all Metaphor only just two or three words for their purpose Literal But that which raises our wonder to the highest pitch is that the very fifty first Verse its self on which they found their Argument is two thirds of it Figure and only otherwise in one Clause to serve their Hypothesis I am says our Saviour the living Bread which came down from Heaven This is Figurative If any man eat of this Bread he shall live for ever That is they say by a Spiritual Eating by Faith And the Bread which I will give is my Flesh which I will give for the life of the World. This only must be understood of a proper manducation of a real eating of his Flesh in this Holy Sacrament It must be confessed that this is an Arbitrary way of explaining indeed and becomes the Character of a Church whose dictates are to be received not examined and may therefore pass well enough amongst those with whom the supposed Infallibility of their Guides is thought a sufficient dispensation for their own private Consideration But for us who can see no reason for this sudden change of our Saviours Discourse nay think that the connexion of that last Clause with the foregoing is an evident sign that they all keep the same Character and are therefore not a little scandalized at so Capernaitical a Comment as indeed Who can bear it V. 60. They will please to excuse us if we take our Saviours Interpretation to be at least of as good an Authority as 't is much more reasonable than theirs V. 62. Do's this says he Offend you Do's my saying that ye must eat my flesh and drink my Blood scandalize you Mistake not my design I mean not any carnal eating of me that indeed might justly move your Horrour It is the Spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speak unto you they are spirit and they are life He that desires a fuller account of this Chapter may please to recur to the late excellent †A Paraphrase with Notes and a Preface upon the Sixth Chapter of Saint John Lond. 1686. Paraphrase set out on purpose to explain it and which will be abundantly sufficient to shew the reasonableness of that Interpretation which we give of it I shall only add to close all that one Remark which * De Doctrin Christian Lib. 3. Cap. 16. Saint Augustine has left us concerning it and so much the rather in that it is one of the rules which he lays down for the right Interpreting of Holy Scripture and illustrates with this particular Example If says he the saying be Preceptive either forbidding a wicked action or commanding to do that which is good it is no Figurative saying But if it seems to command any Villany or Wickedness or forbid what is profitable and good it is Figurative This saying Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood you have no Life in you seems to command a Villanous or Wicked Thing It is therefore a FIGVRE enjoining us to communicate in the Passion of our Lord and to lay it up in dear and profitable Remembrance that his Flesh was crucifi'd and wounded for our sakes And now having thus clearly I perswade my self shewn the Weakness of those Grounds on which this Doctrine of the substantial Change of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ in this Holy Sacrament is establish'd I shall but very little insist on any other Arguments against it Only in a Word to demonstrate that all manner of Proofs fail them in this great Error I will in the close here subjoin two or three short Considerations more to shew this Doctrine opposite not only to Holy Scripture as we have seen but also 1. To the best and purest Tradition of the Church 2. To the Right Reason and 3. To the Common Senses of all Mankind I. That this Doctrine is opposite to the best and purest Tradition of the Church Now to shew this I shall not heap together a multitude of Quotations out of those Fathers through whose hands this Tradition must have past He that desires such an Account may find it fully done by one of the Roman Communion in a little * A Treatise of Transubstantiation by one of the Church of Rome c. Printed for Rich. Chiswell 1687. Treatise just now publish'd in our own Language I will rather take a method that seems to me less liable to any just Exception and that is to lay down some general Remarks of undoubted Truth and whose consequence will be as evident as their certainty is undeniable And I. For the Expressions of the Holy Fathers It is not deny'd Such are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but never 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Note there is hardly any of these Words which they have applied to the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist but they have attributed the same to the Water in Baptism but that in their popular Discourses they have spared no words except that of Transubstantiation which not one of them ever used to set off so great a Mystery And I believe that were the Sermons and Devotional Treatises of our own Divines alone since the Reformation searcht into one might find Expressions among them as much over-strain'd * See Treatise first of the Adoration c Printed lately at Oxford Which would make the World believe that we hold I know not what imaginary Real Presence on this account just as truly as the Fathers did Transubstantiation And doubtless these would be as strong an Argument to prove Transubstantiation now the Doctrine of the Church of England as those to argue it to have been the Opinion of those Primitive Ages But now let us consult these men in their more exact composures when they come to teach not to declaim and we shall find they will then tell us That these Elements are for their * It is not necessary to transcribe the Particulars here that have been so often and fully alledged Most of these Expressions may be found in the Treatise of Transubstantiation lately published The rest may be seen in Blondel Eclaircissements Familiers de la Controverse de l' Eucharistie Cap. iv vii viii Claude Rep. au 2. Traittè de la Perpetuitè i. Part. Cap. iv v. Forbesius Instructiones Historico-Theolog lib. xi cap. ix x xi xii xiii xv Larrogue Histoire de l' Eucharistie liv 2. cap. ii substance what they were before Bread and Wine That they retain the true properties of their nature to nourish and feed the Body that they are things inanimate and void of sense That with reference to the Holy Sacrament they are Images Figures Signes Symbols Memorials Types and Antitypes of the Body and Blood of Christ That in their Vse and Benefit they are indeed the very Body and Blood of Christ to every saithful Receiver but in a Spiritual and Heavenly manner as we confess That in
into Christ's Body than for Christ's Body to be changed into Bread a Vine a Door a Rock or whatever you please of the like kind But I have already shewn the ground of this mistake to be their want of considering the Customs and Phrases of the Jewish Passover and upon which both the Holy Eucharist it self and these Expressions in it were founded And I will only add this farther in confirmation of it That in the Stile of the Hebrew Language in general there is nothing more ordinary than for things to be said to * Expressions of this kind are very frequent in Holy Scripture The seed is the Word of God Luke viii 11. The field is the World the good seed are the children of the kingdom The tares are the children of the wicked one Matt. xiii 38. The seven Angels are the Angels of the seven Churches and the seven Candlesticks are the seven Churches Rev. i. 20. With infinite more of the like kind Be that which they Signifie or Represent Thus Joseph interpreting Pharaoh's Dream Gen. xli 26. The seven good Kine says he are seven years and again The seven good Ears of Corn are seven years i. e. as is plain they signify seven years And so in like manner in this place Christ took Bread and blessed and brake it and gave it to his disciples saying Take Eat this is my Body which is Broken for you That is this Bread thus Taken and Blessed and Broken and Given to you This Bread and this Action signifies and represents my Body which shall be Broken for you And indeed after all this seeming assurance it is nevertheless plain That they themselves are not very well satisfied with their own interpretation †See the Preface We have shewn before how little confidence their greatest Schoolmen had of this Doctrine those who have stood the most stifly for it could never yet * See their Opinions collected by Monsieur Aubertine de Eucharistiâ lib. 1. cap. 9.11 12 13 14. agree how to explain these words so as to prove it And Cardinal Bellarmine alone who reckons up the most part of their several ways and argues the weakness too of every one but his own may be sufficient to assure us that they are never likely to be And might serve to shew what just cause their own great * Tract 2. de Verbis quibus Conficitur Catharinus had so long since to cry out upon his Enquiry only into the meaning of the very first word This Consider says he Reader into what difficulties they are thrown who go about to write upon this matter when the word THIS only has had so many and such contradictory Expositions that they are enough to make a man lose his Wits but barely to consider them all 'T was this forced so many of their †See their Testimonies cited in the late Historical Treatise of Transubstantiation in the Defence of the Exposition of the Church of England p. 63 64 65. In the Preface above c. greatest and most learned men before Luther ingenuously to profess That there was not in Scripture any evident proof of this Doctrine and even Cardinal Cajetan since to own That had not the Church determined for the literal sense of those words This is my Body they might have passed in the Metaphorical It is the general acknowledgment of their ‖ See Bellarmin's words in the Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England pag. 56 57. To which may be added Salmer Tom. 9. Tr. 20. Suarez Disp 58. Sect. 7. Vasquez Disp 201. c. 1. c. greatest Writers at this day That if the Pronoun THIS in that Proposition This is my Body be referr'd to the Bread which our Saviour Christ held in his Hand which he bless'd which he brake and gave to his Disciples and of which therefore certainly if of any thing he said This is my Body the natural repugnancy that there is between the two things affirm'd of one another Bread and Christs Body will force them to be taken in a figurative Interpretation For as much as 't is impossible that Bread should be Christ's Body otherwise than in a figure And however to avoid so dangerous a Consequence they will rather apply it to any thing nay to nothing at all than to the Bread yet they would do well to consider whether they do not thereby fall into as great a danger on the other side since if the Relative THIS do's not determine those words to the Bread 't is evident that nothing in that whole Proposition do's And then how those words shall work so great a change in a Subject to which they have no manner of Relation will I believe be as difficult to shew as the change its self is incomprehensible to conceive And now after so plain an evidence of the weakness of that foundation which is by all confessed to be the chief and has by many of the most Learned of that Church been thought the only Pillar of this Cause I might well dispense with my self from entring on any farther examination of their other pretences to establish it But because they have taken great pains of late to apply the †Concil Trid. Sess xiii sixth Chapter of St. John to the Holy Eucharist tho' it might be sufficient in general to say that no good Argument for a matter of such consequence can be built upon a place which so many of the * See them thus ranged by Albertinus de Euch. lib 1. cap. 30. pag. 209. Two Popes Innocent III. Pius II. Four Cardinals Bonaventure D' Alliaco Cusan Cajetane Two Archbishops Richardus Armachannus Guererius Granatensis Five Bishops Stephanus Eduensis Durandus Mimatensis Gulielmus Altisiodorensis Lindanus Ruremondensis Jansenius Gandavensis Doctors and Professors of Divinity in great abundance Alexander Alensis Richardus de media villa Jo. Gerson Jo. de Ragufio Gabriel Biel Thomas Waldenfis Author tract contr perfidiam quorundam Bohemorum Jo. Maria Verratus Tilmannus Segebergensis Astesanus Conradus Jo. Ferus Conradus Sasgerus Jo. Hesselius Ruardus Tapperus Palatios Rigaltius Here are 50. of the Roman Church who reject this Application of this Chapter For the Fathers see the Learned Paraphrase lately set forth of this Chapter in the Preface All which shews how little strength any Argument from this Chapter can have to establish Transubstantiation most Eminent and Learned of that Communion have judged not to have the least Relation to this matter yet I will nevertheless beg leave very briefly to shew the Weakness of this Second Attempt too and that 't is in vain that they rally these scatter'd Forces whilst their main Body continues so intirely defeated It is a little surprizing in this matter that they universally tell us That neither the beginning nor ending of our Saviours Discourse in that Chapter belongs to this Matter that both before and after that passage which they refer to 't is
of them the Abbot of Ville-loyne I have been assured by some of his intimate Acquaintance that he had always a particular respect for the Church of England and which others of their Communion at this day esteem to be neither Heretical nor Schismatical V. But I may not insist on these things and will therefore finish this Address with this only remonstrance to them That since it is thus evident that for above 1200 years this Doctrine was never establish'd in the Church nor till then in the opinion of their own most learned Men any matter of Faith since the Greatest of their Writers in the past Ages have declared themselves so freely concerning it as we have seen above and some of the most eminent of their Communion in the present have ingenuously acknowledged that they could not believe it since 't is confess'd that the Scripture does not require it Sense and Reason undoubtedly oppose it and the Primitive Ages of the Church as one of their own Authors has very lately shewn received it not They will at least suffer all these things to dispose them to an indifferent Examination wherefore at last it is that they do believe this great Error Upon what Authority they have given up their Senses to Delusion their Reason to embrace Contradictions the Holy Scripture and Antiquity to be submitted to the dictates of two Assemblies which many of themselves esteem to have been rather Cabals than Councils And all to support a Doctrine the most injurious that can be to our Saviour 's Honour destructive in its nature not only of the certainty of the Christian Religion but of every thing else in the World which if Transubstantiation be true must be all but Vision for that cannot be true unless the Senses of all Mankind are deceived in judging of their proper Objects and if this be so we can then be sure of nothing These Considerations if they shall incline them to an impartial view of the following Discourses they may possibly find somewhat in them to shew the reasonableness of our dissent from them in this matter However they shall at least I hope engage those of our own Communion to stand firm in that Faith which is thus strongly supported with all sorts of Arguments and convince them how dangerous it is for Men to give up themselves to such prejudices as neither Sense nor Reason nor the word of God nox the Authority of the best and purest Ages of the Church are able to overcome A TABLE OF THE Principal Matters Contained in this TREATISE PREFACE THE occasion of this Discourse Page i The method made use of for the explaining the nature of this Holy Eucharist Page iv No Proof of Transubstantiation in Holy Scripture Page v The rise and establishment of it Page vi vii Several of their greatest Men before the Council of Trent believed it not Page vii viii And many have even since continued to disbelieve it Page x So Picherellus Page x Cardinal du PERRON Page xi F. Barnes Page xii Monsieur de MARCA Page xiii F. SIRMOND Page xv Monsieur L Page xvii Mons de Marolles Page ib. Others Page xxiv c. Consequences drawn from these Examples I. Of the danger of the Papists especially upon their own Principles Page xxvii With reference to this Sacrament and therein to the 1. Consecration Page xxvii 2. Adoration Page ib. 3. Communion in one kind Page xxix 4. Mass Page xxx With reference to their entire Priesthood Page xxxi II. Against the Infallibility of the Roman Church Page xxxiii III. Against its Authority Page xxxiv IV. As to the Reasonableness of our Reformation Page xxxvi V. That these things ought to dispose those of that Communion to an impartial search into the grounds of their belief as to this matter Page xxxvii PART I. The Introduction Of the Nature of this Holy Sacrament in the General Pag. 1 Christ's design in the Institution of it Pag. 2 That he establish'd it upon the Ceremonies of the Jewish Passover Pag. 3 4 5 6 The method from hence taken to explain the nature of it Pag. 6 7 CHAP. I. Of Transubstantiation or the Real Presence established by the Church of Rome Pag. 8 What is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome in this point ib. This shewn upon the Principle before laid down to be repugnant 1. To the design and nature of this Holy Sacrament Pag. 12 2. To the expression it self This is my Body Pag. 14 The Papists themselves sensible of it Pag. 18 That the Sixth of S. John does not at all favour them Pag. 20 This Doctrine shewn further to be repugnant I. To the best and purest Tradition of the Church Pag. 24 II. To the right Reason Pag. 32 III. To the common Sense of all Mankind Pag. 36 Conclusion of this Point and transition to the next Pag. 37 CHAP. II. Of the Real Presence acknowledged by the Church of England 41 The notion of the Real Presence falsly imputed by a late Author to our Church 42 In answer to this Four things proposed to be considered I. What is the true notion of the Real Presence as acknowledged by the Church of England Pag. 43 II. That this Notion has been constantly maintained by our most Learned and Orthodox Divines Pag. 46 So those abroad Calvin Pag. 47 Beza Pag. 49 Martyr c. Pag. 51 For our own Divines consider the express words of the twenty ninth Article in K. Edw. VI. time Pag. 52 Archbishop Cranmer Pag. 53 Bishop Ridley Pag. 55 That the same continned to be the Opinion of our Divines after Pag. 56 Shewn 1. From the History of the Convocations proceeding as to this point in the beginning of Q. Eliz. Reign ib. 2. From the Testimonies of our Divines Bp. Jewell Pag. 59 Mr. Hooker Pag. 60 Bp. Andrews Pag. 62 A. B. of Spalatto Pag. 64 Bp. Montague ib. Bp. Taylour Pag. 66 Mr. Torndyke Pag. 69 Whose Testimonies are cited at large Of 1. Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum 2. Bp. Morton 3. A. B. Usher 4. Bp. Cosens 5. Dr. Jo. White 6. Dr. Fr. White 7. Dr. Jackson 8. Dr. Hammond Whose Authorities are refer'd to Pag. 71 72 III. That the alterations which have been made in our Rubrick were not upon the account of our Divines changing their Opinions as is vainly and falsly suggested Pag. 72 IV. That the Reasons mentioned in our Rubrick concerning the Impossibility of Christ's Natural Body's existing in several places at the same time is no way invalidated by any of this Author's Exceptions against it Pag. 77 1. Not by his First Observation ib. 2. Nor by his Second Pag. 79 3. Nor by his Third Pag. 80 4. Nor by his Fourth Pag. 81 The Objection of this Opinion's being downright Zuinglianism Answered Pag. 82 And the whole concluded Pag. 84 PART II. CHAP. III Of the Adoration of the Host as prescribed and practised in the Church of Rome Two things proposed to be considered I. What the Doctrine of the
Humane Nature of Christ still remains though assumed by and conjoyned to the Divine Which words as their Editor has done well to set a Cautè upon in the Margent to signifie their danger so this is clear from them that Gelasius and so the other Writers that have made use of the same Argument as St. Chrysostome Theodoret c. must have thought the Bread and the Wine in the Eucharist no more to have been really changed into the very Body and Blood of Christ than they did believe his Humane Nature to have been truly turned into the Divine For that otherwise the parallel would have stood them in no stead nay would have afforded a defence of that Heresie which they undertook to oppose by it VI. Yet more Had the Primitive Christians believed this great Change how comes it to pass that we find none of those Marks nor Signs of it that the World has since abounded with * See the contrary proved that the Fathers did not believe this by Blondel de l'Euch c. 8. Claude Rep. au 2. Traitte de la Perpetuite part 1. c. 4. No talk of Accidents existing without Subjects of the Senses being liable to be deceived in judging of their proper Objects in short no Philosophy corrupted to maintain this Paradox No Adorations Processions Vows paid to it as to Christ himself It is but a very little time since the †Under Greg. ix Ann. 1240. vid. Nauclerum ad Ann. cit Bell came in play to give the People notice that they should fall down and Worship this new God. The ‖ Instituted by Vrban iv Ann. 1264. Feast in honour of it is an Invention of Yesterday the Adoring of it in the Streets no ⸪ Indeed in all Probability a hundred years later older Had not those first Christians respect sufficient for our Blessed Saviour Or did they perhaps do all this Let them shew it us if they can But till then we must beg leave to conclude That since we find not the least Footsteps of any of these necessary Appendages of this Doctrine among the Primitive Christians it is not to be imagined that we should find the Opinion neither VII But this is not all We do not only not find any such Proofs as these of this Doctrine but we find other Instances directly contrary to this belief In some Churches they ‖ So in that of Jerusalem See Hesych in Levitic l. 2. c. 8. burnt what remained of the Consecrated Elements * So in that of Constantinople Evag. Hist l. 4. c. 35. In others they gave it to little Children to Eat †Vid. apud Autor Vit. Basilii c. 8. in Vit. Pat. l. 1. This Custom was condemned in a Council at Carthage Anno 419. Vid. Codic Eccl. Afric Justel c. 18. In some they buried it with their Dead In all they permitted the Communicants to carry home some Remnants of them they sent it abroad by Sea by Land from one Church and Village to another without any Provision of Bell or Taper Canopy or Incense or any other mark of Adoration they sometimes made ⸪ Vid. St. August Oper. imp contr Julian lib. 3. c. 164. Poultices of the Bread they mix'd the ⸫ See an instance of this in Baronius Ann. 648. Sect. 15. The 8th General Council did the same In Act. Syn. Wine with their Ink all which we can never imagine such holy Men would have presumed to do had they indeed believed them to be the very Body and Blood of our Blessed Lord. VIII Lastly Since the prevalence of this Doctrine in the Church what Opposition has it met with What Schisms has it caused What infinite Debates have there risen about it I shall not need to speak of the Troubles of Berenger in the Eleventh Of the Waldenses Albigenses and others in the Twelfth Century Of Wickliff Hus c. who continued the Opposition and finally of the great Reformation in the beginning of the last Age by all which this Heresy has been opposed ever since it came to any Knowledg in the Church Now is it possible to be believed that so many Centuries should pass so many Heresies should arise and a Doctrine so full of Contradictions remain uncontested in the Church for almost a Thousand years That Berenger should be one of the first that should begin to Credit his Senses to Consult his Reason or even to Defend his Creed These are Improbabilities that will need very convincing Arguments indeed to remove them But for the little late French trick of proving this Doctrine necessary to have been received in the Primitive Church This is the Foundation of the Authors of the Treatises De la Perpetuite Answered by Mons Claude because it is so in the Present and if you will believe them 't is impossible a Change should have been made I suppose we need only turn the terms of the Argument to shew the Weakness of the Proof viz. That from all these and many other Observations that might be offer'd of the like kind 't is Evident that this Doctrine at the beginning was not believed in the Church and let them from thence see if they can conclude that neither is it believed now Thus contrary is this Doctrine to the Best and Purest Tradition of the Church Nor is it less Secondly II. To Right Reason too It were endless to heap together all the Contradictions that might be offer'd to prove this That there should be Length and nothing Long See Mr. Chillingworth against Knot c. iv n. 46. Breadth and nothing Broad Thickness and nothing Thick Whiteness and nothing White Roundness and nothing Round Weight and nothing Heavy Sweetness and nothing Sweet Moisture and nothing Moist Fluidness and nothing Flowing many Actions and no Agent many Passions and no Patient i.e. That there should be a Long Broad Thick White Round Heavy Sweet Moist Flowing Active Passive NOTHING That Bread should be turned into the Substance of Christ and yet not any thing of the Bread become any thing of Christ neither the Matter nor the Form nor the Accidents of the Bread be made either the Matter or the Form or the Accidents of Christ that Bread should be turned into Nothing and at the same Time with the same Action turned into Christ and yet Christ should not be Nothing that the same Thing at the same Time should have its just Dimensions and just Distance of its Parts one from another and at the same time not have it but all its Parts together in one and the self-same Point That the same Thing at the same time should be wholly Above its self and wholly Below its self Within its self and Without its self on the Right-hand and on the Left-hand and Round-about its self That the same thing at the same time should move to and from its self and yet lie still or that it should be carried from one place to another through the middle space
and yet not move That there should be no Certainty in our Senses and yet that we should know something Certainly and yet know nothing but by our Senses That that which Is and Was long ago should now begin to be That that is now to be made of Nothing which is not Nothing but Something That the same thing should be Before and After its self These and many other of the like nature are the unavoidable and most of them the avow'd Consequences of Transubstantiation and I need not say all of them Contradictions to Right Reason But I shall insist rather upon such Instances as the Primitive Fathers have judged to be absurd and impossible and which will at once shew both the Falseness and Novelty of this monstrous Doctrine and such are these * See Examples of every one of these collected by Blondel Eclaircissements familiers de la controverse de l' Eucharistie cap. 8. p. 253. That a thing already existing should be produced anew That a finite thing should be in many places at the same time That a Body should be in a place and yet take up no room in it That a Body should penetrate the dimensions of another Body That a Body should exist after the manner of a Spirit That a real body should be invisible and impassible That the same thing should be its self and the figure of its self That the same thing should be contained in and participate of its self †Monsieur Claude Rep. au 2. Traitte de la Perpetuite part 1. c. 4. n. 11. p. 73. Ed. 4to Paris 1668. That an Accident should exist by its self without a Subject after the manner of a Substance All these things the primitive Fathers have declared to be in their Opinions gross Absurdities and Contradictions without making any exception of the Divine Power for the sake of the Eucharist as some do now And indeed it were well if the impossibilities stopp'd here but alas the Repugnancies extend to the very Creed its self and destroy the chiefest Articles of our Faith the Fundamentals of Christianity How can that man profess that he believes our Saviour Christ to have been born xvi Ages since of the Virgin Mary whose very Body he sees the Priest about to make now before his Eyes That he believes him to have Ascended into Heaven and behold he is yet with us upon Earth There to Sit at the right hand of God the Father Almighty till in the end of the World He shall come again with Glory to judg both the Quick and the Dead And behold he is here carried through the Streets lock'd up in a Box Adored first and then Eaten by his own Creatures carried up and down in several manners and to several places and sometimes Lost out of a Priests Pocket These are no far-fetch'd Considerations they are the obvious Consequences of this Belief and if these things are impossible as doubtless if there be any such thing as Reason in the World they are I suppose it may be very much the concern of every one that professes this Faith to reflect a little upon them and think what account must one day be given of their persisting obstinately in a point so evidently erroneous that the least degree of an impartial judgment would presently have shewn them the falseness of it But God has not left himself without farther witness in this matter but has given us Thirdly III. The Conviction of our Senses against it An Argument this which since it cannot be Answered they seem resolved to run it down as the Stoick in Lucian who began to call names when he had nothing else to say for himself But if the Senses are such ill Informers that they may not be trusted in matters of this moment would these Disputers please to tell us What Authority they have for the truth of the Christian Religion Was not Christianity first founded upon the Miracles of our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles Or were not the Senses judges of those Miracles Are not the Incarnation Death Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord the most Fundamental Articles of our Faith Have we any other Argument to warrant our belief of these but what comes to us by the ministry of our Senses * John xx 27 29. Did not Christ himself appeal to them for the proof of his own Rising The Romanist himself believes Transubstantiation because he reads in the Scripture or rather to speak more agreeably to the method of their Church because he has been told there are such Words there as Hee est Corpus Meum Now not to enquire how far those words will serve to warrant this Doctrine is it not evident that he cannot be sure there are any such words there if he may not trust his Senses And if he may is it not as plain That he must seek for some other meaning than what they give of them Let us suppose the change they speak of to be Supernatural Be it as much a Miracle as they desire The very Character of a Miracle is to be known by the Senses Nor God nor Christ nor any Prophet or Apostle ever pretended to any other And I shall leave it to any one to judge what progress Christianity would have made in the World if it had had no other Miracles but such as Transubstanation to confirm it i. e. Great Wonders confidently asserted but such as every ones sense and reason would tell him were both falsely asserted and impossible to be performed But now whil'st we thus oppose the Errors of some by asserting the continuance of the Natural Substance of the Elements of Bread and Wine in this Holy Eucharist let not any one think that we would therefore set up the mistakes of others as if this Holy Sacrament were nothing more than a meer Rite and Ceremony a bare Commemoration only of Christ's Death and Passion Our Church indeed teaches us to believe That the Bread and Wine continue still in their True and Natural Substance but it teaches us also that 't is the Body and Blood of Christ See the Church Catechism and Article Twenty eighth The Communion-Office c. which every faithful Soul receives in that Holy Supper Spiritually indeed and after a Heavenly manner but yet most truly and really too The Primitive Fathers of whom we have before spoken sufficiently assure us that they were strangers to that Corporeal change that is now pretended but for this Divine and Mystical they have openly enough declared for it Nor are we therefore afraid to confess a change and that a very great one too made in this Holy Sacrament The Bread and the Wine which we here Consecrate ought not to be given or received by any one in this Mystery as common ordinary food Those Holy Elements which the Prayers of the Church have sanctified and the Divine Words of our Blessed Saviour applied to them though not Transubstantiated yet certainly separated to a Holy use and
measure to us all and Protestations against Popery Now 't is true for what concerns the latter of these we allow Popery to have the advantage of us as to the Point of Antiquity nor are we ashamed to own it It being necessary that they should have fallen into Errors before we could protest against them but as to the present matter our Author in his * Disc 1. p. 55. §. lvii Guide to which he refers us confesses that Berengarius against whom these little Synods were called proceeded upon Protestant Grounds i. e. in effect was a Protestant as to this Point And therefore 't is false in him now to say that these Councils were assembled long before the birth of Protestantism But I return to his Church Authority and answer 1. If this Doctrine be certainly contrary to Sense and Reason as was before said then he has told us before that no Motive whatever no Revelation tho never so plain can be sufficient to engage us to believe it 2. For his Councils the eldest of them was above a thousand Years after Christ when by our own Confession the Error tho not of Transubstantiation yet of the Corporal Presence was creeping into the Church 3. These Councils were themselves a Party against Berengarius and therefore no wonder if they condemned him 4. They were neither universal of the whole Church or even of the Western Patriachate in which they assembled and therefore we can have no security that they did not err tho we should grant this Priviledg to a truly General Council that it could not 5. 'T is evident that some of them did err forasmuch as the very * In the first Formulary prescribed him by P. Nicholas 2. in the Siynod of Rome 1059. He thus declares Panem Vinum quae in altari ponuntur post consecrationem non solum Sacramentum sed etiam verum Corpus Sanguinem D. N. J. Christi esse sensualiter non solùm SACRAMENTO sed in Veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri The former Part of which Confession is Lutheran the latter utterly deny'd by the C. of R. at this day In the second Formulary prescribed him by Gregory viith 1078. Confiteor Panem Vinum converti in veram ac propriam Carnem Sanguinem J. C. D. N. Et post consecrationem esse verum Corpus Christi non tantùm per signum virtutem Sacramenti sed in proprietate naturae veritate substantiae This speakes of a Conversion but of what kind it says not and Lombard and the other Schoolmen to the very time of the Council of Lateran were not agreed about it and P. Gregory himself in his MS. Work upon St. Ma◠knew not what to think of it Formularies of Recantation prescribed to Berengarius do not agree the one with the other and one of them was such that their own †Jo. Semeca ad Can. Ego Berengar not ad Jus Canon Nisi sanè intelligas verba Berengarii in majorem incides Haeresim quam ipse habuit ideò onmia referas ad species ipsas nam de Christi Corpore partes non facimus So Hervaeus in 4. dist qu. 1. art 1. says that to speake the more expressly against the Hereticks be declined a little too much to the opposite side So Ricardus de Media Villa in 4. dist princip 1. qu. 1. Berengarius suerat infamatus quòd non credebat-Corpus Christi realiter contineri sub pane ideò ad sui purgationem per verba excessiva contrarium Asseruit Authors tell us it must be very favourably interpreted or it will lead us into a worser Error than that which it condemn'd 6. Were they never so infallible yet they none of them defined Transubstantiation but only a Corporal Presence and so whatever Authority they have it is for the Lutherans not the Papists 7. And this their own Writers seem to own forasmuch as none of them pretend to any definition of Transubstantiation before the Council of Lateran and till which time they freely confess it was no Article of Faith. Such is the Church Authority which this Discourser would put upon us But now that I have mentioned the Council of Lateran as I have before observed Pag. 28. that it was the same Council which establish'd this Error that also gave power to the Pope to depose Princes and absolve their Subjects from their Obedience so I cannot but remak further in this place the Zeal of our Author in the defence of its Authority It is but a very little while since another of their Church ‖ Lond. 1616. Pag. 362 c. Father Walsh in his Letter to the Bishop of Lincoln did not think that the * Mr. Dodwel Consid of present Concernment §. 31. Learned Person of our Church to whom he refers us had so clearly proved these Canons to have been the genuine †Monsieur du Pin utterly denies these Canons to have been the Decrees of the Council Dissert vii c. iii. §. 4. Acts either of the Council or even of the Papist himself but that a Man might still have reason to doubt of both But indeed tho that Father be of another mould yet there are still some in the World and I believe of this Author's acquaintance who like this Council never the worse for such a decision but think the third Canon as necessary to keep Princes in a due Obedience to the Church as the first de Fide Catholià to help out the obscurity of the Text in favour of Transubstantiation But he goes on Pag. 28 29. §. xxv and upon these Premises Ask us What more reasonable or secure course in matters of Religion can a private and truly humble Christian take than where the sense of a Divine Revelation is disputed to submit to that Interpretation thereof which the Supreamest Authority in the Church that hath heretofore been convened about such matters hath so often and always in the same manner decided to him and so to act according to its Injunction Now not to say any more as to his Expression of the Supremest Church Authority which it may be he will interpret not absolutely but with this Reserve that hath been convened about such matters I answer from himself 1. It is a more reasonable and secure course to follow that Interpretation which is agreeable to the common Sense and Reason of Mankind and against which he tells us not only the Authority of a Synod but even a Divine Revelation is not sufficient to secure us 2. These Synods as I have shewed besides that they were particular were moreover Parties in the case And then 3. It is false to say that they always decided the same or that that which they decided is the same which the Church of Rome now holds in this matter All which our * Particularly Elondel to whom this Author refers us Eclairciss de l'Euch c. 20