he goes on to tell me utter Impossibilities and after having affirm'd to me that the two Epistles of St. Peter are nothing else but Pope Innocent in person and that the very same Holy Father whom I think I have in my hand at London is also at the self same time personally present at Rome and at Paris and at Vienna and in ten thousand other very remote places he then puts me into a way to break the Enchantment and to overthrow his Delusion with such Arguments as will not be satisfied by saying That the senses may be deceived and cannot dive into the essence of things It is not such a light and ludicrous Cheat as this I have been now speaking of which the Church of Rome has put upon the World for many Ages together for then I question whether I should ever have employed my Pen against it though it is an indignity to mankind to impose upon them to deceive and make children of them but the Romish delusion is of an higher nature for it is the Cheat of a bit of Bread which you must believe to be a man's body nay to be a God And accordingly if you will not worship and bow down to this bit of Bread and acknowledg it to be your Maker then shall you be condemned for an Heretick then will they zealously tell you That they will no more pray for you See the Book of Martyrs in Q. Maries Reign than they will for a Dog and that as your Body fries in a Smithfield-Fire so your Soul shall for ever burn in Hell. And therefore it is of as great consequence to men as their souls and bodies are worth to know the truth of this matter for which cause I earnestly intreat them to weigh and ponder the Arguments and carefully to attend to the Demonstrations which I shall here lay down before them To proceed with the more strength and clearness in this matter and to avoid needless Repetitions and such like incumbrances of a Discourse I shall here premise some very reasonable Demands which without any man's leave I shall take for granted 1. That a Doctrine which consists of Impossibilities is an impossible Doctrine 2. That Omnipotency it self cannot make an Impossibility for what cannot be done at all cannot be done by Almighty Power Supposing an infinite excess of Power as we are sure there is in God yet it cannot do what cannot be done 3. That a Contradiction is an Impossibility From these Premises I shall infer That every Contradiction which is contained in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is an undoubted proof of the Impossibility of it so that it never was is or can be be true and that the pretence of Omnipotency it self cannot support it To avoid the force of this and such like Demonstrations the Representer of Popery tells us That Christ gives to his Body a supernatural manner of Existence by which being left without Extension of Parts and rendred independent of Place it may be one and the same in many Places at once and whole in every part of the Symbols and not obnoxious to any Corporeal Contingencies Thus far he It may be a few new-devised terms and half a dozen Inconsistent Words contradictiously jumbled together are able to overthrow a Demonstration We will try whether they can or no. As for the Privileges and Prerogatives of this Body which it must always be carefully remembred is an Organized Human Body to Exist without Extension of Parts to be whole in every part of the Symbols and not to be obnoxious to any Corporeal Contingencies they are Mysteries which will keep cold and we shall consider them by and by The Thing to be thought of at present is A Supernatural manner of Existence whereby this Body is rendred independent of Place and may be one and the same in many Places at once This Body which exists in a Supernatural manner must either 1. Be every where and in all Places which manner of Existence is Immense and Infinite and peculiar to God alone It is a Divine Attribute and where there is one Divine Attribute there are all the rest But if by an Impossible Supposition this manner of Existence were Communicable to a Body yet it would not serve their purpose for then this Body would be in too many Places at once in all other Places out of the Sacrament as well as in it and so there would be no need of Priests to make Christ's Body in the Sacrament which would be a thing very inconvenient at least for that Order of Men. Or else 2. This Body which is Independent of Place must be in no Place and then with it's Supernatural manner of Existence it does not Exist at all for that which is No-where is nothing Or 3dly and lastly It must be somewhere for let the manner of Existence be what it will Natural or Supernatural or Infinite still this Body which is independent of Place must either be Every-where or Somewhere or No-where if this Body be Every-where as was shewed before it would be Infinite which is Blasphemy for if a Body may have Divine Attributes and be a God then God may be a Body And then again if this Body be No-where it is Non-Existent and Nothing And therefore it remains that it be Some where And this is easily granted for it is said to be in many Places at once which is many Some-wheres Well if it may be in many Places at once it may be in one of those many Places This is undeniable and must be granted us Let us make use therefore once again of the former Scheme and let this one Place be A and D the Body in it and now at last though this Body D be independent of Place yet we are sure of it in one Place for it is in A. But it seems it may be in several other places at the same time Be it so and let B and C be two of those other Places and let D be the self-same independent Body in those Places and then we are haunted again with all the former Contradictions D is in A and at the same time D is not in A for it is in B which is not in A. Again D is wholly in B and D is wholly out of B at the same time for it is in C which is wholly out of B. So that this pretended Supernatural manner of Existence is full of Contradictions that is to say it is Impossible Which was to be Demonstrated In this foregoing Demonstration I have taken the word Place in the largest Sense so as to contain Angels and Spirits who are Somewhere and who cannot be Elsewhere at the same time And this I did on purpose to shew That though the Body of Christ should be present after the manner of a Spirit without filling a Place or having any relation to the Dimensions of it which was the old Hypothesis before the Representer came with his new Jargon and tho it
took up no more room than a Thought does in a Man's Mind yet it were impossible for it to be in many Places at once So that if we should grant Matter to be Immaterial and a Body to be a Spirit yet the Papists are so intangled in the Absurdity of this Doctrine that it would do them no good to allow them half a score Contradictions neither would it any way relieve them or free them from the rest Whereas on the other hand a Body is known to fill and possess the Place in which it is and is circumscribed by the bounds and limits of the Place which is commensurate to the Magnitude and Figure of the Body So that if a Body should be in many Places at once it might not only have quite contrary Situations and be East West North and South of it self be above it self and below it self all at once but also it would be Circumscribed and not Circumscribed at the same time which is a very plain and open Contradiction 2. The Second Head of Contradictions are those which attend the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in point of Time. Every thing that has now a Being either always had a Being and is Eternal which only God is or else it had a beginning of its Being in which it has continued ever since which is the condition of all Creatures and this Continuance of a Creature in Being we call the Duration of it which is so essential to all Substances whether Material or Immaterial that it is absolutely inseparable from them For when their Being began their Duration began and when their Duration ceases their Being ceases This Duration is counted by Days Months and Years and such like greater or lesser portions of Time which Time is nothing else but the measure of Duration whereby we reckon how long a Substance has continued or persevered in Being And now we have a Test in our hands to try whether it be not absolutely impossible for the Transubstantiation-Body in the Sacrament to be the very Body of Christ which was born of the Virgin Mary The Body which was born of the Virgin Mary has continued in Being 1688 years whereas the Body which the Priest (2) Conficiunt Christi Corpus Sanguinem Catech. Trid. de Euch ss 82. Edit Lugdun 1676. made yesterday has continued in Being but one Day but the Duration of one Day only cannot be the Duration of 1688 years And the Duration of 1688 years is now inseparable from the Body of Christ born of the Virgin Mary for the Duration of a Substance is inseparable from the Substance therefore the Body which the Priest made yesterday cannot be the Body which was born of the Virgin Mary Which was to be Demonstrated Again If the Body in the Sacrament which was made that is began to be yesterday is the same Body which has continued 1688 Years then the same Body continued 1687 Years and upwards before it began to be but before it began to be it was not in Being and consequently in every Minute during that 1687 years the same Body was in Being and was not in Being Which amounts to Millions of Contradictions Once more It must be granted That the Cause is in Being before the Effect and it would be a double Repugnancy to say the contrary for then the Effect would be both before its self for it is not an Effect till it be Caused and also before its Cause and so would be Caused by that which is not Now the Causes of the Transubstantiation-Body are these amongst others 1. The Bread out of which it is produced which is so necessary that this Change cannot be wrought out of any other Substance in the World Flesh nor Fish Pillar nor Post nor any thing else that can be named and therefore this is the necessary Matter of the transubstantiation-Transubstantiation-Body or the Cause out of which it is made 2ly The Baker by whom the Bread was made for he that is a Cause of the Cause is a Cause of the thing Caused 3ly The Marvellous Operator the Priest who makes the Body together with his Intention 4ly Which seems to be an Instrumental Cause his Pronouncing these words Hoc enim est Corpus meum in one Breath 5ly The Consideration which moved him to say a Mass at that time But neither the Bread nor the Baker nor the Priest nor his Intention nor his Voice nor his Breath nor the Proposal suppose of Twelve pence to him to say a Mass neither all nor any of these which were the Causes of that Transubstantiation Body which was made yesterday and did contribute more or less to the producing of it I say none of these Causes were in Being an Hundred years ago and if the Causes were not in Being much less was the Effect in Being otherwise the Effect must be before the Cause which is impossible But the Body of Christ born of the Virgin Mary was in being 1600 Years ago which is more than One hundred Years ago and this is impossible for the Transubstantiation-Body which was made yesterday therefore it is impossible for the Transubstantiation-Body to be the Body of Christ born of the Virgin Mary Q. E. D. I wonder that when the Representer's hand was in and he had made Christ's Body Independent of Place he had not likewise made it Independent of Time for that was full as necessary to be done as the other 3. The Third Head of Contradictions are those which relate to Quantity under which Head I was going to Demonstrate That the same Body cannot at the same time be Bigger and Less than it it self That it cannot be an Organized Human Body Five Foot and an half long and at the same time be stowed within the Compass of a Wafer no bigger than a Six-pence nay within the compass of every Crumb of that Wafer though not so big as a Pins-head But I am interrupted from proceeding any further in this Attempt for by a wonderful Conveyance the very Subject-Matter of my Demonstration is taken away and instead of a Solid Body with Figure and Dimensions with different and distinct parts divisible and measurable they have left me only the Appearance of a Body which no Demonstration can fasten upon For they say That this Body is indued with a Supernatural manner of Existence by which being left without Extension of Parts it may be whole in every part of the Symbols and not obnoxious to any Corporeal Contingencies Now tho we cannot demonstrate any Property of such an incomprehensible Body as this is no more than we can draw the Picture of a Non-entity or weigh it in a Pair of Scales for it scorns and tramples upon all the Principles and Axioms of Euclid yet we may a little consider the Terms of Art by which it is exprest 1. It is a Body without Extension of Parts So that it is a whole which has Parts though those Parts are without Extension and accordingly as it follows
most close and intimate that can be and consequently the Concomitancy must be the strictest Nay the very Reason Ground Bottom and Foundation of the Rule of Concomitancy is this Because from Two single Things Really joyned together there results One Compound The Union is the Cause of the Concomitancy because it is Impossible for the same thing to be Divided from it self So that if two things which are Really joined together must always of Necessity keep company together then it is utterly Impossible for one and the same thing to straggle from it self but it must ever be its own Individual Companion From these Premises I say That Christ's Body having been in Heaven these 1600 Years if in that Space of Time it has been upon Altars here on Earth then it has not been at the same time where it has been but it has broken the Rule of Concomitancy and has strangely stragled from it self which is Impossible Q. E. D. I have studied with all the Application of Mind of which I am capable to forecast in my thoughts what fault the Papists would find with any of the former Reasonings or with this last in particular and cannot foresee nor imagine any For though we should allow Christ's Body to be Independent of Place or to have any other Impossible Prerogatives which they list to Invent yet still this Body must be subject to the Rule of Concomitancy because they themselves are forced to make use of it to prove that the Body of Christ is under the Species of Wine and that the Blood of Christ is under the Species of Bread and it is the only Proof they have Now if of Necessity the Body must be by Concomitancy where the Blood is then by an antecedent Necessity the Blood must be where the Blood is for the Blood 's being there is the cause of the Bodies being there likewise So the Body being under the Form of Bread is the reason that the Blood is there also but then to be sure the Body must be there From whence as I shewed before it undeniably follows That Christ's Body is only in Heaven or else it is not where it is which overthrows the very Foundation of Concomitancy 2. The Second Argument shall be drawn from their Form of Consecration For this is my Body being the words of our Saviour from whence they have wrested the Doctrine of Transubstantiation Now to give them a Samplar of their own and to shew them how they themselves interpret Scripture I say that it appears by the very words of Consecration That the Priest himself is also Transubstantiated for the Body is Christ's and yet the Priest says it is My Body which cannot be True unless the Priest and Christ be the same And that cannot be but by an Admirable Change and Conversion which the Holy Catholick Church has conveniently and properly named Transubstantiation No say the Papists in great anger There is no such Change at all for the Priest only stands for Christ and (a) Sect. 82. Personam suscipiunt Personam gerens sustains his Person he only Represents him in that Action and is in Christ's stead so that we are not to look upon the Priest in that solemn Action as Friar John but as Christ himself And therefore the Priest may say with Truth this is My Body tho Literally and Properly and in strictness of Speech it is Christ's Body and not His. To which I again reply Why this is the very Exposition of these words of our Saviour for which the Hereticks have all along been Burnt namely This Bread stands for my Body and Represents it in this Action it is instead of my Body and bears the Character of it and you are not so much to consider it as Bread but to look upon it as the Representation of my Body which is given for you And therefore with Truth I can say it is my Body though Literally and Properly and in strictness of Speech it is Bread and not my Natural Body Now therefore let the Papists give or take Either the Bread is not Transubstantiated or if it be by virtue of the self-same words the Priest is Transubstantiated too For every word in the Prolation with one Breath except the word Enim Sect. 20. does Operate as well as Signifie and Does what it Says and therefore if the word Corpus be effectual to make it a Body then the word Meum makes it the Priests Body The Wit of Man cannot find an Evasion and I doubt not but I am able to maintain this Argument against all the Popish Priests in the world For all the Advantage lies clearly on the Protestant Side For our Saviour visibly took Bread and gave it the office of Representing him and made it the Figure of his Body as Tertullian's word is He erected it as a standing Memorial to be used in Remembrance or Commemoration of him as S Luke's word is To shew forth his Death till he come as S. Paul speaks 'T is true he commanded his Disciples to repeat the same Action and to do as he had done But where did he bid the Priest to Personate him That he gave us the Bread by the Name of his Body Three of the Four Gospels witness and by the Name of his Broken Body S. Paul witnesses But where did he ever say That He himself would always Sacrifice himself by the Priests Hands and say Hoc est Corpus meum to the end of the world by the Priests Mouth And further There is not one word which the Papists have said in behalf of the Bread being Transubstantiated but holds as strongly for the Priests being Transubstantiated which makes full as much for the Dignity and Majesty of the Sacrament for the abasing and mortifying of our Deceivable Senses and for the improving and exalting our Faith and making it Meritorious as the other can We have gained such considerable Advantages by the foregoing part of our Discourse that now we are able unalterably to renounce the Doctrine of Transubstantiation For having Demonstrated the Impossibility of it We have thereby Demonstrated that though Heaven and Earth should pass away yet that Doctrine can never be True. We have likewise at the same time Demonstrated the Protestant Exposition of those words of our Saviour This is my Body to be the true and necessary Sense of them for either there is a Change of the Bread into the Body of Christ or there is not But because such a Change is an utter Impossibility as we have abundantly proved therefore it remains That the Protestant Doctrine which asserts there is no such Change is Demonstrably True. We have also made it as clear as the Light That neither the Letter of a Divine Revelation nor the pretence of an Infinite Power nor any thing in the world can support one single Contradiction because if one single Contradiction could stand it would destroy the very Being of God himself and deprive the world of the