that it is no more a process to be instructed it 's all instructed already and they can do no more for their part to put it in a condition to be discerned on But who shall be the Judge of it It shall be every one of you according to the Principles of your own Religion For according to the Principles of ours there would be no question at all because on one hand our Church has all the marks by which it has been judged since St. Augustin's time that we ought to acknowledge it the true Church of Jesus Christ And on the other we believe that Jesus Christ has given to his Church an infallible Authority to which every particular person is bound to submit But your Church is grounded on another Maxim directly contrary and you are made to believe that every one of you have right to examine and judge after all your Ministers assembled in a General Synod could say unto you Make use then of the liberty which is given you even to the end you may be sure if they had reason or not to give it you Read and Judge but read with such attention and care as you would bring to comprehend an Affair upon which depended the Life of one of your best Friends and judge with that Conscience and sincerity of Heart with which you would desire to be judged if your Life or Death depended on the Judgment they were to make of you And indeed there is no less at the stake in this occasion only with this difference that these Men who should Judge you could not preserve your Life but for a little time nor condemn you but to a Death which sooner or later you could not eschew Whereas it is of far greater importance to you to discern in this process after the instruction that is given you of the same for in judging it aright and having nothing but God before your eyes you may eschew a Death which never ends a Death which all those will incur who have been made to look upon as a Damnable Errour the Ancient and perpetual Faith of the most sublime Mystery of our Religion and may put your selves in a condition to enjoy one day a Life eternally happy after having received the pledge thereof by the real and true partaking of the Worlds Saviour wherewith the Catholick Church nourishes her Children THE FAITH OF THE CATHOLICK CHVRCH Concerning the EUCHARIST Invincibly proved by the Argument used against the Protestants in the Books of Mr Arnaud entituled The Perpetuity of the Faith c. THere is no Christian can deny that a Doctrine regarding one of the principal Mysteries of Religion such as is the Eucharist * The Controversie of the Eucharist is one of the most important of those which makes the separation betwixt the Roman Church and the Protestants says Mr. Claud p. 1. of the Preface of his Answer to Mr. Arnaud The Article of the Eucharist in my Judgment is one of the most essential says M. de Larroque Minister at Rouen in his Preface to the History of the Eucharist which had been always believed in the Universal Church is a Doctrine taught by the Apostles to the first Believers We shall then have proved the Doctrine of the Real Presence such as the Roman Church now believes it to be the Apostles Doctrine when we shall have proved it to be that which has always been believed in all the Churches of the World. Now it 's impossible but it must have been always believed in all Churches If being certain it was universally believed in some Ages we can demonstrate that it could not proceed from an innovation or change of its ancient Faith that the Church of these Ages began to believe it The business will be compleatly done then if we can make out this And thus we make it out SECT 1. ARGUMENT All the Churches both of the East and West were found to be united in the Belief of the Real Presence towards the beginning of the eleventh Century and they are found to be yet united in the same Belief excepting onely some new Sects of the last Age. But it is impossible this Belief should have been established of new or by an innovation of their ancient Faith in all these Churches and yet no trace nor memorial of that Innovation appeared And it is certain there has appeared none at all neither from Paschasius his time to that of Berengarius nor from Berengarius his time even to this day Therefore it is certain that the Doctrine of the Real Presence is the perpetual Doctrine of the Church and consequently none can maintain the contrary without being an Heretick THe first Proposition which is called the major has two parts one that the Churches of the East were united in the same Faith concerning the Eucharist with the Roman Church in Berengarius his time The other that they are united with the same at this time The second Proposition which is called the minor has likewise two parts One that supposing the truth of the major as to Berengarius's time it 's impossible that the innovation pretended by the Calvinists to have been made in all Churches from Paschasius to Berengarius could be made in that time The other that if it was not made in that time in all the Eastern Churches it would be impossible it could have been made from Berengarius's time to this day SECT 2. The general Proof of the major in respect of Berengarius his time A Matter of fact unanimously asserted by contemporary Authors who cannot be suspected to have been deceived or intending to deceive and which has not been contradicted by those who were most concerned to contradict it ought to be held for most certain and undoubted But we have shewn from the very beginning of the first Treatise of the Perpetuity and in the first Tome 2 Book 7 Chap. and 9 Book 1 Chap. That all those who wrote against Berengarius Adelmanus who had studied under S. Fulbert Hugo Bishop of Langres Deodurnus Bishop of Leige Lanfrancus Archbishop of Canterbury Durandus Abbot of Troarn Guitmondus Archbishop of Aversa in Italy did all of them reproach to him That he had separated himself from the unity of the Holy Church that he scandalized the whole Church that none before him had dreamed of his Follies that his Heresie was so notorious that there needed not a Council assembled to condemn it that he impugned what the Church taught througbout the World That the Berengarians had not for themselves one sole Town nor so much as one Village And in a word that there needed no more but to ask the Latins the Greeks the Armenians and generally all the Christians of whatsover Nation and all would answer That they believed the change of the terrestical substance of the Bread and Wine by the infallible incomprehensible and miraculous operation of the Omnipotence of God into the essence or substance of the Lords Body We did likewise
THE FAITH OF THE CATHOLICK CHVRCH Concerning the EUCHARIST Invincibly proved by the Argument used against the Protestants in the Books of the Faith of the Perpetuity written by Mr. Arnaud A Translation from the French. Printed at Holy-Rood House 1687. Errours to be Corrected Page 40. line 18. I know not p. 50. l. last r. 〈◊〉 more easily p. 89. l. 1. r. came p. 214. l. 6. r. put out a p. 225. l. 23. r. for those P. 262. l. 3. after day r. l. 〈◊〉 after procedurer also l. 9. after not r. also l. 18. in steaâ—â— of that it was not r. was it not ADVERTISEMENT TO THE PROTESTANTS THe sole Title of this little Book is capable to make you sufficiently understand that the attentive reading of it may be of great importance to you It treats of a Mystery on the account of which you have been made conceive the greatest aversion from the Catholick Church And which you have been made to look upon as the greatest obstacle of your Reconcilement to it There is no Person of good sence among you who will not avow That if your Religion be false in this point you ought to forsake it and that you ought to give no credit to your Ministers if it be found that in the matter of the Sacrament they have made you mistake Errour for Truth You have no assurance that you are not thus misled for they dare not say that their Church is Infallible Do not then neglect so easie means to examine whether it be so or not and refuse not a few hours application to the most important Affair you can have in the World which is that of your Salvation Your Ministers ought not to hinder you from this application For if you find nothing solid in what is here proposed to you you will be inclined to adhere more closely to them And if on the conttary the Truth appear to you with such evidence as obliges you to embrace it What other thing should hinder it from having the same effect on them but a selfish stubbornness which should not be a motive to you to follow them but rather to forsake them Perhaps they will tell you there is nothing here proposed to you of new nothing but the same Argument which Mr. Claud has answered and consequently that it 's not worth your taking notice of it But the contrary is true For if here were offered to you a new Proof of any Article of our Faith which you had not heard discoursed of before you would not miss to say That you ought to expect what your Ministers could answer to it But this you cannot say here for never was there a Debate so agitate on either part as this whereof you have here the result That little Book of the Perpetuity where it was supposed that the Eastern Societies believes what we believe concerning the Eucharist while it was yet a Manuscript was impugned by a Manuscript-Answer of Mr. Claud wherein he maintained that the said Supposition was false and that excepting the Roman Church Transubstantiation and the Adoration of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist were two things unknown to the whole World and that neither the Greeks nor the Armenians nor the Russians nor the Jacobites nor the Ethiopians nor generally any Christian save only those who are subject to the Pope believes any thing of these two Articles After this the little Perpetuity was printed with a Refutation of the Answer made by Mr. Claud In which Refutation were brought most clear Testimonies of what he had so boldly denied concerning the Faith of the Christians of the East But as it was judged the contrary could not be maintained so that point was not insisted on at length Mr. Claud sets out a great Volume against that little Book And not yielding to the Proofs that were brought against his Assertion he employ'd all what he had of Wit and Dexterity to support what he had asserted viz. That Transubstantion and the Adoration of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist were believed in no place of the World except in the Roman Church To this Book of Mr. Claud's was opposed the first of the three great Volumes of the Perpetuity wherein the truth of the matter of fact impugned by him was confirmed with such force with Proofs so convincing with Testimonies so irrefragable and so numerous that no Man in the World would believe that one could yet pertinaciously maintain a thing so manifestly false But we were mistaken in this Mr. Claud did not yet give over but employed all kinds of artifices and subtilties to put out the eyes of those of his Party that they might not see the Faith of the Roman Church concerning the Eucharist in the most formal and express Testimonies of all the Oriental Societies But this Opiniatorness served only to make the truth shine forth more brightly for it was the cause of procuring a great many more new Testimonies and whole Books published by the Greeks in certain circumstances that 't is impossible but the most unreasonable must succumb if so be they be oblig'd to reflect seriously on them This was made appear in the general Answer to that Book of Mr. Clauds and in the last Book of the Third Volume of the Perpetuity And Father Paris Canon-Regular of the Congregation of St. Genevieve a most learned Divine has made two Books on the same subject which joyned with those I have mentioned have made this matter of fact evident in the highest degree This is the fruit of that long Dispute which has verified that Saying of St. Augustin De Civit. Dei lib. 16. cap. 12 That God permits several points of the Catholick Doctrine to be impugned by Hereticks with many artifices to the end that the Catholicks being obliged to defend them they may be examined more exactly illustrated more clearly and maintained more vigorously Mr. Claud has written nothing since that time on this matter his last Answer is in the year 1670. And there are five Volumes which he has left unanswered The last of these five Volumes is in the year 1675. The two last Volumes of the Perpetuity the general Answer which is in 1671 and the two Books of Father Paris And yet Gentlemen it is very strange that notwithstanding of this silence of Mr. Claud so publickly notorious it is given out amongst you that he has written last and that his Books are not answered For I know this has been said by several persons and particularly by Madamoiselle de Suze to a Priest a Friend of min. I have set down to you the progress of this famous Debate to let you see you have no reason to say in this occasion we are expecting till our Ministers shall have taught us what is to be answered to this Argument They have done all you could expect from them on this subject they are exhausted They have spoken they have answered they have replied they have if I can use the word duplied So
the meaning of the Calvinists containing no more but the institution of Bread as a sign of the Body of Jesus Christ. It 's a manifest absurdity to assert they import a promise and engagement on God's part to give really his Body to those who should take the Signs of it Perhaps the Ministers will answer true it is the promise of that real receiving the Body of Jesus Christ which they believe is not contained in these words This is my Body but it 's contained in other Passages as in the 6 chap. of St. John and in these words of St. Paul 1 Cor. 10. The Bread which we break is it not the communion of the Body of Jesus Christ This is what must be examined in few words As to the 6 of John it is clear they cannot make use of it to prove their belief concerning the Eucharist seeing they hold with the Lutherians that the Evangelist speaks not of this Sacrament in all that Chapter There is no word of the Supper here says Calvin on the 53 vers but of the continual communication of the Flesh of Christ which we have without the use of the Supper And he adds These of Bohemia have not adduced this passage pertinently to prove that all in general should receive the Cup. They could not then be thought to deal seriously if they should alledge this Chapter to prove their belief concerning the Supper since they judge the Evangelist does not speak of it therein As to the passage of St. Paul I confess that being taken in the true sence which is that of the Real Presence it includes that of receiving the Flesh of Jesus Christ which is a consequence of that Presence But it cannot rationally be concluded according to the Calvinists for first Zuinglius cuts off at one stroak all the consequences they can draw from it by pretending that the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not signifie Communion or Participation of the Body of Jesus Christ but a company of People who live upon the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and that by eating this Bread one declares himself a member of the Church Tom. 2 fol. 211.258.342 Besides this explication of Zuinglius whose Authority should be considerable to the Ministers because of the rank he holds among those who have erected their Church of new They themselves furnish us with others which destroy all the consequences they can draw from that passage for who can hinder a Socinian to explain these words of St. Paul in a figurative sence as themselves explain these of Jesus Christ and who can hinder him to say that these words must be so rendered The Bread which we break is it not the sign or figure of the Body of Jesus Christ as they render these others this is the sign or figure of my Body Now how can they conclude from thence that in receiving this Figure they receive really and in effect the thing figured unless it be by a great number of groundless suppositions and by supplying from their own imaginations what the Scripture says not at all They must then will they nill they confess that the figurative sence they give to the words of Jesus Christ This is my Body is altogether false it being so manifestly contrary not only to that which all Christians who believe the Real Presence since the Apostles have given to them but also to the Principles of the Ministers They must therefore renounce it to defend their belief concerning the eating and receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in their Supper Here is moreover another advantage drawn from the main Argument and we cannot sufficiently admire the care the Divine Providence has had to guard this Mysterie of our Faith with so great abundance of Proofs against the incredulity of men For it must be observed that altho' commonly it follows not that he who errs in one Point errs also in another altogether distinct from it Yet God has so disposed things as it follows necessarily that if the Calvinists err in any one of the Points upon which we accuse them of Heresie their Doctrine concerning the Eucharist is false and ours is true To be convinced of this there needs only to consider two Principles the one of Right the other of Fact both equally certain The first is It 's impossible the truth of the Mysterie of the Eucharist should be known only by a Society of Hereticks and that all other Societies should be in errour concerning so capital and important a Point for if this supposition were possible it would be also possible that the whole World might be in errour and that there were no Orthodox Church at all seeing that only Society which should know the truth of the Mysterie of the Eucharist would be Heretical in all other Points and all the other Societies would be Heretical in point of the Eucharist The second is There is none at present in the world but only the Society of the Calvinists and those who have sprung from it or have risen up with it as the Anabaptists the Socinians and Quakers who deny the Real Presence This cannot be doubted of after the Proofs we have above set down Wherefore it follows necessarily that if the Calvinists had reason to deny this Presence all the other Societies must have been in errour as to this Point and it being impossible according as I have said that the truth of this Mysterie should be known only by Hereticks there needs no more but to convince the Calvinists of Heresig upon any other Point that 's common to them with the Sacramentarians to conclude thence demonstrativly that they are also Heriticks in matter of the Eucharist because otherwise it would follow that notwithstanding of their being Herericks they alone should know the truth of this Mysterie which is altogether impossible Wherefore they are not consequences only probable but entirely certain and demonstrative To say the Calvinists are Hereticks in condemning as Idolatry the Invocation of Saints the Honour that 's given to their Reliques as is invincibly proved in the Answer to the writing of a Minister upon several points of Controversie Therefore their Doctrine concerning the Eucharist is false The Calvinists are Heriticks in rejecting Prayer for the Dead in promising Salvation to their Children dead with out Baptism c as we have demonstrated in the last chapter of the Defence of the Faith of the Church for answer to a letter of Mr. Spon Therefore their Doctrine concerning the Eucharist is false The Calvinists are Heriticks in believing that the state of the Church was interrupted in so far as it was necessary according to them that God should raise up People in an extraordinary manner to erect the Church of new This we have likewise proved so as admits no reply in the first part of the Answer to Mr. Spon Therefore their belief concerning the Eucharist is false So there needs no more but to convince them of errour