not annexed to the sensible species but to the proper substance of his flesh which is living and life-giving because of the Divinity which is united to it Upon which account all those who believe the real presence ought not to have any difficulty to communicate under one sole species because they there receive all that is essential to this Sacrament together with a plenitude so secure because there being now no real seperation betwixt the Body and the Blood as hath been said we receive entirely and without division him who is solely capable to satiate us This is the solid foundation upon which the Church interpreting the precept of Communion as declared we may receive the Sanctification which this Sacrament carries with it under one sole species and if she have reduced her Children to this sole species it was not out of disesteem of the other seeing on the contrary she did it to hinder those Irreverences which the confusion and negligence of people had occasioned in these later ages reserving to her self the re-establishment of communion under both kinds according as it should become more advantagious to Peace and Unity Catholic Divines have made it appear to those of the pretended Reformation that they have themselves made use of several such like Interpretations in what belongs to the use of the Sacrament but above all they had reason to remark this which is taken out of the 12 chap. of their discipline Title of the Lords Supper art 7. where we find these words The Bread of the Lords Supper ought to be administred to those who cannot drink wine upon their making protestation that it is not out of contempt and endeavouring what they can possibly to obviate all Scandal even by approaching the cup as neer their mouths as they are able They have judged by this regulation that both species were not by the institution of JESVS CHRIST essential to the Communion otherwise they ought to have absolutely refused the Sacrament to those who could not receive it whole and entire and not to give it them after a manner contrary to that which JESVS CHRIST had commanded in which case their disability would have been their excuse But our adversaries conceived it would be an excessive rigour not to allow at least one of the species to those who could not receive the other and as this condescendence has no ground in Scripture they must acknowledge with us the words by which JESVS CHRIST proposes to us the two species are liable to some interpretation and that this interpretation ought to be declared by the authority of the Church But it might seem as if this article of their discipline which was made in the Synod of Poitiers held in the year 1560 had been reformed by the Synod of Vertueil held in the year 1567. where it is said the company is not of opinion the bread should be administred to those who would not receive the Cup. These two Synods nevertheless are no ways opposite That of Vertueil speaks only of those who will not receive the Cup And that of Poitiers of these only who cannot In effect notwithstanding the Synod of Vertueil this article remains in their discipline and has been also approved by a latter Synod then that of Vertueil by the Synod of la Rochell in 1571 where this article was review'd and put into that stare in which it now is But supposing the Synods of the pretended reform'd Religion had differed in their sentiments it would only follow that the matter in question regards not Faith and that it is of the number of those which are at the Churches disposal according to their own Principles SECT XVIII The written and unwritten Word THERE remains nothing more now but to explicate what Catholics believe touching the Word of God and the Authority of the Church JESVS CHRIST having laid the Foundation of his Church by Preaching the unwritten Word was the first Rule of Christianity and when the Writings of the New Testament were added this unwritten Word did not upon that account lose its Authority which makes us reiceive with equal veneration all that was ever taught by the Apostles whether by Writing or byword of Mouth as St. Paul himself has expresly declared And it is a most certain sign 2 Thes 2.14 a Doctrine comes from the Apostles when it is universally embraced by all Christian Churches without any possibility of shewing its beginning We cannot chuse but receive all that is established after this manner with the submission due to Divine Authority and we are persuaded those of the Pretended Reformation who are not obstinate are in the bottom of their Hearts of the same Opinion it being impossible to believe a Doctrine received from the beginning of the Church can flow from any other source than that of the Apostles Wherefore our Adversaries ought not to wonder if we who are careful to gather together all our Fathers have left us should conserve the Depositum of Tradition as well as that of the Scriptures SECT XIX The Authority of the Church THE Church being established by God to be the Guardian of Scripture and Tradition we receive the Canonical Scriptures from her and let our Adversaries say what they will we doubt not but it is her Authority which principally determines them to reverence as Divine Books the Canticle of Canticles which has so few visible marks of a Prophetical Inspiration the Epistle of St. James which Luther rejected and that of St. Jude which might appear suspected because of some Apocriphal Books cited in it In fine it can only be from this Authority they receive the whole Body of Scripture which all Christians accept as Divine before their reading of it has made them sensible of the Spirit of God in it Being then inseparably bound as we are to the Holy Authority of the Church by means of the Scriptures which we receive from her Hands we learn Tradition also from her and by the means of Tradition we learn the true sence of Scripture Upon which account the Church professes she tells us nothing from her self and that she invents nothing new in her Doctrine she does nothing but declare the Divine Revelation by the interiour direction of the Holy Ghost who is given to her as her teacher That Dispute which was raised in the very time of the Apostles upon account of the Ceremonies of the Law shews clearly that the Holy Ghost explicates himself by the Church and their Acts have by the method by which that first Contest was decided taught all succeeding Ages by what Authority all other differences are to be ended So that as often as there shall happen any Disputes to cause a Division amongst the Faithful the Church will interpose her Authority and her Pastors assembled will say after the Apostles Act. 15.28 It his seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us And when she has spoken her Children will be taught they ought not to begin
Prelate is come to a fair composition about Transubstantiation He is willing to content himself with such a reality of the Body of Jesus Christ in the Sacrament as the Pretended Reform'd themselves believe An. Avert p. 27. When he treats of the Invocation of Saints He endeavours to mitigate and extenuate this worship of the Roman Church An. p. 24. both as to her Tenets and Practice Together with the Veneration of Saints he softens that of Images An. p. 24. An. p. 65. as also the Articles of Satisfaction Sacrifice of the Mass and the Popes Authority As for Images he is ashamed of the Excess to which the Doctrine as well as Practice has been carried The Anonymus who represents him as if he had changed the Council of Trents expression in the Article of Satisfaction p. 110. will needs have it that this change in the Expression proceeds from an alteration which he introduces in the Doctrine In fine he represents him as one who is going over to the Sentiments of the new Reformation or to use his own Expression like the Dove which returns to the Ark not finding where to rest his foot An. p. 104 368. He not only lays to his charge particular Opinions about the Merits of Good Works and the Authority of the Pope but seems ready if we would conform our selves to the Doctrine of the Exposition to admit of those two Articles which so much perplex those of his Communion There is nothing generally more frequently repeated in his Book An. Avert p. 23 26. Rep. p 3. c. than the reproaches he casts upon the Author of the Exposition for deserting the Communion of the Church of Rome He wishes all those of M. de Condoms Communion would reduce themselves to the moderations in this Book An. Avert p. 30. and write conformably to its sense This would says he a little after be a happy beginning of a Reformation which might have much more happy consequences Nay more he takes an advantage from these pretended allievations These Softnings of M. de Condom says he are so far from giving us an ill opinion of our Reformation An. p. 85. they confirm us that good and moderate Person themselves condemn at least a great deal that we do and by consequence in some measure acknowledge a Reformation to be useful and necessary He should have concluded quite otherwise For a Reformation such as theirs is which tends to a change in Doctrine ought not to regard those things which are condemned already by a common consent But the pretended Reform'd are willing to perswade themselves that the Honest and moderate Persons in Communion with Rome amongst which number they allow M. de Condom a place in many things abandon the Sentiments of their Church and come over as much as they can to the new Reformation Thus you see what they are made to believe by this strange manner of mis-representing the Catholick Doctrine Being accustomed to that hideous and terrible form in which their Ministers represent it in their Pulpits they imagine those Catholicks who lay it open in its natural Purity disguise and alter it The more justly we represent it as it is the less are they acquainted with it and they imagine we are going over to them when we only disabuse them of their false preocupations 'T is true they say not always the same thing The Anonymus who accuses M. de Condom of making such considerable alterations in the Doctrine of the Church p 61 6 tells us this Exposition has nothing new in it but a dextrous and delicate turn and in fine nothing but apparent qualifying which consisting only in some expressions or in things of small consequence gives no body any Satisfaction and only raises new difficulties instead of resolving old So that he seems to be sorry for having represented the Exposition as a Book which made an alteration in the Faith of the Church in all its principal points not only in the Expressions but in the Doctrine Let him take it which way he pleases If he continue to think a Book so truly Catholick as the Exposition contrary to so many important points of the Roman Faith he shews himself never to have had any thing but false Ideas of its Doctrine And if it be true that by sweetning only the expressions or retrenching as he says matters of small consequence the Catholick Doctrine seems to him so much more tractable he will in the end find the grounds of it were better then he imagined But the truth of the matter is M. de Condom has not betrayed his trust nor dissembled the Faith of the Church in which the Holy Ghost has placed him a Bishop And the pretended Reform'd could not perswade themselves that a Doctrine which already appears less strange by the sole exposition of it and that an Exposition so plain so easie and so 〈◊〉 should be that Doctrine which their Ministers represented to them full of Blasphemy and Idolatrous We ought no doubt to give God thanks for such a disposition because although it shew in them a strange prejudice against us yet it gives us hopes they will look upon our Tenets with a more equal temper when once they are satisfied that the Doctrine of this Treatise which seems to them already more pleasing is the pure Doctrine of the Church So that we are so far from being angry at them for making so great a difficulty to to believe us when we propose our Faith to them that we are obliged in Charity to give them Lights so clear and evident that they may not hereafter doubt but it was faithfully expounded to them The thing shews it self and we need but tell them that this Treatise of the Exposition which they believe is contrary not only to the Common Tenets of the Doctors of the Roman Church but also to the words and Doctrine of the Council is approved by the whole Church and that after having received divers Testimonies of Approbation from Rome as well as from other places it has at last been approved by the Pope himself in the most express and most Authentick manner that could be expected This Book had no sooner appeared in publick but the good repute it had throughout France was testified to the Author by Letters from all sorts of People from Lay Persons Ecclesiasticks Religious and Doctors but especially from the most Learned Prelates of the Church whose Testimonies he could even then have produced had the Subject been ever so little dubious or new But because the Pretended Reform'd are apt to believe us in France to have particular thoughts and Tenets which approach nearer unto theirs in matters of Faith than the rest of the Church and particularly than Rome it is convenient we should let them see how matters there were carried on As soon as this Treatise was come forth Cardinal Bouillon sent it to Cardinal Bona desiring him to examine it with
the utmost Rigour Letters could no sooner return from Rome to Paris but there came also from this Learned and Holy Cardinal whose memory will be perpetuated in the Church with eternal Benediction that honourable approbation of his which you will find in the sequel among the rest that we shall speak of The Book was Printed the first time about the end of the year 1671. And this Cardinals answer is dated the 26. January 1672. Cardinal Sigismond whose death the whole Church doth still regret writ no less favourably concerning it to M. l' Abbe de Dungeau He tells us expresly that M. de Condom has spoken very well of the Popes Authority and whereas this Abbot had written him word that some scrupulous persons here apprehended lest this Exposition should be looked upon at Rome as one of those Explications of the Council prohibited by Pope Pius IV he shews how ill grounded this scruple is He adds that he found the Master of the Sacred Palace the Secretary and the Consulters of the Congregation dell ' Indice all the Cardinals that compose it and in particular the Learned Cardinal Braneas President of it of the same opinion and that they did all of them highly applaud this Treatise of the Exposition This Letter bears date the 5th of April 1672. The Master of the Sacred Palace was at time the Reverend Father Hyacinth Libelli a famous Divine whose merits and great Learning raised him shortly after to the Dignity of Archbishop of Avignon His Letter of the 26th of April 1672 written to his E. the Cardinal Sigismond shews what esteem he had of this Book for he tells him there is not so much as the shadow of a fault in it and that if the Author desire it should be Printed at Rome he will give all the necessary permissions without altering the least tittle in it In effect M. l' Abbe Nazari famous for the Journal des Scavans which he writes with so much elegance and exactness was at that time about an Italian Version of it which his E. the Cardinal d' Estrees caused to be reviewed and did himself peruse some of the principal parts that it might be entirely conformable to the Original The Book had been already done into English by the late Abbot Montaigue whose zeal and vertue is known to the whole World and there wanted not many Testimonies to shew that his Version was well received by all the Catholicks of England This Translation was Printed in the Year 1672 And in the Year 1675 it was put into Irish and Printed at Rome by the Printers of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide The Author of this Version the Reverend Father Porter of the Holy order of St. Francis and Superiour of the Convent of St. Isidorus had some time before ordered a book called Securis Evangelica to be Printed at Rome it self in which a great part of this Treatise of the Exposition was inserted to prove the tenets of the Church when faithfully expounded to be so far from ruining the Foundations of Faith that they do establish them In the mean time the Italian Version went on with an exactness which became a Subject of that importance where one word ill rendred would spoil the whole work and the Reverend Father Capisucchi Master of the Sacred Pallace Licensed it to be Printed in the Year 1675 as appears by his answer of the 27th of June following to M. de Condoms Letter of thanks for it This Prelate after having heard from several parts of Germany that this Treatise had been well approved of there received a more ample Testimony of it in a Letter of the 27th of April 1673 from the Bishop and Prince of Paderhoâ—n then Coadjutor and at present Bishop of Munster in which that Prelate whose name bears with it his Elogium says that he took care that this work should be turned into Latin that it might be made Common every where and especially in Germany but the succeeding Wars or some other occupations having hindred the performance of it the Bishop of Castory Apostolical Vicar in the United Provinces was desirous that a Latin Version which the Author himself had examined might be made publick and accordingly it was Printed at Antwerp in the Year 1678. Not long after in the same year by the same Bishops order this Treatise was again Printed at Antwerp in Dutch with the Approbation of the Ordinary and the Doctors in those parts so much did this Prelate who composes such excellent things himself judge this to be profitable for the instruction of his People The Bishop of Strasbourgh who notwithstanding the miscries of War was no less careful of his Flock resolved about the same time to procure that this Book might be turned into High Dutch and published with a Pastoral Letter to all those of his Diocess and having advertised the Pope of his design his Holiness caused him to be informed that he knew the Book long before and that as he had heard from all parts it was the occasion of many Conversions so the translation of it could not but be advantagious to his People About this time the Italian Version was finished with all the exactness and elegancy possible Monsieur l' Abbe Nazari dedicated it to the Cardinals of the Congregation de propaganda side by whose order it was printed the same Year 1678. by the Printers belonging to that Congregation In the front of this Version was placed the Cardinal Bona's Letter the Coppy of which was fouâ—â— at Rome in the Hands of his Secretary as also the Approbations of M. l' Abbe Ricci Consultor of the Holy Office of the Reverend Father M. Laurence Brancati de Laurea Religious of the Order of St. Francis Consultor and Qualificator of the Holy Office and Bibliothecarian of the Vatican and of M. L' Abbe Gradi Consultor of the Congregation Dell ' Indice and Bibliothecarian of the Vatican that is by the chief men in Rome for Piety and Learning This Book was presented to the Pope as the Latin Translation had been before And he had the goodness to order M. l' Abbe de St. Luke to write to the Author and to let him know that he was satisfied with it which he also repeated several times to the French Embassadour The Author who thought he had nothing more to wish for after such an Approbation gave with a profound respect his most humble thanks to the Pope in a Letter dated Nov. 22. 1678. In answer to which he received a Breve from his Holiness of the Fourth of Jan. 1679 which contains such an express approbation of this Book that it cannot be hereafter doubted but it maintains the pure Doctrine of the Church and of the Apostolick See After this approbation I needed not to have mentioned any others but I was willing to shew how this Book which was threatned by the Ministers with such opposition in the Church and which they imagined was so contrary to her common