided into Sects you with great bitterness contend about the Opinion you ought to have of this Sacrament Would to GOD thou knewest how pleasant it is to prostrate thy self before the Altar Where the Angels says St. Chrysosthm in his third Homily on the Epistle to the Ephesians with Trembling Reverence the Host How sweet it is there to Adore our Lord Who to use St. Augustin's words in his Commentary on the 98 Psalm walk'd here in the Flesh and gave the same Flesh to be eaten by us for our Salvation How far lastly it excells all humane Delights to reject vain Circumstances and believe only the Word of GOD to which so many foregoing Ages have Assented to acknowledge that to be our Lords Body which our Lord himself has affirm'd to be his Body and with a Mouth of Flesh to receive in all due Humility the Flesh of our Lord that he may nourish our Souls with the effect of the Sacrament and the Spirit which quickneth None shall before the Tyranny of Antichrist deprive the Faithful of these Joyes nor can any one but he who has experienc'd them comprehend them The End of the second Chapter ADVERTISEMENT THere being many Excellent Pieces of the same Author containing a Direct Short and Full Proof of all those Points commonly Objected to Roman Catholicks by Sectaries as having furnish'd a pretended Occasion of their Schism I design God willing one by one to prepare them for the Press that the World may see how unreasonable and groundless are all the Exceptions made against Us and Manifestly Repugnant to God's Holy Word and the received Judgment of all Antiquity
Heaven yet art thou still really on Earth Nor is any part of thee that is either thy Mind or Body really in Heaven there to receive Nourishment Shouldst thou never so Seriously fix thy Thoughts on Rome or on Hierusalem couldst thou be therefore said to be really at Rome or in Hierusalem It remains therefore that thou shew how thy Soul which ascends not really into Heaven can be really Fed with the Flesh of CHRIST unless CHRIST be truly and really on Earth and there also in many places at one and the same time since many of you at the very same moment Communicate both in England and France But thou wilt Reply thou art indeed ignorant of the manner yet certainly knowst that thou art Fed. Is it so If thou knowst not by what means these things are done then art thou not sure but it may be by Transubstantiation Why then dost thou with so great Boldness and Fury inveigh against it But be it that thou knowst not the Manner yet thou at least knowst that the Manner is such as may not in Thought and Faith only but in very Deed joyn thee to CHRIST's Body or else thou must confess that thou dost not indeed receive CHRIST's Body For thou sayst that by Faith thou eatest our Lords Body Now what doest thou mean by these words That thou by Faith hold'st and believ'st Vertue so to flow into thy Soul from the Body of CHRIST who is in Heaven that thou art thereby in some sort united to him But this O Sectary is not really to receive CHRIST's Body 't is at most to receive it but imaginarily For that Power and those Vertues which thou say'st flow from CHRIST into thee are not indeed CHRIST's Body And thou believest that thou receivest really nothing else Nor dost thou I suppose eat these Vertues Why therefore to elude the Sentence of the Fathers who testify That CHRIST's Flesh and Blood is in very deed receiv'd do you make use of such vain Deceits saying that you also hold the same But if thou say'st that thou by Faith apprehend'st and believ'st CHRIST's Body to be really Communicated to thee I answer that this Faith of thine is even in thine own Judgement false and ridiculous as making thee believe that which is not Since in thy Opinion our Lords Body is no where but in Heaven and thou art really no where but on Earth But because thou frequently appeal'st to the Scriptures come and let us hear what they say In St. Matthew Chap. xxvi our Saviour says This is my Body this is my Blood In St. Mark Chap. xiv This is my Body this is my Blood In St. Luke Chap. xxii This is my Body this is the Chalice of the New Testament in my Blood In St. John Chap. vi Vnless ye shall eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood ye shall not have Life in you And St. Paul in his first Epistle to the Corinthians ch xi pronounces him who comes unworthily to the Eucharist Guilty of the Body and Blood of our Lord. These are plain Words no perplex'd Testimonies nor things mention'd but once 〈◊〉 which being clearly vanquish'd you presently fly to 〈◊〉 â—xposition whereas when any thing seems to favâ—â— you ye stick close to the letter refuse all Interpretation and cry out we must adhere to the Word of GOD. As if you were the sole Judges and had Authority at your pleasure one while to decide by the bare Text of Scripture without admitting any Expositor and soon after to appeal to Interpretations and those only of your own Invention But come on What do you object against us Arguments you say taken out of the Scriptures First that the Eucharist is sometimes in the Scripture call'd Bread and Wine Next that CHRIST said in St. John chap. vi It is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing The words which I have spoken unto you are Spirit and Life Lastly That CHRIST sits at the Right-hand of the Father and shall come from thence to Judge the quick and the dead But I answer that these words are more obscure than those you would have explain'd by them to wit This is my Body my Flesh is Meat indeed Now what kind of Philosophy is this to explain one Obscurity by a greater or that I may speak more truly to gather the Sense of a clear place from a dark one But what if we should say that these Places you object against us are to be interpreted by those we have alledg'd What if we deny that you have any more Right to expound them than we You bring only doubtful Arguments and such as will be turn'd upon your selves Nor will it be any great labour briefly to solve them all The Eucharist you say is in the Scriptures call'd Bread and Wine Therefore the Scriptures you say acknowledge Bread and Wine to be truly in that Sacrament Proceed Sectary and by the same Argument more closely press us in this manner The Catholicks in their Discourses and Prayers frequently call the Eucharist Bread They believe therefore that there is in it true Bread and not only our Lords Body Is not the reason and strength of the Argument the same Why will you rather make the Scriptures when they mention the Eucharist by the Name of Bread and Wine to assert true Bread and Wine to be therein than us Catholicks when we call it by the same Names Give me leave therefore thus to retort this Argument upon you In the Catholick Church we often term the Eucharist Bread and Wine and yet believe not any Substance of Bread or Wine to be therein Therefore it cannot from the Scriptures using the same Names be concluded that they acknowledge true Bread and Wine to remain in it Lay aside Sectary the prejudice of thy Faction and tell me whether thou art not more justly overthrown by the same Argument with which thou assaulted'st us For that we often style this Sacrament Bread and Wine is so well known to those who live amongst us that 't were Impudence to deny it and gross Ignorance not to know it How often do we desire that not only the Eating but the Effect of this Bread may be granted us How often do we beg of GOD the Father that this Bread may be to us not a pledge of Death but of Glory And all this by Similitudes and Figures Which kind of Speeches you your selves also do not deny to be frequent in Holy Writ So St. Bernard whom none can without blushing deny to be ours calls the Eucharist Bread when in his first Sermon on the sixth Sunday after Pentecost distinguishing Bread into several Species he says Moreover the seventh kind of Bread is the Eucharist because our Saviour says the Bread which I give is my Flesh for the Life of the World. We therefore with the Scriptures call this Sacrament Bread Both because as the Natural Man lives by Bread so does the Spiritual Man by the Eucharist
To signify which CHRIST commanded it to be made of Bread and Wine and many of the Fathers by Our daily Supersubstantial Bread which we are taught to Pray for understand this Heavenly Food And also because it is in the Form of Bread but principally because 't was Bread before For we often call a thing that now is by the Name it formerly had And how often have you heard from our Writers the Example of Aaron's Rod which being turn'd into a Serpent was certainly no longer a Rod unless you will say that GOD rather put an Illusion on Pharaoh's Eyes than by a real Miracle admonish'd him of his Majesty and yet even then it was call'd a Rod to wit Because it had from a Rod been chang'd into a Serpent And they all cast down their Rods which were turn'd into Serpents but Aaron 's Rod devour'd their Rods Exod. Chap. vii But not to say much against so weak an Argument The Scriptures call the Eucharist Bread Be it so The Antient Fathers have often done the same And we also do the same Why then may we not be believ'd to think with those with whom we speak Nor is the Arrow of any greater force they shoot against us from these words of our Lord It is the Spirit which quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing For if they will have them simply understood That the Flesh of Christ profiteth nothing I would ask them why they then say that our Lord's Body is receiv'd by them in the Eucharist Nay why CHRIST said Vnless ye shall Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drink his Blood ye shall not have Life in you Do they think that CHRIST contradicted himselfe Or will they deny it to have been always believ'd in the Church that CHRIST's Flesh profiteth the Receiver They must ever be fain to distinguish between the manner how our Lord's Flesh being receiv'd profits and how it profits not They must to wit acknowledge that the Capharnaits hearing CHRIST's Words fancy'd to themselves some gross unworthy and carnal manner in which he would affirm he should be eaten My Flesh so taken as you in your selves imagine profits not I will give my self in a more Noble and Spiritual manner than you believe and being by you taken for Food will quicken your Souls And thus of the manner of taking and not meerly of the taking it self did CHRIST say The Flesh profiteth nothing Let us now see the Force of your Argument CHRIST says His Flesh taken as the Capharnaits fancy'd will profit nothing Therefore say you it will not profit being taken in such manner as the Catholicks believe But thou must first O Sectary prove that we think as the Capharnaits did and that we will not hear the Spirit which quickens Now both these are false The Capharnaits as is manifest from the Scriptures had no higher conceit of our Saviours words than that he promis'd His Body should be eaten as other Meats that it should be divided into parts taste like Flesh and being taken Consume We in a Spiritual quickning Sense believe that CHRIST is indeed truly and really present in the Eucharist but after a Spiritual and Incomprehensible manner that he is receiv'd by us whole inviolate and never consuming Thus will there be a mutual agreement between those words of our Lord by which he asserts that His Flesh is truly given for Meat and those others by which he shews that if you understand this matter Carnally with the Capharnaits The Flesh profiteth nothing Now if you deny that the Flesh of our Lord is any way profitable you will contradict those words Vnless ye shall Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man ye shall not have Life in you But if you say that 't is in some manner but not in that Capharnaitical one both receiv'd and profitable This indeed we shall readily grant but shall withall add that this Holy manner is in our Church and that neither these Texts nor any other have any thing to the contrary You say lastly that the Scriptures often affirm that CHRIST is and shall be in Heaven till he shall come in great Majesty at the end of the World And that therefore he cannot be on Earth in the Eucharist in the Hands of the Priests The Answer is ready CHRIST is and shall be in Heaven in that great and visible Majesty till the end of the World. He is not seen publickly by us in that Brightness nor is he yet so much as Conversant amongst us to receive those Offices which may be indeed profitable to a Body Such as St. Mary Magdalen perform'd when she Anointed him and in respect of which our Saviour said The poor you have always with you but me you have not always He will not therefore come down from Heaven In the Glory of His Majesty till the calling of all Men to Judgment But he is often present at our Affairs in another manner after another Fashion with lesser State he is I say often truly and really present with us here on Earth He appear'd in the way to St. Paul as he was going to Damascus and spake to him in the way So says Ananias to St. Paul Act. ix Our Lord JESUS hath sent me who appear'd to thee in the way as thou camest And Barnabas declar'd to the Apostles How Paul had seen our Lord in the way and that he had spoken to him And Acts xxxiii Now the night following our Lord standing by him said Be constant for as thou hast testify'd of me in Hierusalem so must thou testify at Rome also And lastly Act. xxvi I am JESUS whom thou Persecutest But arise and stand upon thy feet For to this end have I appear'd to thee that I may ordain thee a Minister and Witness of those things which thou hast seen and of those things in which I will appear to thee And say not that 't was an Angel who having taken CHRIST's shape appear'd to St. Paul. For to let pass its being distinguish'd in the Acts of the Apostles when our Saviour or when an Angel appear'd to St. Paul he himself has in his first Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. xv taken away the doubt where after he had to prove CHRIST's Resurrection to them affirm'd him to have been seen after his rising again by his Apostles and Disciples he adds And last of all he was seen of me also as of an Abortive Now 't is certain that this his being seen of St. Paul was not till some years after the day of his Ascension For St. Paul was a long time a Persecutor not an Apostle 'T is certain also that 't was not an Angel but CHRIST himself who thus appear'd to St. Paul Since he affirms him to have been the same that was seen by St. Peter and the other Apostles to assure them of his Resurrection For sure thou wilt not say that 't was an Angel and not our Lord himself that appear'd to the Apostles during the fourty days which