This book made available by the Internet Archive.

CO ^OMAJsC T%AT>1T10 3^

EXAMINED, be.

AMong many Books that lately came forth, of fomewhat the like tendency, there is one called [ A Rational Difcourfe concerning Tranfub-flantiation , in a Letter to a Perfon of Honour , from a Mafter of Arts of the Univerfity of Cambridge.] Alas, for the unhappinefs of thofe Perfons of Honour that have fuch Teachers and Counfellors as this i Could they have no better? or would they not ? If they chofe them their mifery is juh\

The Title Paraphrafed is [ A Rational Difcourfe againfi Senfe.^ But the ftrain of this, and abundance Written, by Men of the like ingeny, tell us convincingly, that while they difrruft all their Senfes, and would have all the Worjd diitruft them, and deny them, they are lb confident of their Thinking, Inventing, and Talking Faculties, that they dare fet them in Battel againfb the Senfes of all M inkind,andcheri(h ibme hopes to get the Victory. And verily, it is a wonderful victory that fuch Mens Tongues have got already, if all the Princes, Lords, Doctors, and all other People that go for Papifts, do really believe Tranfubftantiation . and if ibme be not in the right, who think that there is not one heart)' and compleat Papift in the World, unlets implicite Believers-may be called fuch, who believe as the Church doth, though they know not

A 2 what j

(»)

what; but that the Matters of the Game are but the Makers or Predicants of a Faith for others., which never was their own, and that they generate but their like, e-ven worldly diifemblers, and convert only Mens Tongues by the power of the Sword, and not their Hearts by all their Oratory. And Imuft confefs, that when I have heard a prophane Swearer, Curler, Railer, Drunkard, Whoremonger, plead for Tranfubftantiation, I have thought of peaceable Melancthons words [ You Italians maintain that Chrift is in the Sacrament ■> when you believe not that he is in Heaven.^

But the devout words and confidence of this Mafler of Arts maketh me think that he believeth himfelf, and that diffembling is not the Art that he is Matter of ; but though he be as he faith £ Non ignara mail ] yet he may be Ipnarus mali^ ignorant of his Error and of the Mifchief which he would do. Indeed if Men will needs believe that Night is Day, and Day is Night, we might fatisfie our felves with our companion for their weaknefs, without any importunate publick contradiction $ but our cafe with fuch Men as this, is fuch as prohibiteth fuch patient filence: For, the fame Religion which teacheth them to deny the Senses of Mankind, doth teach them to Exterminate^ Bum, Excommunicate, and Damn all thofe that will not do as they do, but will believe their Senfes $ andalfo to depofe thofe Temporal Lords that will not exterminate fuch from their Dominions.

Two things yet I rauft note, that make me doubt whether the Author befo honeft in his dealing as I could wifh him, and as a Man that talketh of God and Jejw chrift fhould be. i. That he fo blindly, or fraudulently ttateth the Queftion. 2. That he taketh fo little notice of the Books and Arguments that are Written againtthis Caufe,

as

(3)

as if they needed no Anfwer, when we fuppofe that they have put the Error of Tranfubfhntiation fd far pad all rational doubt, that it is fcarce pofllble for a Man that hath underftandingly, and ferioufly read them, to believe it: It is but lately that a fmall Book, on that Subjeft, was published by R. Baxter, Dedicated to the Duke of Lauder-dale, called, £ Full andeajie fatisfaction, which is the true Religion, ~] \\ hich all the Papifts in the World can never give a rational Anfwer to • and therefore this Man dare fcarce take notice of fuch, left it fhould bring them to the notice of his Reader. But doth he think that we muft not know that his Book is Anfwered before it was Written, becaufe he will take no notice of it ? or muft we therefore repeat the fame things again ?

The Roman Article of Faith is, that £ There is a change made of the whole finance of the Bread into the Body of Chri'f, and of the whole fuhfiance of wine into his Blood"] ib that our Controverfie with them hath two parts, i. Whether after Confecration there be no longer Bread or wine ? 2. Whether that which was Bread and wine is then turned into the very Flejh and Blood of Chriftt Now this Rational Difcourfer confoundeth thefe together, and in his progress dealeth ib little with the flrftpart, as if he were afraid that it lhould be taken notice of.

The Reader muft farther note. 1. That it is none of our Controverfie \_whether the whole [ub (lance of the Bread and wine he Relatively changed into the Reprefenta-tive Flejh and Blood of Chrijl which he once had, and offered in Sacrifice for us on the Crofs, as the Lamb of Gid that taleth away the fms of the world • For, this is our Doctrine: ] But it is, whether there be a phyjical change of the jrwjfance of the Bread and nine into the natural JubjUnce

'I

(A)

of the F/eJl) and Blood of Chrifi which is now glorified. « 2. That the Controverfie is not at all of the Real pre-(eme of chrifts glorified Body, whether it be in this or that place , or not ? but whether the B read and wine be changed into it?. For, many Protectants (Lutherans,and o-thersj do profefs that we have no certain clear Conception of the nature of a glorified Body 5 and confequently as they cannot judge of the Locality and Prefence of a Spirit, fo neither of the Locality and Prefence of a spiritual Body: They know not whether the now prevailing Phylolbphy be not true, that Light is a Body, and Solar Light is the emanant fubftance of the Sun it felf, whofe Center is in the Heavens : And if its very fubftance be (b extenfive as to fill all the Air betwixt Heaven and Earth, ( and more,) and if the Light of an hundred Candles can be all together in one Room, they are uncertain what are the Limits of Chrifts Spiritual Body, or whether it be either of a more ignoble nature than the Sun, or of lcfs extent: And moft of the Greek Fathers thought Spiritual Bodies (if not Spirits themfelves ) were Fire. And as our Senfe or Reafon cannot tell us whether or no there be now an Angel in this Room, fo neither can either of them tell us whether Chrifts Spiritual Body be here: This therefore they leave to God that knoweth it, and will have to be no no part of the Controverfie.

1. For the firft part, whether there be true Bread and wine after Confecration^ as many others have fully proved the affirmative, fo particularly the forefaid Author briefly hath proved it pan: all rational denyal. 1. From the S&nfes of all Mankind • an Argument fortified by twenty lubordinate convincing Arguments againft the deny-■ers of Senfe •, where the Papifts Anfwers are refuted. •2. He hath proved the Contradictions of the Dodrine of

Tran-

Tranfubftantiation. 3. He hath fhewed that the Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation afierteth one and thirty Miracles, w'xxh twenty miraculous aggr av;i 'ions . and hath fully proved from Scripture that thefe Miracles are fictitious. 4. He hath proved from many exprefs Texts of Scripture, that it is Bread after the Conjecration. 5. And alio that the Scripture it ielf doth fully teach us to expound This is my Body, as we do, and not as the Papifts do. 6. He proveth that the very nature of a Sicrament, even as Aquinas defineth it, is inconfiftcnt with Tranfubftantiation. 7. And Laftly, he proveth the Novelty ofyourDoftrine, and that the antient Writers werea-gainftit; which Albertin'ts^Pet. Molina de Novil.Pa-pifmi, the late Morning Leffures of the Nonconformists *• gainft Popery, and many others have proved at large. But thefe things our Difcourfer Rationally difjembleth, left if he Ihould antwer them it would appear to be no Rational Difiourfe. But let us hear what the Rationality is which he pretendeth to. [

His Difcourfe confifteth of three Atfertions, and their pretended Proof, and a fliort Anfwer to fome Scraps of Objection.

Hisnrft Atfertionis, that [It ispofflle to the Omnipotent Power of God, to change the fubfance of Bread and wine into the fubflance of our blefjed Saviour's Body and Blood.] And he faith,that [ This his Adverfaries generally errant.] And yet, if he know what they fay, he knoweth that they maintain that Tranfubftantiation is a Do&rine of Contradictions, and that God cannot make two Contradictories true. They eafily grant him that God can do every thing which belongeth to Power to do: Though we are not fond of his phrafe [ Omnipotent Powers ] no more than of [ wife mfdom] or l/lrong Strength] or

art At

freat

great Greatnefs,'] yet taking his meaning) we grant that Omnipotency is never {tailed with difficulties: Though God cannot lye, nor cannot hate goodnefs, nor love fin, nor make Contradictions true^ that is not for want of Power, but becaufe he is perfect: He cannot be ignorant) or evil • and he cannot chufe but be God.

I iuppofe that he taketh not Chrift's Body, though fpi-ritual, to be meerly, or properly Spirit, or ( as they /peak) immaterial h and fo that it is none of his meaning, that God can turn Bread into immaterial spirit; which yet I would not have faid that he cannot do : But it is turning one Body into another which he calleth Poffible. And that God can do this by Appofition, or Union , adding one Body to another, I cannot deny: But thefe following Contradictions we take not for Poflibilities.

i. For one Bod) to be turned into another pre* exiftent,by appofition, (the Form of the changed Body ceafing, but not the Matter;) and yet that the pre-existent Body mould not be increafed by the apportion, this is a Contradiction. As in Numbers, for two to be added to ten, and yet the Number be (till but ten, is a Contradiction: So for all the Bread that is Confecrated to lofe only its Form, and the Matter to be changed into the Body of Cktijt\ by appofition, and yet Chrifts Body to be no bigge r,is a Contradiction • unlefs fome pre-exiftent part of Chriits Body vanilh, and it be diminiflied by lofs, as much as it receiv-eth by appofition.

You fay, that h ConcoBion we our [elves turn Bread and wine into Flejb and Blood daily: But note,that the Form only of the Bread and wine ceafeth, and the Matter re-ceiveth a new Form in us, and by appofition increafeth our Fleih and Blood ; and that our bulk increafeth not al-wa.y, is becaufe fome parts vanifh, as others are added ;

and

C7)

and being in a continual Flux or Mutation, we have little, if any,of the fame Flefh and Blood this Year, that we had the lair, or a few Years ago. And doth ChrirVs Body thus change,and receive addition and diminution ? or, doth it grow bigger at the pleafureof the Pried ?

2. If you fay that this is not your ordinary belief, but that the very Matter , as well as Form of the Bread and wine ceafeth $ I add, that it is a Contradiction, that the very Matter fhould ceafe to be, and yet be changed into a-nother Body. The ceaftng of Matter is Annihilation: And to fay that it is annihilated, and yet changed into .<-nother thing, is a Contradiction: As Matter is denominated from the Form, when the Form ceafeth, the Matter ceafeth to be the Matter of that Form $ but unlefs annihilated it is ftill the Matter of another Form. For one Body to be annihilated, and another to take its place, is not for the one to be changed into the other. Annihilating andTranfubftantiating are Contradictory.

j. It is a Contradiction for Bread and Wine to be turned into ChrihVs Flelh and Blood, and made his Body, whofe Body is not FleJhyQx Blood; unlefs he have two Bodies, or one confifting of marvelous diflimilar and hete-rogeneal parts. That Chrilt's Body in Heaven is not Flefh and Blood at all,muft be-confeft by all true Expofi-tors of 1 Cor. 15.50. Flefl) and Blood cannot enter into the Kingdom of Cod. The Context flieweth that it is not Sin y but natural proper Flefh and B'ood that is there meant: And who will believe that glorified Bodies are Fle/h and Blood, whoever well considered, 1. what Flefh and Bloodily and for whatufe? 2. In what Region glorified Bodies du'ell; and that the Inhabitants are every where Connatural to their Region. 3. That the Text faith The y are Spiritual Bodies.

B And

(8)

And if ChrifYs Body in Heaven be no Flefi or Blood, and his Bodv on Earth be both . then either he hath two Bodies, or very heterogeneous parts or one.

4. It is a Contradiction to lay that there are Accidents, \\ hich are northe Accidents of any Subfbnce, (either of Breads C unit's Body, or any thing elfe:) For, Accidentis ejje eft in efje, it is relative: The forefaid Author f. 96. hath told you, 1. For Quantity a Pound, or Inch of nothing • a long, or broad, or thick nothing • a Pint, or Quart of nothing, are Contradictions. 2. For the Number of Wafers, or Cups of Wine,to put twenty, or forty, or an hundred nothings, is a Contradiction. 3. For Figure, a round, or fyuare nothing, is a Contradiction. 4. A fweet nothing • a fiarp, or auftere nothing, inftead of Wine, is a Contradiction. So an odoriferous nothing -a rough, or (mooth nothing ; a red, or a white nothing . a nothing feated on the Altar more than another place, &c, all thele are Contradictions.

5 .And he hath there fhewed you that it is a Contradiction for nothing to have real effects: for nothing really to nonrijhy and become Flefy and Blood in him that eateth it: yea, for nothing to be eaten 5 for nothing to turn to real excrements • for nothing to make a Man drunk, as Wine doth: God can do all that are works of Power, but to verifie thefe Contradictories, is no work of Power.

6. God cannot lye, faith the Apoftle, and Nature it felf-, elfe Faith had no certainty at all, the formal Object failing. To lye, is to give falfe deceiving figns of the Matter, andofthe Authors mind : And if Gods Natural Revelation to Senfe it felf be falfe, r yea to all Mens Sen-fes ; doth not that make a lye as well as a falfe Word, Prophefle, or Vifion ? God's Natural Revelations are known by all Men certainly to be his own, and fo are ft not

not the Prophetical: All know that God made Mans Senje to be the Natural pcrceiver of Qenjible Objects, that as ienfcdj they might be perceived naturally by the Intellect : And fuppofing the Objetf, Sc*fe y Intellect^ and Medium duly qualified, if new we be deceived,/; -rural Revelation raileth, or is fjlle, and we have no remedy: So that to make God's Natural Revelation to Scnfe, and by Senfe to the Intellect, to be falfe to all the found Senfesin the World, is to make God, blafphemoufly, the greateft Lyar in the World • and this God cannot be, becaufc he is God.

And now, I pray you what doth the Dsclrine of Rare-faclion and Condensation make againft any of this that I have faid ? Apply it to any one of thefe Contradictions, and try whether it will prove them no Contradictions? Though your definitions of them are ridiculous, ( xif-c, that Hare foci ion is a little ALitter under a great Quantity, and Condensation is % great deal of Matter under a little Quantity • and this you fay is the ancient and commonly received Definition ) yet this, were it fo, is nothing to our bulineis. Rarefaction maketh the Quantity of Matter no more^ but only more diffufed^ or extenfizr as to Space ; and Space and Quantity are not all one : And Cjndsnfati-on maketh not the Matter to be pf/f/i Quantity, but only to poflefs lefs Space: You mew how great a Philofo-pher you are. But dpth Rarefaction make Occidents without a Subject, or Effects without a real Can/ 5 or Muter lobe, sdded to Matter without augmenting it; or the lame Matter to be changed into other .Matter, and yet ceafeto.be the lame Matter it was y or any of the reft. And what if a Spirit, which is circumfcriptivcly .in no pb.ee, may-be faid to be d?.fiuitiir ! y,^r 0 p{rMi,%gliLin m> ny pi Ices at once ? Will you lay the fame of a Bod}', a/In

B 2

Co make Body and Spirit to be the fame I A Spirit is indi-•vifible, and ib is not Miner • but yet I make not this the Controverfie. I know not how near ChrirVs Body is to a Spirit, which is called fpiritual $ but if it be material, and yet in many places at once, it mull be by Parts • one Part in one place, and another part in another place. For a material Body not to pollefs its proper place according to its Quantity and Parts, is a Contradiction : And whatever you will fay of C firings Heavenly Body, fure you will not fay that his fuppofed Flefh and Blood is not material, or a true Body : And therefore either Chrift hath as many Bodies , or elfe as many Pieces, or Parts of one Body, as there are Confecrated pieces of Bread, perhaps many Thoufand Miles diftant from each other. Yet I will confefs to you, that as if a Thoufand vifible Apples could grow on one fpiritual, or invifible Tree, they would be all Parts of that one Tree 5 fo if you could prove,that a Thoufand material vifible Hofts are united by appofition to one fpiritual invifible Body of Chrift as Parts, they would all be Parts of that one Body • but marveloufly heterogeneal. But what's all this to the forefaid Contradictions ?

But you have recourfe to the Miracle of Chrift's incarnation, to falve the Objection fctcht from senfe: But what mean you by that ? Did you think that it is Miracles that we object againft l or that every Miracle is a Contradiction, or contrary to well-qualified Senfe ? What is there in Chrift's Incarnation, Conception, or Birth, which is a Contradiction, or againft Senje, or Reafon ? There is indeed much that is above the reach of Reafon without Revelation 5 but nothing that is againft Senfe,or informed Reafon : For, what fhould it be ? Is it impofli-ble for God to impregnate a Virgin, any more than to

• make

CO

make Eve ? Or is it impoflible for God to take a humane Nature into Union with the Divine • when as all things are Co neerly dependant on him, that he is, as they dy, i*-timior intimo mftro ? and it is harder to confute that Pla-tonift,who taketh God to be the Soul oftheUniverle, and all things to be as it were his Body and Accidents, than to prove it impoflible for him to be united too>;c What elle meant your Fanuicks, Fryar Benedicl. *4*gh in Regit!a perfect, to make it Mans perfection to believe that there is nothing but God ?

And for the Doctrine of the Trinity, it is no more a Contradiction, than to hold that the Mental Nature or Spirit is informed by a Fertue or Faculty, which is One eQenttifly, and "three refpecJively, as to the Acts and o£-jetfs, viz. The F&cult.u-vitalis-atfiva r Intelleftiva & J'o-Iitiva • or, that the [enfitive Soul hath a formal Faculty, which is One and Three, viz,. Attiva y Perce^tiva, Appeti-tiva • or., that Fire hath a Trin-une power, Motive, illuminative, ejr Calefactive, When Trinity in Vnity is imprinted on all Active Natures, will you find out a Contradiction in .it ? If it were Three Efjences, and yet hnt One Efjence • or Three Pcrjons, and yet but One Per-fon t in the fame fenfe and refpect, it were a Contradiction. And is here any deception of our well difpofed Senfes, or any Lye? Becaufe God hath many Works which furpafs the power of natural fecond Cauies, in their ordinary way of working •, and becaufe he hath many which we cannot know without fupernatural Revelation, will you thence infer that he may be the great Deceiver of the World, and may deliver Contradictions as his Truth ? As if Miracles were all Lyes and Contradictions*

You fay that Chrijl appeared to S. Mary in the fiape of a

Gardner,,

(12)

Gardner. And what of that ? Either diflana, or want of tight, or observation did hinder her from difcerning his proper Vifage, and then its nothing to our Cale • or eife he really ajjumcd a rifage different from that which 1 he had formerly feen : And if lb, here was no deception of Senfe, any more than in the apparition of an Angel . nor no more than a Masked perfon doth deceive anothers Senfe,, becauie he would not be known . nor any more than when one knoweth not his old Friend, when Age or Sicknefs hath changed him.

Pag. 4. You did with a neceffary craft pafs over your Victors Explications of the Myftery, as knowing that they do but detecl the Contradictions.

You here tell us of £ [ome of the learnedeft of the En-g/ijb Clergie (or Church) that confers the holy Euchari^ after Confccration, to be really and truly our Saviours Body, and therefore fall down before it, and adore it 5 and for this caufe difown the New Rubrick of the Common-Prajer Book, which faith } our Lords Body is in Heaven, and not on the Altar. Thefe Doctors will tell you that they aeknowledge the thin?, only they dare not be fo bold as the Romanics to determine the manner. And one of the learnedeft of them, Mr. Thorndike, asks, why cannot onr Saviour appear to us in what jhape he pleafeth, in the jhape of a Gardner, or if it fo pleafe him, in the [kape of Bread and wine ? ]

To which I anfwer, 1. That New Rubrick is but the Old reftored : So you call our Religion New. 2. Thole may well pafs with you for the mo ft learned, who pleafe you belt, while you confer Degrees. 3. Such as you teach men to refute Kneeling at the Receiving of the Sacrament, (as one oi you that is mentioned in the Life of Biihop Hall) by thus perfwading men, that the Englifli Clergv believe Tranliibftamiation, and adore according-

ly. 4. Either you (peak true or falfe of the le.vncr-the Engl/jh derate : liftlje, it is an ill ihelter for j other Falihoods : If true> what regard ihouId we have of the judgment of fuch Clergy-men, as declare their Ajjent and Consent to all things contained in and prefcri-bed by the Book of Common-Prayer) and Articles of Religion, and yet dtfown the Rubrick, and believe Trxnfuh-ftantiation, and adore the Eucharifl as chrijis Body ? Why do you not call fuch the Roman Clergie, rather than the EngL\h clergie, if they differ from you but only in a want" of boldness to determine the manner, while they acknowledge the thing 1 What if a Bilhop Bramhall will have the Pope to be Principium Unitatis . and take Gro-t'ws to be of the mind of the Church of England, (who would have Rome to be the Miftrels Church, and the Pope the Univerfal Governour, according to the Canons of Councils^even the Council of Trent h ) muft we therefore itoop to fuch mens judgment? Or might you not as well tell us, that CaJJander, or Milctcrim, yea or Bellarmine } were of your mind ? And whats that to us ?

Your lecond AfTertion is [_lf our Saviour would have left us his facred Body and Blood, in^ead of all the Sacrifices of Sheep andOxen^ under the Mofaical Di r penations, to be offered up by Ghriftian Priejfs, and to bf fed upon by the Chriflian People, it would have been a favour worthy of his exceffive love to mankind, by reafon of the innumerable benefits) &c.

An\w. 1. If he had only left us his Body and Blood, he had not deceived all mens Senfes, nor impofed any Contradictions on our Faith.

2. If he had done fo, his choice would have taught us to take it for a benefit, becaule his Wildom is fitted todifcern, and to denominate it.

(H)

j. To leave us that Body which was true fie ft and Bloody capable of breakings jhedding, fain, and death, is one thing ; and to give us his glorified Body y is another tiling: This is not capable of breaking, fhedding, pain, or death, being a (piritual, immortal, incorruptible Body. Therefore indeed, the Eucharift is chrift s Body and Blood reprefentative, but not of fuch a Body as he hath now glorified, but fuch as was truly Flelh and Blood, which he once offered •, the benefits of which Sacrifice are really given us in and by the Eucharift. But to have left us a Body to be broken and flain, which cannot be flain, and Fleft and Jflood which is not Fleih and Blood, but fpi-ritual, is a Contradiction. But if Chrift have two Bodies, or one confifting of parts fpiritual, glorified, and of real Flefli and Blood, then indeed one part of this may be ftill a Sacrifice.

4. But taking it (as you here do) abftra&edly from Gods Will, and as in it felf confidered • what reafbn can you give us, why Chrifi's true offering of himfelf in Sacrifice once for all, fhould not be as great a Benefit and Love-Token, as our offering him daily t The holy Scripture (ffeb. 10. 14. telleth us, that \^by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are janffified~\ and v. 10, ii, 12. that by the mil of God we are fanclified through the once offering of the Body of Jefus Chrift: and every Priefl ftandeth daily miniftring^ and offering oftentimes the fame Sacrifices, which can never take away fins; but this Man after he had offered one Sacrifice for fins, for ever fate down on the right-hand of God."] But you will tell us what a benefit it would be to offer Chrift often ? Doyou really break, wound, hurt,and kill him in your offering, or do you not? If not, how is it a Sacrifice? and how is he the flain Lamb of God that taketh away

the

the fins of the World ? And what Sacrificing, or fatis-fti&ory life can it have, to be offered without breaking, hurt, or death? Is it a livings ox dead Body of Chrift that you offer? If'a living Body unhurt^ it is none of'the Sacrifice the Scripture mentioneth of Chriil: And how is it propitiatory for fin ? If it. be a dead Body y was it ever alive? If not, 'tis not Chrift's: If yea, who kille tb him I And if it be his living, glorified, impaffible Body that you offer, how unlike is that to Chrift's offering ? And why calleth he the Bread and wine, his Bodj and Blood, which a glorified Body is not ? It's molt evident that Chrift fpeaketh of his Offering Body^ and not of bis glorified Body that cannot fuffer: And if lb, lliall we tell God what a benefit it would be to /*•, if every Pried may become as the Jews, the killer of Jefus Chrift ; that he may break his real Fleih, and let out his real Blood ? Chrift did not this himlelf. He contented to be killed, but he killed not himlelf. And what Man of Senfe can doubt but he fpeaketh of a Reprefentative Body, and Blood at his laft Supper, when his real Body was not broken, nor flain, nor his Blood, till after ; unlefs Chrift had two Bodies, one firft killed by himfelf, and eaten by his Difciples -, and the other killed after by the Jews.

I marvel whether any Papift believe in his Confcience, that Peter y and John, and the reft,did believe at that Supper, that they did eat Chrift's real Pleih, and drink his Blood ? What, they that did not underftand before his Refurreclion that'-he w r as to dye as a Sacrifice for fin, and rife again, though he oft told it them ? For fo ex-prefiy faith the Text, John 12. 16. Luke 18. 31,51, 33,34. and 24. 20, u. If it had been believed by them, why is there no mention of any of their wonder at iiich a Miftery, as that their Saviour lhould at once be in their

C Belly,

EcMy, and in tfteir- fight ? I caw- fcarce believe that Mar* that faith hebelievctfh thnt they believed that then they did eat Chrift's very Flefli and Blood. But perhaps fome of you will take up a late ftart Conceit, that Chrift at his Iaft Supper did not ce,'ebr.--ie,but only institute that Sacrament: which I am afhamed to (lay to anfwer.

For our parts, we take it for- a greater mercy that Chrift doth reconcile us to God, and- put away our fins, by once offering himfelf in Sacrifice, inftead of the old Sacrifices that muft be often repeated, than if he had bid us kill, or break, or offer his real Body and Blood often. And we take it for a greater mercy that we may d uly offer this Reprefentative Body and Blood, and Commemorative Sacramental Sacrifice, than to have broken the real Body of Chrift our felves daily, and med his Blood. But I wonder not that they that can believe, or take on them to do it in fpite of all Mens Senses, can do it alfo in fpight of Scripture, Reafon, and Conscience t

Iconfefs there is fomething in what you fay, p.j. It would have been an incentive to munificence in adorning Churches with the richefl Gold and pretious Stones ? and whatever elfe that*s rare and fplendid7 and alio to enrich and magnifie the /V/W/.thatcan inftrumentally make God of Bread, and Sacrifice him when he hath done h or fet him on the Altar, or keep him in a Box. But to the entertaining of Chrift into the heart by Faith and Love, a Reprefentative Sacrifice feemeth more meet for us to exercife: And Chrift faid to Thomas, hlefjed are they that have not feen, and have believed.

Your third Affertion is, that [ The Bread and wine in the holy Ettckarift, are by the Omnipotent Power of God actually, and indeed changed into the Body and Blood of our blef-•ed SavhurJefmCbri fi.

Anfw>

Ci7)

Anfw. This is to the ptirpofe if it be' but proved. But, alas, where is the Proof? Why you give us iuch as you have, and we can expect no better from you. You fay {_ This mas the Univerjal Beliefof-the chri'fun world in the ninth Century."] How prove you that ? Very eaft* ly in your own conceit 5 ziz. lay you £ It . • evident fy the Tejiiwom of nil the Writings of that 5*g<.,| and by the Uni-verjal Tejlimony of the tenth Age • nor do oar A.iverJ-trics deny it."]

A;;Jn\ 1. All thefe three are falfe: Neither all the Writings of the ninth Age, nor the Univerfal Tcltimo-ny of the tenth, faith it 5 and your Adverfaries do deny it.

2. But was there not fome lorry neceflfity that put you to begin your Proof lb low as nine, or ten hundred Years after Chrilt? Methinks you Ihould have feared , lelt this

yiflxLb have opened all the deceit.

3. Your Adverlaries challenge you to nunc one Book that ever fo much as named Tranlubltantiation, before one Stephanie fcduenfis after the Year, nco, which was neither in the ninth, nor tenth Century, and vet you have not done it to this day* and yet go on to talk at this rate. And they challenge you to name one General Council that ever determined for. either Narks or Tin, (that the Bread and Win:; are changed into the very Body and Blood of Chrift, and are no. longer true Bread and Wine j before the Council at the I+at-erane m^ome^ under Inncc.^. Anno^ 1215. which furew as neither the ninth, nor tenth Century. Can you givers no earlier proof that ever any Conncil mentioned it (when Councils are your Religion) and yet deceitfully talk with confidence as you do ?

4. But fupnor e the twelfth Century^ or thirteenth, had

C 2 been

cm

been the tenth. let us hear your Inference; You fay, £ Then it mufi necefjarilj be taught in the firfi Age by the Apoftles } to their firfi Converts over all the world ^ andcon-fequently be mofi certainly true : For it cannot be doubted but that tne firfi Converts did underfl and what was taught them, believe and efleem it as highly nece[j..ry to them and their Children^ — Then none can doubt tut that they could and would and did teach the very fame Doctrine which they fo highly esteemed^ eye.

Anfw. Thus- iome over-wife Pcrfonscan fit in their Clofets ? and tell from moir real Caufes, what^nc doubt 9 \vas done in all Ages of the World : And why can you not as infallibly prophefie from fuch Caufes, what will be done, and fo get the reputation of a wife Man indeed ? As one that would infallibly foretel that his Party fhould conquer in a certain Battel, becaufe they were, Men that loved themfel ves and their Country, and therefore would not wilfully deltroy, or defert both $ and therefore would not run away-r For they know that more are killed when they fiye, than when they ftand to it; and if they do not run, the Enemy will, as ordinary Experience fheweth ; ergo they rauft needs conquer. But when he. was asked why all the fame things might not be faid of theEne-mies,and when he fhortly heard, defaclo^ that the Enemy had got the day, his great Argument was i unanfwerably confuted; But let us come to the tryal.

i. I will better argue from your Medium^againft you : The far greater!: part of Ohriftians in the World are a-gainft Tranfubftantiation at this day ^ therefore fo were their Fore-fathers, and their Fore-fathers, till you come up to the Apoftles..

That it is fo at this day requireth no better Proof than to have more knowledge in theftate of the World,, or

more

C«$0

more lionefty in reporting it than you have. Pag. if. you fay Q Tie whole World formerly^ in a manner^ Pa except a handful of Jews is now become Chr/(lian.~] Holder, Is this Man like to tell you what all the ChriiHan World held,in former Ages, from fuch a Medium as their latter Belief, that can no better tell what the Chriitian World is ? Look over the Globe, or Map of the World, and let this Man tell you which be the Countries that are Chriftian • and then take the Mcafure there of their Proportion your ft If. Or to lave you the labour, read any credible Author that reporteth it. Brienxood in his Eur quirics, one of the beit, tells us, after the naming of the leveral Countries of each Religion, that if you divide die Known World into Thirty Parts, nineteen are Pagan Idolaters, fix are Mahometans, and rive arc Christians of all forts: But this Man is not afliamed to fay, that, exceft a h.vjdftdof 'Jews, the wbo'e jvorld w a manner P>-~ gan, is new bee:?n: Christian. All the Pagans of A t rica y and America^ and Afia^ and all the Mahometans are nothing to him ; even rive fixth parts of the Known World. And, alas, how little probability is there that the term incegnits, the vaft unknown Regions, mould be Chriitian: fure if they were governed by the Pope, he would know them. He that can Tranfubftanniate all the Pagans, and Mahometans on Earth, into Chrihhans ?, and make Men believe that five parts of fix of Mankind are now of a Religion which they partly know not, and partly abhor, may not difpair hence to prove Tranluftanti-ation* But how many of this fixth part of the World are Papijls ? A Biihop Bromhall faith, that about the fifth part of the Chriftians of the World are Papifts: Others think about a fourth part, not meafuring by the large-nefs of their Dominions (for few in the King of Spain's

Weft-

("20)

weft-Indies are Chriftians ) but by the Number of Pro feflors. But the moft that ever I knew any underftand-ing impartial reckoner allow them, is to be the third part of Chriftians; comparing them with the AbaJines,Cop-ties, Syrians, Armenians, Gregorians, the Greek-church, and Muscovites, and all the Protectants, &c. And when the Empire of Abaft ia was greater by many Kingdoms, and the Kingdom of Nubia was not revolted, and many great Countries of the Greek Religion were not yet turned Mahometans, the Papifts were proportionably much lefs a part than now. And though moft of thefe will fay, as we do,thatthe Bread and Wine are Chrift's Fleih & Blood (not which is in Glory, but which iv.rs Sacrificed for us on Earth ) yet few, if any, of all thefe do hold real Traniub-ftantiation. If he fay the contrary of them, Travellers, and Authors enow of their own can confute him: (How ihamefully they have changed the Mthiopick Liturgie, as to their (enfe 3 by the altering of one word Biihop Ufier hath (hewed from the true Copies $ and by fuch tricks they can, by a Printer, make all the World Papifts: and I would the Pope had no other fort of Subjects to uphold his Monarchy, than fuch as are fo made.)

I appeal now to any impartial reafon, whether I may not better argue againft Tranfubftantiation, becaufe two or three parts of the Chriftian W r orld are againft it, than he can argue for it, becaufe a third ox fourth part are now for it, or were fo in the twelfth, or the tenth Century.

But perhaps he will fay, that tley are of the fame Religion that they ever vcere, but Jo are not the Proteflants. . I aniwer, i. The Proteftants will not undertake that none of their Anceftors from the beginning were in this, or other points, erroneous: If the Papifts will, it is fuitabJe to their other undertakings: But that we are of the fame

Reli-

Religion which all true Chriftians were of from the beginning, the [iime B.ipt/Jm, the fame Creeds the Cam :.. ..' -Prayer and Decalogue, and the fame Scriptures, owned, fliew: and the Lords-Supper Adminiftred in the fame words as Chrift and his Apoftles and the ancient Churches did. 2. But if the Proteftants had not been of the fime Faith with their Anceftors^ what's that to the reft that are more than all the Panifts ? It's notable to read in their Godhnw ae rebm Ai^fjiinerum^ how an old Woman ( the Emperors Mother) eonfuted,or baffled the Learned papift that came with Oiic.w to pervert them to the Pope; by pleading the Tradition of their Fore-fat' that had delivered them their Religion, and never told them of the Pope. And how tenacious the Greeks are of their Religion as received from their Fathers, their very ftitfnefs againft the Roman Infertion of [_Fiuoq h ] into the Creed, fiifficiently iheweth. 3. hut that really the Papifts are Innovators,and have changed the old Religion in this Point,as \\ e have oft fully proved out of Antiquity^ io we need no other Proof than the exprefs words of'Scripture • which (to pal's by the reft) in one Chapter in the three next Verfes 1 Cor. 11. 26, 27, 28,) doth three times call it Q Bread ] after Confecration. And I never met with a Writer fo impudent as dare deny but their leaving out the Cup to the Laity in the Lords-Supper is a change from the antient Practice of the Church. And yet will this Medium ferve our Rational Difcourfer ; The prefect church 'caret h out the Cup*, ergo fo did their Fore-fathers^ and fo did the Apoftles ? And let him tell me, with the Face of a Man, if he can, whether he think in his Confcience that our Anceftors, or the firft Converts of the Apoftles, were not more likely to underhand and remember vphether the Bread and Cup

were

were both delivered by the Apoftles, or the Bread alone, than to underfland and remember in what fenfe it was that the Bread and Wine was called Chrift's Body and Blood.

In fum, i. We believe that all true Chriftians have the fame Religion which was firft received from the Apoftles. 2. We are fure that they kept not all the fame Purity, and Integrity of that Religion- As fome fell quite away to Paganifm, and Mahumatanifm, and fome to Arrianifme, and other Herefies 5 fo fome that fell not fo far, fell to lefler Errors. 3. And we do undertake to prove, contrary to this Difcourfer, that the generality of the Churches for many Ages, and the maft of the Chri-ftian World to this day, held not, and hold not Traniub-ftantiation.

II. I farther ufe his own Argument againft him; At this day, the greateft part of the Churchy by far, and in the fourth Century, that which they themfelves call the Universal Churchy denyed the Pope's Primacy ( much more his Soveraignty) to be of Divine Inftitution : Therefore fo did the firft Converts of the Apoftles. If the Conie-quence be good in your Cafe, it is much more in this. 1. You falfty feign all the Church to have been for Tran-fubftantiation, but I (hall undeniably prove what I urge them for, as being againft the Divine Inftitution of the Romm Primacy. 2.And this is a Point likelier to be commonly underftood and remembred, than the meaning of the words [ Body and Blood,] I prove the Antecedent.

1. That moft Chriftians now are againft it, is a matter of Fad commonly known : Two or three parts of the Chriftian World being no Subjects of the Pope at all, viz. Thofe before mentioned. 2. That in the fourth and fifth Century the Church was of this judgment, ap-

peareth

peareth by the raoft exprefs words of one of the four Great General Councils, even that at C&lcedon, which faith, C Definitions [anctorum Patrum [eqnentes ubiq^ & Regulam, & que nunc relecia font 150 Deo amxntijfimo-rum Epifcoporum, qui Congregate \11nt fub pit memori* Im-peratore majore Tkcodofio in Regit Civitate Conftantmop, nova Roma, Cognefcentes & nos eadem dcfintvimus de pri-vilegio ejufdem fanc/ijj. Conjlantinop, Ecclefi.e, nov* Romx: Etenim fedi Jeniwis Rom.e.propter Imperium frvitatis iUim , Patres confequenter privilegia reddiderunt: ejr eadem intent ione promoti 150 Deo amantiff. Epifcopi *qua fani'tif-ftm* fedi nov£ Rom* pnvilegia tribuerunt, rationahtliter judic antes Imperio cjr fenatu urbem or n at am aqu/s fenioris Regit Rom£ privileges frui7\ that is [_ " We following " alway the definitions of the holy Fathers and the Ca-" non, and knowing thofe things which now have been " read of the 15 o Bilhops moft beloved of God, that were u Congregated under the Emperour, of pious memory, " Tbeodo/ius, the greater, in the Royal City, Conflantino-<c pie, New Roweyhwe our felves alio defined the fame " things concerning the Priviledges of the fame moft ho-" ly Church of Confiantinoplc^ New Rome : For, to the lc Seat of Old Rome, becaufe of the Empire of that City, "the Fathers confequently gave the Priviledges: And "the 150Bilhops moft beloved of God, being moved " with the fame intention, have given equal Priviledges u to the moft holy Seat of New Rome . reafonably judg-" ing that the City, adorned with the Empire and Sen ite, " (lull enjoy equal Priviledges with Old Regal Rome ]

Here you fee, 1. That two of the four greatelt General Councils concur. 2. That they profefs herein to follow the old Definitions, and Rule. 3. That they conclude that Romes priviledges were given it by the Fathers.

4. And that becaufe of the Imperial Seat. 5. And there-tore they give equal priviledges to Conjhntinofle.

The Teitimony is fuch as nothing but impudent violence can put by: either they (peak true^or not: If not^then how come two of the greateft General Counoils fo quickly to falfifie the Tradition of the Apoftles ? Did they not understand what their Fathers had delivered to them ? or did they difefteem it, or forget it ?

Ifthey'fpake truth, (as they did J you fee that Rome hath no priviledges, or primacy, from God's tnftitution, but (like Canterbury} in our Empire by the Princes and Fathers Gift.

Which is ib fure, that he muft put off common Ingenuity ,that confiderately will deny it-, having not only this Testimony of two Grand Councils.) but the continued opinion of all the Greek-Churchy even before their divifi-on from the Roman: For, let any Man rationally Anfwer me this Argument. {The whole Greek-Church knew that a Divine Invitation wis to be preferred before a Humane : The whole Greek-Church knew thAt Constantinople was not by Divine , but by Humane Institution^ m.ide Patriarchal or equal with Rome, and yet were for its Patriarchate and equality , if not priority : Therefore the whole Greek-Church j'tdged Romes Patriarchate and Primacy to be of Humane^ and not of Divine Injtitution. I havelarglier proved this elfewhere.

IIT. I give you another Argument with your own Medium. [ The Universal church in the time of theCoun-cils o/Conftance and Bafil, judged that a Pope might be a wicked Heretick, and as fuch be deposed • and that it is de fide, that Con-nils have power fo fo do : ErgOythis was the Doctrine of toe Apo[lles to their Convert s7\ And yet the Councils at the Liter a /rf-under Leo the Tenth, and Florence^

(25)

re nee ,determine that the Pope is above a Council. What Self-contradiftors now do you make the Apoftles to be ? How could the Councils of Bafil and Cvnftance believe that Councils are above the Pope, and that he may be a fallible wicked Heretick, unlets they had received it down from the Apoftles? And how could the Councils at the Litterane^ and Florence, judge the contrary, unlels they had received it down from the Apoftles ? Will neither Reafon nor Experience make you amamed of cheating the World by fuch filly Inferences?

IV. But yet I will come nearer you; The fame General Council at the Ltter/we, fab Innoc. :. which tirft decreed for the Belief of Tranfubftanti.uion, did in the very next Canon and words, decree, That all Temporal Lords mould exterminate from their Dominions all iiich, as Hereticks, that denyed this Tranfubftantiation h and if they did not exterminate them, lliould be excommunicate by the Pope ; and if yet they did it not, the Pope lliould depofe them,, and ablblve their Vaflals from their Allegiance, and give their Dominions to another. Now either they had this by Tradition from their Anceftors, and lb from the Apoftles, or not: If not, whv mould you dream that the Council had the fecond Canon from the Apoftles j, and not the third? If yea: Then, i. We fee what we muft expect from your Religion: The King muft exterminate all Protectants (and other Decrees far, Burn them) orelle be depoicd himfelf. To exterminate us ail, will bealmoftto depofe himfelf. Kind Sir, whither Hiall we all go? or who mall burn fa many ? It will be a greater Incendinm than that of London\ or South-vcark : And who ihall be the Kings Subjects ? Who mall Plant England anew? The French, Spaniards, or //. titans ? But wliat if in this fortunate Ifland the) a![o mould

D 2 awa-

C 2<* )

awaken and turn Proteftants $ mufi; the King be to feek for new Planters to be his Subjects ?

As Bene diet us spixo[a r who affaulted the Scripture, did at once alfo affault all Civil Government • and taught men, that he that could get the Crown had beft right to it i, and that a Man may kill any that ftand in the way of his defires, and break any Vows when they are againlt. thofe defires (which are his Intereft, ) God mercifully ib ordering it, that he that will depefe Chrift, mall with him be permitted to depofe all Kings and Governours • Even foGod in mercy to preferve Princes, in theirwits, from turning Papifts, hath permitted the fame Men that firft by Council, condemned common Senfe, and made God the deceiver of Senfe, and of the Worlds and new brought Tranfubftantiation into the Faith, to make a Decree alfo ( fuch as never Turks, or Canniballs made ) That all Men that will not renounce all their Senfes (that isj> their animality, and their humanity) (hall be exterminated-, and all Princesdepofed that will have fuch (as renounce not humanity) for their Subjects.

Several things are faid to this, by Men that think that if they do but open their Mouths, and fpeak, though it it be to prove that Murder is Mercy and Piety, they have conquered.

i. Say fome, Tou fee the King of France^ nd others , do not[o. Anfw. i. \ithey may be good Cxtbo'icksthzx. re-bell againft the Pope and a General Council, why may not we ? 2.1 fpeak not of what any of you do, but what your very Religion bindeth you to do : Are not Councils your objective Religion? By the fame Lavp And Religion then, that Tranfubftantiation was firft. decreed, if it rule in England, we are all in Law exterminated, or dead Men ( except the Papifts) or clfe the King muft be no King.

Can

(27)

Can you fay in Confcience that your Anceftors had this from the Apoftles ? If you will, let Kings, that love your Tradition, take it.

a.Butfome fay,thatthefe were no Decrees of the Council, becaule they were but propofed in haite by Pope Innoc. and not patted by the Council. This help Bilhop Taylor, Bilhop Gunning, and Bilhop Pi-rfon ^ in kindneis, would give the Papifts ; but unthankful Men will not accept it: And therefore the Anfwerers to Bilhop Gunning and Bi&QP ficrfan prove the contrary, as Mr. Dodwem hath unanfwerably done lately at large:And what ever it was in it felf, it was a General Council to the Papifts, and is part of their Religion, who number it with the approved ones. And Math. Pans faith but this, that Q many Decrees were propofed, or brought in by the Pope, which fome Hied, andfome dijliked~] and yet the Major Vote might pals them: See alio Nancler,Gcn 41. an. 12 I 5. Gode frid ad An. 121}. Platin, in Vit. Innoc. f.

3. Others fay, that thefe were but Decrees of Practice and Difcipline, and not de fide • and therefore the Pope is not here Infallible, nor his Council neither. But Men that will not take a found of Words for their Eftates, Lives, and Souls, may foon anfwer this. 1. That though there be many things to be believed, that are not to be done - yet there is nothing to be done but what we mult firft believe that it may, or mufi be done. When it is laid, Thou (halt love God and thy Neighbour 5 it is included, that, Thou muft believe it thy Duty to love God and thy Neighbour : So he that faith |" Hereticks mail be exterminated, and Temporal Lords that will not do it ihall be depofed, and their Dominions given to others ] doth include, that [ To do fo is a Duty, or Lawful at leaft.~\ Sure it is not confeffedly decreed that the Pope ihall fin,

("28)

ot 4 that Temporal Lords lhall be dcpoled by him for anything but fin, in their Affertion.

2. If you grant that a Pope and General Council are Fallible about Duty and Sin, even in depofing Princes, and diffolving their Subjects Oaths of fidelity, how lhall we know that they are Infallible in matters of Faith ? He that is deceived in faying, Thou muftobey the Ten Commandments, may be deceived in faying, Thou flialt believe the Creed: If we cannot be fure by the Churches Propofal that God is to be loved • how fliall we that way be fure that he is to be Lelicved, and that the Scripture is bis word. And if the Pope may excommunicate and de-pofe Princes,and change Dominions by errour h how can I be fure that he may not lay by errour, that this Bread is no Bread, and this Wine is no Wine.

3. Is it only matter of Faith, and not matter of Fact that you have by fure Tradition ? Is not matter of Fact (as ChrifiVs Birth, Death, Refurre&ion, and Afcention) alio matter cf Faith ? And is not this in quertion a matter of Fact, viz. Whether, de facto, the Apojrles told the firjl Converts^ that Bread after Confecration was no Bread, and that this was the meaning of ChriiVs words [ This is my Body ] which you aflfert ? And it's matter of Pratt ice that Men mull receive it in this ihnie. But if the Council may be deceived in this, and make (uch Laws for ruining Princes and Nations,which yet they were never taught by their Fore-fathers- why may not the fame Men lay [ Bre td is no Bread ] without being taught it by their Fore-fathers.

4. Will you give it us under your hand, that this Council and Pope did err in this, and are not to be obeyed, that Princes may have fo much notice of your trufti-ncis ? But what Council hath ever fince declared that

this

this Pope and Council erred in this j name it me if you can? No, they will be guilty of no fuch Contradictions as (hall fignifie repentance and amendment.

5. In the mean time, is not the Pope and bis C by this Decree, declared Enemies to all Proteftant Princes, and People \ What can any proclaimed Hoftility do more^, than thus by your higheit pow er to Decree Extermination of all the Peopleyind Depofition of their Lords' And is not he to be taken and uled as* a Publick ProfeiTed Enemy, who foprofeflfethhimfelf? Are you not all virtually in continual Arms -igainJt us, who make the Decrees of fuch Councils your Religion ?

V. And why might not an Arnan have argued as you do, when they had their General Councils, and the World groaned to find it {elf turned Arrian y faith a Father? Might they not at Ariwinum and Ftrmium have laid;, How can we believe it y unless our Fathers had it from trie Apojlles ? And I fuppofe you know ( elfe Sondi-us will tell you ) that the Arruns pretend as confidently. to Tradition as the Papifts do. And your own Dionrf. Petaviw hath cited lb great a Number of the antienteft Fathers and Writers, who fpeak words too plainly favouring of, or fivouring Arrianifm, as will tell any Man that their pretenfe is not without iuch a colour of proof, as is as plaufible as any you can bring for the Tradition of Tranfubftantiation at the lead.

VI. I pray you tell us which way was Traniubftanti-ation delivered down from the Apoftles ? By writing, or without-book^ ly word alone ? If by Writing, are not thole writings yet extant ? And cannot we read them as well as you? You tell us that all the Writings of the ninth, or tenth Age (hew it ( which is falfe.) But if the Writings of the firft eight hundred years (hewed not the

lame .

(3°)

fame thing to them^ how did they know it ? If by bare words^ can you make your (elf believe that b*re yvords^ and Memory , will as furely convey down from Age to Age, the Myfteries of Faith, as written Records will do ? Do you not daily find, that if Men are but to repeat a Sermon, yea a few Sentences^ how apt they are to alter, or omit, or add fome words which alter the whole fenie ? I feldom hear a Sermon reported, but fomewhat of it is mif-reported ! yea, we can fcarce have a matter of Facl; reported without great diverfity and mif-reports • which makes the common reports of Perfons, and Things, in City and Country;, to be fo full of falihood, and uncertainty. Mens Memories are flippery, and the alteration of a word, may make the matter another thing. Send but your Servant to do a meflage, or bufinefs for you , by bare word and memory • and at another time Write him down all that he mall fay, or do 5 end try which way will occafion more miftake i Why do you keep your Bonds, Bills, Covenants, Leaies, Deeds, and Teftaments in Writing elfe, and do not truft them to Mens Memories ? Why are our Laws Written, and Court Records kept, if Memory will keep them better? Had we no Books, or Records, one Lawyer would fay one thing, and another, another things and there would be nothing but uncertainty and confufion. Why do fo many Preachers ufe Sermon Notes ? Why do you caufe all your Mafs, even the Hoc e(l Corpus meum to be read out of a Book, and truft not your Mafs-Priefts to repeat them by Memory ? Befides, that, Men Write more deliberately, and accurately ,than ufually they fpeak-, and their fenfe is eafilier tryed, and reviewed. Where Mens Life and Death lyeth on it, Phyficians will hardly truft their Memories with all their Remedies h nor fend one to the Apothecaries without

a writ-

a written Bill, left the miftake of a word, or Dofij prove Death.

VII. And I ask you farther, Is all the reft of your Religion delivered, only, ormofi certainly >hy word of Month and Memory, or rather by Books ? Are not the Decrees of allyjur approved General Co/tncils for Faith and Practice your Religion \ And are not thefe written in Books ? Have Caranza, Cra 1 , Surius, Nicotines, Binius, the great and many Volumns of the French Edition, and ill the reft, been all written in vain? Do all your Lay-Papifts, or all your Priefts, or any of them carry all thefe in their Memories to a word ? Or are they there as lure as in your Books ? Doth Verbal Tradition now deliver down your Religion ? Nay, do you not Write your very Confcfions and Creeds ? If all your Books were burnt, would not your Religion be greatly changed, while much of the Decrees of Councils would be forgotten? and O what contention and confufion about them would there be?

VIII. But if all your Religion was lo currantly delivered by word of Mouth by Fathers to their Children, what made the ancient Doctors pals by the fame things in their Writings?, when their Writings were purpofely to tell their Readers what was the Chriftian Religion, and the reafons of it •, would they leave out that in their deliberate Writings, which every Child was taught by his Parents?

iX.But what mean you to talk of all Parents delivering it to their Children? Do you mean all Priefts, or all Lay-men ? U Priefts had children, it's like they were Married 5 And had you then the Celibate of Priefls by Tradition from the Apoftles ? If you mean Laymen, would you make Men believe any Story you tell them, contrary to the experienc of their daily Convcrfe ? Do we not fee

E that

that the far greater! part of Men, both among Papifts, Greeks, and Proteftants, have too lktle f;nie, or under-ftanding of Religion, to be accurate keepers of the lenle of Scripture ? Try your own followers in Ireland^ Spain, Italy, yea, or France, whether the generality of the Common People teach their Children, or understand themlelves, what a Sacrament is •, though your Induftry may teach them to Cant out inch words as you would have them lay in oppofition to the Proteftants. When we have much ado to get moft of the Vulgar to endure to be Catechited themfelves, and to understand the very Creed, and Principles of Christianity ^ do you fuppofe them competent preiervers of the myfterious lenle of fuch words as we are Controverting ?

X. And if Tradition without Writing be fo fure, how cometh Tradition to be lb contrary ? The Millenaries pretended to Tradition from St. John 7 . Moft of the Writers of the firft 300 Years feem for them. Yet I think you will fcarce confefs that this was indeed the Doctrine. of any Apoftles.

XI. How long did the Opinion and Practice of Infants Communion prevail in the Church? Doth it follow therefore that they had it from the Apoftles? Why then do you difufe it ?

XII. The Practice of not adoring, kneeling on any Lords-day in the Year, or any Week-day between Epfter and whit^ontUe, was indeed called the Practice of the Univerfal Church, and an Apoftolical Tradition 5 and was Decreed in the firft General Council at N'ice , Can, 20. If they had not this from the Apoftles, how prove you that your Tranfubftantiation is from them ? Iftjiey had, why have you changed an Apoftolical Univerfal Practice ?

XUL And

(33)

XIII. And if it was the Common Belief of the Church, why did never General Council mention it till 1215 Years after Chrift's Birth ? Was it becaufe it was commonly known ? So were the Articles of Faith which the* do mention : And lure it is the Common Faith which they are to preferve and deliver. Unlels the}' were negligent or forgetful, it was becauie no fuch thing was then believed.

XIV. The ancient Churches profefled that their Creed contained all the necetfary Articles of the Chriftian Faith: And when Hereticks obfeured fome of them, they put the Expofition of them into their after Creeds. If Tran-fubitantiation then was a necetfary Article of Faith, how came it to be left out of all the Creeds ?

XV. The fecond Council at Nice held Angels to be Corporeal, and that Images were not to be worshipped with Latrix: Yet Aqmnas^ md many others of you, as to the Image of Chrijt and the Crofs, dillent from them in the latter •, and the generality in the former : Had they thefe then from the Apoftles, or not ?

XVI. Doth one of your General Councils, ( e.g. that at Ti •»;,) fignifie all the Chriftian World? 1. When they are oft but a few Men (not fifty fometimes) and when one County or Diocets with us hath more Learned Men. 2. When they are a Fadion packt by the Pope, and his Agents. 3. When we know that it is ufually the Pope, Prince, or Arch-Bilhop, or Men of Power, that chufe the Members, though molt of the Clergy be oft for others, or have no choice. 4. When all the Papifts that lend to your Councils are not part the third part of Chriftians, and the far greateft part have no Delegates there. 5. When we know that a few Mens Intereft, and Speeches in fuch Aflemblies ufe to carry away the

E 2 moft.

moft. 6. When we know that they Life to differ among thcmfclves, and fometime carry a Caule but by a few Votes: And how fhall we be fure that if ninety fay one thing, and one hundred lay the contrary , that the ninety did not as well underftand the Tradition of their Forefathers as the hundred? 7. And when we, know that. Men are oft in Council bnrn down by fears, or hopes, or fair words, and repent when they come home, as the. Creeks did after the Council at Florence. 8. Yea, when . we know that they fometime fall into inhumane Fewds,, yea^ and fight it out to Blood • as the Cafe of Diofcortu againft Flavians proveth. And is this a certain* Tradi^ tion of what w r as delivered by the Apoftles ?

Indeed Baptifm,the Creed, Lords-Prayer, Decalogue,, and the Eucharift have been delivered down by certain Tradition • But fo hath not every Controverne about, them, nor in particular^ .the Doclrine of Tranfubftan-tiation.

XVII.' Read but Pet. MoUham de Nov it ate Papifmi^. or but the N on-con for mifts late Morning Lectures on that. Point ; and you will fee how the Papifts have innovated in Religion^ and all their Errours proved Novelties: And fhall we think that fuch changers have kept Tranfubftan-tiation as from the Apoftles, that,could not keep one half the sacrament it feIf which they delivered them ?

XVIII. How fhall the ignorant know whether this Vim fay true? that moft Books^ and moft Men were for. Tranfubftantiation in the.ninth and tenth Centuries? The time is paft, and the Men are dead: Muft he know it. by the Books of thofe Ages, or by the Teftimony of this Age ? If by their Books, 1. How fhall he that hath read their Index expngatorim y and known their corrupting of Authors, be fure that thofe are not corrupted ? or

many

(35)

monV of them as very Forgeries, as Merc at or s Decretals, and abundance of Spurious Writings ? fo proved by Cook, Blonde!!, Rivet, Ujher, and many more. Is it necefla-ry to Salvation that the Vulgar (yea, or the PrieftsJ have Co much skill in Hiftory as to know which way moil Men went for fo many Ages paftj in the Expofition of fuch a Text of Scripture ? What Man can tell now what mind molt of the World are of in feveral Myfteries, and Contrqyerfies between you and us? Who can tell how to take their Votes ? Much le's can every illiterate Man know what mind moft Men were of in former Ages -, and leaftof all to be able critically to judge of the Evidence, and what Authors are fpurious and corrupted,and what found. 2. Nay, whoever put lb much Cofmo-graphy into the Creed before you, or made it neceilary to Salvation,toknow that there is fuch a Place as Rome in the World ? 3. If Books muft decide that Cafe for the ninth and tenth Century, why not for the former alto ? And have not we all thofe Books as well as you? And yet we are confident that they are againft you. 4. But if it mull be by the Teftimony of the prefent Generation, whole Teftimony mud: it be that muft tell us what our Bore-Fathers held ? Muft it be by the Teftimony of a Council? 1. There is no General to enquire of, nor hath been long-, nor know we whether ever there will be? 2. If it muft be by the Ufi Council, 1. How ihall the Vulgar know that it was a true General Council, any more than that of Epbef. 2. Bajil, Confiance^ ejre. 2. How know they what they did Decree ? They never faw, or heard them. If it muft be by the Printed Books, 1. They cannot read them. 2. They know not whether they are forged, or falfified. 3. They know not the meaning of them. If it muft be by

Reports^ by whofe Report ? Father Paul Servita maketh them a pack of Fellows that abufe the World, under the fhew of a General Council: He was a Papift. We cannot look for another Council to tell us what this Council faid. Muft men take the word of particular men ? Some accufe that Conncil- fomeownit: Whom fhall we believe ? muft it be every fin^e Priefl ? Then Father Paul mull: be believed againft them: And fome that turn from the Pope lay more againft them than he: And how fhall the People know that the Prieft faith true ? Perhaps he knoweth the Prieft to be a common Lyar, or perjured • at leaft, he knoweth him not to be infallible. If the Pope be infallible, none of you faith that each Priefl \$ (o: And we never faw or heard the Pope. If you fay that we muft believe the Priefts where they all confent: How (hall ordinary men know that, 'who never fee a Council, nor mxny of them ? If the major Vote muft be believed : who mall gather the Votes, and how {hall the People know them? In a word, I fee no way that you have to give men any aflurance what to believe to falvation, (for the generality that cannot travel over the World, nor get skill in Hiftory and Cofmography) but only to believe that Prieft that fpeaketh to him • when perhaps he knoweth him to be a man that hath forfeited belief; or at leaft is neither the Pope, Council^ Churchy nor pre-tendeth to infallibility.

But fuppofe that the perfon be fo learned, as to be ver-fed in the Councils, How fhall he know by them what the former Ages held ? i. What Councils be they that he muft believe, and how fhall he be fure of it ? Is it the Councils aforefaid of Ephef. 2. Bafil, Conflance, and fuch other? Thefe you reject, and many more. 2. Do any Councils tell him by Decrees, which former Councils

were

C37>

were currant, and wliich not ? Sure they do not ; no, not the laft at Trent: So that it is not, de fide, with } T our felves, which are the true Councils, and which not. 3, How doth a later Council know which former Councils v\ ere true ? Not becaufc they find (o themfelves ; for then all would be true: If it be by any Characters, what be they, and why may we not know them ? 4. How do Councils know w hich way mod Writers went, or what they wrote? As it cannot be expected that theBi/hops that met at Trent lliould rv.member by Tradition what all the Chriitians in the world [aid or thought in every Age ; Co neither were all Writers words known to them without Book, by verbal Tradition. I pray you tell me trujy, whether ever any General Council took that way to prove what J#fti# 9 Tcrtuliixn, Cyprian, BaH, Gregories, Hit rem, A'lgrtfiine , Chry\o\kom, <y-c. laid and held, by mewing that they had it by Tradition from other Councils Decrees, or their Fathers telling them lb, rather than by looking into the Writings of the Authors themfelves ? And your own Doctors commonly tell us what the Fathers held, by citing the Fathers words, and not by telling us, that either Councils, or their Fathers, or Mothers, or Nurfes told them whatthev ibid or held, [except in the common Effentials of Chriltiurity, the Sacramental Covenant, Creed, Lords-Prayer, Decalogue, and that the Scripture is Gods Word] which all Chriftians acknowledge are delivered tons, as by two hands, vir,, by verbal and practical Tradition, and by the Scripture it felf.

But if it be the Prefent church real, (that is, the-con-fent of Chriftians) which mud tell us what was held in the former Ages (which for ought I find is it that you flye to -, ) though the ignorant cannot try this,all knowing

ing men can tell that this way you are utterly condemned: For at this day, as is faid before, at leaft two third parts of the Chriftian World are againft your very Papacy it (elf- and believe the ancient Churches to have been againft it: So that Tradition doth depofe the Pope. So that you have no way left, but to fay, 7/ is our own judgment or Tradition alone that we will jiand to.

So much to your dull cheat, about your pretended Univerfal Tradition.

Pag. n. You notably fay, \_Suppo[e a Book fully written as to all points to be believed by Chri'Hans, by the jirft Teachers of Chrij 1 ianity : Lst them together with this Book give charge to their Jjrjl Convert /, not to add to it, or diminish it^ and to believe as in their Consciences they /half think that Book fhall teach them. Though Generation after Generation be never fo faithful to fuch a Charge, yet th?y may in after Ages come to !ofe or change their Faith, becaufe the Book may jcem to one Generation to bear one

fenfe, and to another Generation to bear another As

theie words, This is my Body*, may fern to one Age to bear this fenfe, This is the sign of my Body, &c7\

1. But you mult fuppofe alfo, that they that will learn this Book mult have Teachers: 'Elfe how will they fb much as read it ? We are for Teachers as well as you, though not for Judges that may judge in partem utramli-het. The Paftors may teach the People that there is a God, a Chrift, a Life to come 5 but cannot judge that there is none. And Teachers make known that fame Evidence of Truth to the Learner, by which they received it themfelves •, but do not fay, you muft believe that there is a God, a Chrift, a Heaven, meerly becaufe wefay fo.

2. And you muft put into your Suppofkion, that (as is faid) the Effentials are delivered both ways, by writing and by word of mouth, 3. And

Ch9>

3. And now fuppofe, that the Apoftles had put the lame expofitory words of {This u my Bcd<~\ into a Book, which they fpake by word of mouth? Had that been the lefs intelligible becaufe they were in the Book? Or the harder to beremembred? Or could that Age have delivered to the next any more, as from the Apoftles, than what they received ? And if that be the* fame written as fpoken, furc writing maketh it not the lefs or worle ? If it do, all your Religion is in danger, now it is written in your Volumns of Councils. Have you wore yetthats neceflary, befides all thofc Volumns, which you whif-pcr or deliver by word of mouth? If not, you profefs your Religion unfafe, becaufe you have written it.

4. And indeed you here profefs, that the fidelity of fucceflive Generation cannot preferve Religion, by pre-ferving and delivering any Bouks.. And if io, then your prefcrvation of Fathers, and written Councils, and Decretals, is no fufficicnt Tradition of the lenle of [This is my Bity.~] Could you ihew us your fenfe in them, it is an infufficieot Tradition •, for one may take your Councils in one fenfe, and another in another.

5. But do you indeed think that any Perfon or Country is fecured from changing their Religion by your verbal way ? Why then did the Reformers when they were of your way forfake it ? Why did the Greek Churches dif-own you ? Nay, why did lb many ancient Churches apoitatize to Mahometanifm ? Was it for want of Verbal Tradition ? Hid they not the fame as you ? Sure no Law will fecure it lelf from being broken by miners, and no-Tradition is enough to prevent Apoftafie. But why the fame words fhould be lefs fufficicnt written bv the Apoftles, than/jM'-"# by them 5 or why Gods Writings mould not be as lure and clear in things of ncccifity, as your

(4°)

Councils 5 or why your Councils ihould be infufficient, becaufe written ^ no impartial man can tell.

But you fay further, [But no ten Families who have been taught by their parents* either to leliere that our Saviours Body is in the Eucbarift, or that it is not there ^ (you mould have (aid, in what fenfc it is there) can pojfbly miftake^ &cP±

Dreams may feem fomething to men that are afleep: If God had written the fame words that my Mother fpake to me, why could not I have as well understood them ? Doth my Mother, or Father, or Prieft fpeak fo much more wifely than God? Sure not, if the words were the fame. But alas, can you keep us from knowing, that you and we have ten thoufand and ten thou-fand Families near together, where the Parents never talk much to their Children about any fuch matters, nor catechize them, nor themfelves underitand them: When we ask many of the ignorant Papifts, whether they believe that there is no true Bread and wine at all after con-fecration, they tell us that they do hold that there is, though yet Chrifts Body and Blood be there 5 which is but the Lutherans Coniubftantiation : And do you not know what Durandm taught in this ? and yet they that chide him excufe him from Herefie. And had Durandm never heard what ten Parents teach their Children ?

You prefently ftab your Papacy to the heart, when you . fay [Seeing God Almighty is rejolved not to teach every Age by immediate infallible Mif/ionants from himj"elf , but to fend infpircd Ambafiadors to one particular generation only, wd to leave thut generation to teach their Children fuccef-fivelj till the day of judgement jvh at they learnt^&c. Thus muchisjuft the Proteftant Religion. But then what's iieeonie of thv infpired Infallibility of your Church? who

though -

(40

though they underftood not the matter when they came to the Council, (or though the Pope were an unlearned Lad) yet prefently can infallibly expound Scripture^ and defide Controverfies. As you praile Mr. Thorndike^ you might have accepted of the kindnefs of one Mr. war-ley of Cam''ridge , in a Book lately dedicated to the Lord Chancellor, called, The Nstnral Fanatic:-, who will allow the Church and Councils a higher way of certain determination, than by Reafa • and will tell you how doubtful its left to Realbn, whether there be a God, or the Soul be immortal^ and will curb men th.it will let their Realbn againft Councils or the Church. But to remember and rehearfe only the words that the Apoftles delivered, is a work that Realbn may perform, without any infpired infallihiity.

But if Tradition by immediate Parents, yea and Patters be fo lure, the Aha$nes^ the Greeks, and many others, are fure that the Papacy is an Ufurpation: And fo were tlie old Britain*, and the Scots -, a little before Be da's time, who would neither conform to the Church of Rome^ nor fo much as eat with them.

Pag. 42. You fay [ifGod Almighty will oblige me to believe what wxs taught 1600 years before I iv.:s born^ how [hould be expect I j hould come to the knowledge of this, but by fuch Books m were written in thofe times, and near thofe times, and by the tejiimony of all Chriilian Countries, what h&tb beat immcmoriallj believed by them, ever fincc they were C ? -■•''•]

Anfw. Well contradicted : This is our very Religion.: We fhnd to Fincent. Lcmienf. Rule, Qvodfempsr, ubique, ab 0 . But, 1. Here then Books be not made

ib unferviceable as before. 2. God,Almighty obligcth us firft to believe his or before any others : And

C44).

how {lull we more certainly know what Chriit did and commanded, than by thole that purpofely Wrote lb ma-ny Gofpels, orHiftorics of it, that we might believe and have Life by his Name. Sure the four Evangdiits and the Apoftlcs Wrote what they Wrote (even to the ig-iioraat) to be understood and read. 3. We alio know by the Books written near thofe times what then was received by the Churches. And your Councils cannot know it (nor your Pope neither) by any other means than are known to others: for their extraordinary Inspiration we never fa >v caufe to believe. 4. And I remember no one thing at all, which I do not receive, which hath the Testimony of all Christian Countries that it hath imm?mcrial'y been believed, by them ever ft nee they were ChriftUns; nor lhall I reject fuch when you prove it. But that is, becaufe, de facto, I think there is no errour that hath fuch a kind of Teftimony ; and not becaufe I think it imfofftble: For as your part of the World is deceived, e.g. to think that the Roman Supremacy was infti-tutedbyGod, contrary to the judgment of alt the Greek church, andofthetwaforementioned General Councils at Conjlantinof.e and Cake don • fo I know not but it had been poflible to have brought all Countries to the lame deceit, or to have believed that chrift's Blood might be denyed the People in the Sacrament, as a thing received by Tradition.

We believe that the true Church infallibly believeth what ever it believeth upon true Divine Revelation^and that it can never fall from the Effentials of ChrifUanity; that is, that chriit- will (till have a true Church in the World till the end. But we know that in many things we offend all, and if every Mans will and Life is imperfect, and culpable, then fo is every Mans judgment -

and

. .C43)

and there is no Man living without many errours, who hath the Exercife of Reafon • and the Church is Compelled of fuch erring Individuals: And why it is not potfi-ble for them all to have thought that fome of their errours came down from the Apoftles (as the Millineries thought) I cannot tell. But whatever is truly proved to be delivered by the Apoitles as the Will of Chrilt, by Writing, or word, v.e will readily receive : And the Ei-fentials of chriili anity we believe, and can prove to have been both ways lb delivered . and fome things more, (, as the Lords-day, &c) t

But you fav, pdg, 15. cc Can any imagine that c< they who exfofed their Lives for their Religion, would, {C if they could, Agrex together, [o notoriously to change it, iC as to m/lke them\elves mot grofs idolaters, ly ado cc Bread and wine, as the true Body and Blood of their C- c..» " tor, and God 7 .'] Anftv, No, bun wemiy well imagine tint good- Fathers may have bad Children, and that Children are not born with a. Chureh-hiftorv*, or Coun-cils v. ritten in their minds • and that worldly Clergymen may deceive^ and be deceived ; and tint even pious Men might concur in the deceit: that is, Th.it the name ofchrifSs Body and Blood being juftlyfrom the beginning applyed to the Euchariir, as the Clergy grew formal, ceremonious, felfilh, and worldly, they neglected the explication of the fenfe andfpiritual part of the Sacrament , and grew to over-magnifie the external figns in a way that tended to that advantage and honour to themlelves, which for want of Learning and Grace they could not by their worth attain: That the ninth and tenth Ages which you chufe for infhmce were as a Night of darknefs, having few Learned Men, in which he that was but skilled in Greek and Helrov was t\kcn

for

C44)

for a Conjurer, or a Heretick^ other of your own Writers befides Bellarmine do acquaint you. That the Popes were ibme Boys, many Murderers, Simonifts, and moil horrid, wicked, and ignorant Men, many by one Woman brought in, and poyfoned after $ and that for forty Years there were divers Popes at once contending for their fe-veral Titles, almoft all Hiftories agree • That hence the World was filled with Treafcns, Rebellions, Perjuries, and all wickedneis, how many Hifbrians teftiiie . when the Pope hath been judged by a Council for a Heretick, and Adulterer, deflowering Women at his Doors. And is it incredible that fuch Men mould degenerate from their fore-fathers ? Or (hall a Fryar now come out of a Cell, and tell the World, that becaufe the firft Biihops oiRome were holy Martyrs, it was not poffibic for Pope John to be fuch a blafphemous filthy Villain 5 nor for Pope Euge-tiius to be damned as a Heretick and wicked Man by a ^General Council, and yet continue Pope after depofiti-on: Gt fox Setgim to ule For mo fas as\\G did? Ifpeak not of rarities^ or doubtful things : The Popes gfeateft flatterers lament them. Baroniits ad an. 912 faith \^*what " then was the Face of the holy Roman Church ? How ex-cc ceeding filthy when the mofl potent , and yet the mojlfor-u did whores did Rule at Rome ? by whofe pleasure Sees cc were changed^ Si/hops were given , and which is a thing cc horrid to be heard, and not to be fpoken^ their Lovers 6Q (or Mates) were thruji into Peter's Chair^ being falfe u Popes , who are not to be written in the Catalogue of the cc Roman Popes, but only for the marking out of [itch cc times : And what kind of Cardinals^ Pricfts and Beacons cc think you we mufl imagine thefe Monjlers did chufe, " when nothing is fo rooted in Nature^ as for everything cc to beget his Ijh ? ] i ,1s not here a Succdfion fit to prove

the

the Church of Rome to be the true Church? O happy Succdfion ! 2. And is it impoflible that iuch Men as thefe iliould err ? and iuch Bifliops,Priefts, and Deacons fliould change one word that was delivered orally from their Fathers? Is not here a fure Foundation for a Man to build his Faith and Salvation on ?

Gcnebrard mother: furious Papift (//'. 4. Seel. 10.) faith £ <c In this one thing this Age was unhappy^ that for near M an hundred and fifty Tears, about fifty Popes did wholly "fall away from the iertue of their Ance/lors, being ra-c< " ther irregular and Apolitical, than Apofiolic rl,~] Apo-ftates makean Apoftolical Succefllon of Infallible wicked Men. Reader, did not our Rational Difcourfer wifely chufe the ninth and tenth Ages for his ground-work ? Thefe are the very Ages whofeTeftimony he appealeth to. Pope Adrian ( after ) himfelf, ( de Sacram. Confirm. Art.q. faith, that there have many Popes of Rome been Hereticks. And as I faid, Pope John 13 alixi 12 was in Council Coniic! of Raiifhing Maids,wives, andwiddows. at the Apoftolick Doors, and of committing man) Murders, and he drank a health to the D.'vil; and at Dice called for help to Jupiter and Venus, and at lafl was killed in the Act of Adultery,

Saith their Platina Q He w.ts from his Youth a Man contaminated with all d/jhonefy, and ftlthinefs 5 and if he bid any time to [pare from his Lvfls, he [pent it in hunting^and not in praying. — He faith, he wxs a mo ft wicked man, 0? rather a Monger. — And faith, \_ that the Life of this wicked Man being judged in a Council of Italian Bijhops, ftr fear of them he fed, and lived like a wild Beast in the woods7\

Pope John 23 Was accufed and depofed by die General Council at Conftance^ upon about feventy Articles^

which

C40

which you may fee in Binnws in about thirteen Columns, viz. of Murders, Adulteries, Witchcraft, Simony, a Heretick, obftinately maintained that there is no Life after this 5 called commonly, The Devil incarnate . fafd the Soul w.rs extinH with the Body, & a Beafis • dcnyed the Rejur reel ion, &c. And for thefe the Council depo-fed him.

So the great Council at £.</?/depofed Eugezns the 4?^ as \_a Rebel againjl the holy Canons, a notorious diftmber and fcandalizer of the peaee and Unity of the Church • a Simonijf ; a perjured wretch • incorigible ; a Schifmatick, and an ohflinate Heretick"] Yet is their Churches Succef-iion continued from this condemned Heretick, w ho ftaid in fpight of the Council that depofed him.

But you'll fay, Though the Pope may fo erre, yet General Councils cannot. A/ifiv. Thele very Councils that condemned him,are now rejected by you, as is Ephef. 2. and many others : yea accufed as being mother Church $ faith the Learned Cardinal Cajetan in his Oration at the Council at the Laterane [ub. Leon. 10. ( Bin. p. 552.) [This Novelty of Pifa (Mark Councils are Novelists) fyrung up at Conftance, and vanished : At Bafil it fpyung up again, and is exploded. And if you he Men it will now alfo be reprejfed as it was under Eugen.4. f or it cometh not from Heaven, nor doth it embrace the Principality of that One who is in the church-Triumphant, and preferveth the Church-Militant • and which the Synod of Pifa ought to embrace if it came from Heaven, and not as it doth to rely on the Government of a Multitude. The Church of the Pifans therefore doth far differ from this Church of Chrifi : For one is the Church of Believers y the other of Cavillers • One of the Houjho/d of God, the other of the Erroneous: One ofchrijlian-men, the other offuch

AS

C47)

as fear not to tear the Coat of Cbrifl 5 and divide the Atypical Members of chri\\ from bis Mvflical Body,

See here to what Novelty and • Apoftacy, even to be another church: You think that General Councils have fallen, as thofe Councils lay the Pope hath done. O but thefe Men can corrupt nothing, becaufe the Martyrs Avould not have corrupted it! And yet even good Mens pious credulity, believing ignorant Mens Dreams and Vifions ( fuch as Gregorics Dialogues and BeH.t ihewto any rational Man) may do much to introduce Changes.

But if Changes be lb impofiible,becau{e Fore-rathers were pious Men and of another mind, how come the Greek-Churches to be Apoftatized ib far to Mahometa-nifme ? and why do you accufe the Proteftants,or Greeks of changing, If it was impolTible (for ten Families ) to do it? Sure then the jAbaffiHis^ Syrians, Armenians, Greeks y eye, have their old Faith itiil unchanged, if it be impofltble. Sure never fuch Viliany was charged on their Bilhops as on your Popes. If .they may change, notwithstanding their Fore-fathers Piety, why qot you ?

In the laft place I ihould fpeak to your Teftimonics out of fome Ancients. But r. Why Ihould we put it to the tryal of Fathers^whcn you dare not ftand to it,but fly to the Authority and Judgment of your prefentChurch ; that is, your Pope. 2. Can any Fathers fpeak plainer than St. Paul himfelf doth, who caileth it Bread after Confecration thrice in the three next Verfes ? Or did the Fathers contradict him? If they delivered what they received, we fee what that was. Is oral Tradition con-trarv to the Scripture ? Is hot this a certain Argument? Pvd\n 1 Cor. 11. faith oft that it is Bread after Confecration ; t'^^that Speaker, or Writer is deceived, or a

G Decei-

Deceiver,\\ ho faith, that he or any other Apoftle deliver ed the contrary by word of Mouth.

y. Doth this Difcourfer mean fincerly in talking of Tradition and the Fathers Testimonies, and yet never once attempt any anfwer to all thole Teftimonies to the contrary, out of their plain words, which our Writers have copioufly and often cited. How many, and many more, plain Teftimonies of the Fathers againftTranfub-ftantiation doth one Edmundus Albert in m give you ? to whichinltead of anfwers^a few meer words,or cavils are returned : But all thele are overlooked by this Difcourfer.

But come, let us briefly try all his great proof of the Tradition of the Fathers.

I. He begins with excellent Augufline (who in a Carthage Council did help to quell the Pope's Ufurpation) And out of many great Volumns he hath found, i. That AtiXiin faid, that £ now it is no longer called Bread, . but the Body of chrifl: ] The fame will the Presbyterians fay : Do they not in their Directory fay, [ Take, eat, this is the Body of chrift ] when they deliver the Sacrament f Are they therefore for Tranlubftantiation ? Is it all one to fay, [_It is not called Bread, and, It is not Bread?. J if the Kings Statue be made in Marble or Brafs, you may well fay. This is not now to be called Marble and Brajs, but the King.

2, That Atflin faid [that Chrift gave us his very Flefl) to be eaten to our Salvation 5 but no body eateth that Flejh^ unlefs he have firfl adored it.'] Anfvv. Any Proteftant will fay the fame. For Chrift himielf hath faid, Except ye eat the Flefi of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, ye have no life in you. Do not your own facrilegious Popes and Clergy expound this of fomething elfe than the Eucharift ? when they deny the Cup to the People ? If it

C4?)

be that wine Confecrated that is here meant, what bloody wretches are you to damn all your Peoples Souls, by denying them all that Blood of Chrift, without drinking which they have no life ? But it's certain by i Cor.i 5. that Chrift hath not Fleih and Blood in Heaven, and therefore it is not the Heavenly Body, that,as iuch,is here meant •, but the true fenfe of Chrift and Aufm is, that as the Sacrifices are eaten by fuch, by, and for whom they are offered •, fo his Fleih and Blood offered on the Crols is the true Sacrifice for Sin, which mull be eaten in its Commemorative Reprefentation orally in the Sacrament., and really in it felf by Faith, that the benciiirs of that Sacrifice may be ours. And who doth not adore that Chrift \\ horn w e thus eat and live upon ? This is the fum of all that the Fathers fay.

But let the Reader judge of Aujlins mind by plainer Words, De Doclr. Chrijl. cap. 7. £ Let no Man look to what they arc ( mentioning the Bread and wine ) but to r$hat they fignifc : For our Lord w.ts p'leafed to fay, This is my Body when he gave the fign of his Body.~]

And Cont. Max. I. 3. cap. 22. £ we note in the Sacraments, not whit they are, but what they jhevp ; For they are ft?ns, which are one things and'fignific anotl er7\

And Epi/l. 23. ad Btnif. [if Sacraments had not frn.c likenefs (or relemblance) to thofe things whereof they arc Sacraments, they could not be Sacraments at all. From this likenefs ( or relemblance ) they often take the names of what they represent: Therefore as the Sacrament of Chr:(l*s Bfldy is in fomc fort his Body, fo the Sacrawcnt of Faith is Faith alfo.~]

You need no more than this of Auflin to Interpret other Fathers, that call the Sacrament chnffs Body.

II. His next is Ambroje 7 \\ho faith thut^That when Con-

G z (ecrztion

fetration hath been made </' Bread, it is made the Flefh of chrift~\ and [Chrift mJkffi 'this Sacra?vent~] and [the Body of Chrift w.zs not bejore Confccration, but after, &c.] Anfw. i. All thi^ the Presbyterians fay. Even as we lay, It is not a Law till the King give the /U% or it is not his Coin till his Authority and Stamp fo make it $ And are they therefore of your mind? 2. Ambrose exprefly expounds his negation of ordinary Bread h no doubt it is not ordinary Bread. 3. You would deceive the Reader by hiding Ambrofe, who faith there, de Sacram, I. 4. c. 4. [ This we afjerty how that which is Bread ( mark that ) can yet be the Body of chrift ] — [_ And if chrift 3 s Speech hadfo much that it made that to begin to be which was not • how much more is it operative that the things that were,both Be-y and be changed into Something clfc -- ] And [As thou hafi drunk the jlmilitude of Death, fo thou drinkeji the ft-mtlitude of precious Bloody So Ambrofe, and fo the Pro-teftants.

III. His next is Hierome » out of many Volumns he. hath gathered thus much, that Priefts \_make the Body of cWift with their jacred Mouth and Prayers.'} Anfw, And any Proteflant will fay the like: He that faith [This is the Bodj of cbrif] that'is, Sacramentally, will fay that, under Chrift, his Minifter maketh it fuch. And is this the Tradition ?

2. Let Hierome fpeak for himfelf, Contr. Jovin.i. 2. [The Lord as a Type {or Figure ) of his Blood, offered not water, but wine.~] Are not thefe words plain, till' the Pope expound them?

IV. His next is Cyprian, de Coena Vom. And, 1. Let the Reader note, that even Belh.ywine de fcript. Eccl. in Cyprian faith, that the Book which this Man citeth as St. Cyprians, [ was neither Cyprians, nor any Learned Mans ~

* and

CsO

and had neither words nor sentences worthy a framed 7Aan, Out fo$Ujh and ricvcu o tk Narations, and. Fables."}

2. The words cited out of it are [ Pant's ijkt quem P<>-minus di[ci\uhs forrigebat, non efpue fed nat/^a mutatus^ omnipotent™ verb i \fA:vm eft Car J] But by \_Natura~} the Author plainly meaneth \jhc Relative Nature'} and not the Subfance. And it was not for nothing that Bellar-tniae contcmneth him, who ever he was 5 for he is downright againft Tranliib/tantiation. Cap 2. He maketh the difference between this and common Meat to be, that, Corpora! is [mi c ret mens (pecie?n, fed zr--tut is divinx

tnvifibili cfficientia probans ad efje pr.efentiam : It is but the pretence of Divide virtue that he affirms to be with the Speeds of corporeal [ttbjlmce. And plainer, cap, 3. \_ when the Lord had [aid, Do this in my remembrance, This is my Bod),and this my Blood~] as oft as by thef'e words and this faith it is done, that fuperfnbjlantial Bread and Cup, by \olemn bleffing hallowed^ profiteth to the life and health of the whole Man 5 being both a Medicine and a Sacrifice, to heal our infirmities and purge our iniquities. And lhewing the difference between the Common part of Chrift's laft Supper, and this Spiritual Food, he addeth, that, [_whcn the ferfideou-s mind of Judas touched this holy Meaty and the fanflified Bread entred his wicked Mouthy &c7S So that he calleth it fanclifed Bread after the Con-fecration.

And Cap. — telling why Chrift calleth the fame both Bread,B ! ood,Flejh, and his Body,he imh,[_Panis eft cfca,8cc. Bread is Meat, Blood is Life, Flefh is Substance, his Body the Church. And cap. 4. This Sacrament Chrifi calleth fometime" his Body, fometime Flejb and Wood, fometime Bread • a Portion of Life eternally, which he Communicate th according t« thefe vtfthle thinfs Jo corporal Nature,

That

That common Bread being turned into Fief) and Blood, pro* cureth Life and increase to bodies (that is, our common Conco&ion turneth common Bread into our Flcfh arid "Blood • ) Therefore the Infirmity of our Faith being helped by the ufual efjecl of things^ iy a [enable Argument is tanohty that the effed of Life eternal is in Vifible Sacraments • and thtit we are united to chrif, non tarn Corpora-liquam fpirituali tranfitione,notJo much by a Corporal as by a spiritual Tranftion, And cap. 6. His CoxjuneJion and curs neither mingleth Person^ nor uniteth Subflances ; but Confociateth Affettions^ and Confederateth Wills,

And the fame Author,or another,'in Cyprian's Works, de Unci tone chryfm. cap, 7. Saith Q Our Lord at the Table where he lajl feafled with his Dijciples, gave them with bis own hands, Bread and ivine • but on the Crojs he gave his Body to be wounded by the hands of Soulaiers, that the fin-cere truth, and true fincerity, fecretly imprinted in the Apoflles^ might expound to the Nations how the wine and Bread w&s Flefl) and Blood • and by what Reasons the C life s agreed to the Ejects, and divers Names and Species were reduced to one Efjence . and the Things figmfying, and the things fignifed were called by the fame Names, (or known by the fame Words ) By thefe privHedges of fu-pernatural Grace, by the eating ef fanc~lificdBread,Leing refrefhed, wafted, and anointed, &c,~\ Reader, here you fee what Tradition faith.

Next out of 'Cyprian de Lap (is, he citeth words againft them, that \_wilh defied hands and mouths receive the Body, and drink the Blood of the Lord.~] Words which Proteftants have more frequently than Cyprian ., and are they on your fide too ?

Butj fhall Cyprian have leave to fpeak indeed ?• Epifl, adMagn, cap, 4, \_wben our Lord catleth bis Body Bread,

con-

CS3)

we (ted by the adunation of man) Grains, he fleweth the Union of the People whom he bare: and when he called his blood wine, exprefjed tut of man) bunches of Grapes and Kernels, and made up into one, he fgnifed one Flock unt-

ted,8ccr\ '

And Etijl. 63 M CMilium de sacram. Proving that the Sacrament fhould not have iviter alone without Wine, he faiths 2. [_That the Cup which is offered in commcmo-ration of him le o']ered mist with Wine, For when Chrift (aith, I am the true Vine, his blood is not water, but^ wine. Nor c m his blood, by which we are redeemed ana Unci)fed, be feen to be in the cup, if wine be not in the cup, by which Chnfrs blood is ftewed, &c.

And c. 6. we find the cup mist which Chrift offered, and that it was wine which he called his blood, whence it is apparent that the blood of Chrift is not offered, if wine be wanting to the cup 3 nor is the Lords Sacrifice celebrated faduefanclification, unlefs our Oblation and Sacrifice an*

fwerhisPaffien.

And cap 9. In the wine is (hewed the blood of Chrijr, as in the water is underflood the People. (Is the water turned into the People?)

And cap. 10, So the cup of the Lord is not water alone, nor wine alone, but mu(l both be mixed - even as the bod) of the L»rd cannot be meal {or flower) alone, or water alone, but both muft be united, conjoined, and be bread by compofition folidated.

And cap. 12. C As oft as we offer the cup in commemoration of the Lord and his Paffion, let us do that which is m wife (I the Lord did.~] So much of Cyprian. ;

V. The next cited by him is Tertullian, faying, L™' fejh is fed with the body and blood of Chril}, that the Soul • 'may be made fat with Godr\

C 54 >

Anf». i. The fame we all lay, even when we Administer the Sacrament: See the like in the English Liturgy, and the Directory : Are we therefore for Traniub-itantiation? 2. Jtisthe Reprefentathe body of chrifi, and not real flefh and blood: For he faith, that hethat cat-cth fat fieJh^ and dnnketh his bloody hath eternal life • and dwelleth >n Chrifl and Chrifl in him^ John 6. 54, 56* But the wicked,that eat the body of Chriit Representative, have not eternal life, nor dwell in Chriit.

Another citation {tomTertu'l/an is lib.de idololat. [To touch the bod) of our Lord with thofe hands which give bodies ts Devils -> &c]

An[rv. Here is no more than we commonly fay: This Man fure would prove that the Liturgy and Directory are both for his opinion. Is this the Proof of Univerfal Tradition ?

Reader, Tertufiian calls it The body of chrifl, and fo do we. Will you hear him fpeaking his own Senfe, which this Man concealeth ?

Cont. Marriott) I. 3. c. 19. [ Sic enim Bens in Evange/io quoq^ veftro revelavit, panem corpus fuum appellans, ut ejr nine jam earn intelligas corporis fm fgurr.m pani dedtfjcj c/ijvs retro corpus in panem Prophet es figuravit, ipfo Domino hie fixer amentum poflea interpretaturo.~] That is £ For fo God even in your Go/pel revealed, calling bread his body^ that jo hence yon may underfil and, that he gave to bread the figure of his body • whofe body the Prophet formerly figured into breads the Lord himfef being afterward to interpret this Sacrament.2 Here it is oft called bread, and this bread is called Chrift's body, and the figure of the Body given to bread it felf, as was prefigured by the Prophets before Chrifl: had a body.

And Cont, Marc, l % 1,14. [Net panem (reprobavit)

quo

(55)

qu» ipfum corpus [uum reprefentatf] [ He reprobated net bread, by which he represented bis oven very body.'] Pame-lius hath no fhift, but to iay, that by repref ntmg he mean-eth making prefent, iuch deceit will feem to prove to them Univerfal Tradition : And he citeth many other places, as for him, out otTertullian, which have no more but his naming the Sacrament Chriji's lody and blood jus we all do.

Co fit. Marc. 1. 4. c. 40. He is yet plainer, faying Q The bread which be took and cliffribnted to bisDifciples, that be made his body, faying, This is my body • that is, the F \ GUR.g of my body: But it had not been tbe Figure of it, if he had not had a true Bods. For an empty thing which is a pban-tafm, can ha+c no Figure • or if -he therefore feigned (or made) bresd to be his body, becaufe he wanted (crhad not ) a true body, then it was bread that ke mu(l deliver up for us: It made for Marciorw Vanity that bread jhoiild he Crucified. (All this is to prove againit Alarcion that Chrift had a true body.) But why doth he call bread bis body, and not a Pumpion, which Marcion hath inffeadof a heart , not underflanding that this was the old figure of Chritfs lody, (N.B. had Chrift fkfh then ?) who [aid by Jeremy X They have devifed a Device againfl me, ftying, Come, let us caft wood upon his bread- that is, tbe Crofs upon his body fo aljo making bis Te(lament in the mention of the Cupy &c. And th.it you may know the old figure of his blood in wine, Elaias faith, 6cc. fo now be confecra-ted his blood in wine, who then figured wine in blood."] Let any thing but ignorance and impudence judge, whether here be not over and over, bread and wine r iter Confederation, being the reprefentative and figurative b* dy and blood of Chrift, or reprefenting and figuring them fullier, as the Prophets had partly, or darkly done before.

H But

Hut notliing will convince fome that rage, and art confident.

I repeat Tertu'uians reproof of" the denyers of the certainty ofSenfe,Z,/'£ de Annim. c,iy. [The; (fere if Causes are freed from the infamy ( of fallacy ) how much more Scxfe, which Caufes freely go lefore, &c. what doft thou procacious Accademick ? T/jo/t overturneH the whole St Ate of Life . thou troublejl the whole Order of Nature • thou blindeft the Providence of God him[elf, as if he had made deceitful and lying Senjes the Ijords of all h s works, as they are to be known, inhabited) difperfed, and enjoyed.-— Jt is not lawful for us to call thofe fenfes into dou t, left in ChriH we deliberate of the belief of them • Left perhaps it be faid that he falfly (aw Satan cajl down from Heaven, or falfly heard his Fathers Voice teflifying of him ; or w.s; deceived when he touched Peter'/ Mother-in-Lawyr after felt fome other Spirit of the Ointment, which he received as to his Burial • and fome other relilh of the wine which he Consecrated for the Memorial (or to be the Memorial ) of his bloody So much for Tertullian.

VI. He next citeth cbryfoflorne, faying that Chrift [ makes us his Body, not only in belief, lut in very deed • and that we eat and touch his Body.'] Anfw. And doth he not fee how in citing thefe, he confutcth himfelf. i. Chrift doth really make Us his Body ; that is, his Political and Miftical Body: But is it we that this Man wcukl prove Tranfubftantiate into Chrift's Body? I thought it had been the Bread, and not Us.

2. If we touch chrift 9 s Bod) it muft be his Reprefenta-tive Body • for the Papifts hold that we touch not the real Flefh'and Blood of chrif,but only certain Accidents, which now are nottrje Accidents of Chrift s Body, nor of any other Subftmce.

C57)

It would be tedious to cite out of Chryfoflome all that, makes againft them. Let thefe plain words lerve to notifie his mind [ Eptft. ad Cefar. The Bread is made worthy to be honoured with the Name of the Flejh of Chriflfa the Priejl's Consecration • yet the Plefo retains the properties of its incorruptible Nature-, as the Bread doth its Natural Subflance, Before the Bread is fxuCllfied we call it Bread • hut when it is Consecrated by the Divine Grace, it deferveth to be called the Lords Body, thou h the Sub fiance ' of the Bread ft ill rcmaineth^]

Reader, This is the Tradition of the Church.

As to fome Mens Cavil, that this E iftle is Spurious, it is fully confuted by Learned Men from fuflicient Teftimony.

VII. The next cited is a word that feemeth, in found, to be for them, in Cyril (or lbmc think John ) of Jeru-fale'ms Catechiime. Read the words Tranflated by him-felfj It is that Sentence which above all in the Ancients they mod boalt of, [yiz>. Do not look on it as b.ve bre.:d,and bare wine 5 for it is the body and blood of Chrift : — For though thy Senje fuggefl this to thee, yet let Faith confirm thee : Do not judge of the thing by the tafie, but rather from Faith hold for certain, fo that thou haf no doubt that the b$dy and blood are given thee • knowing -and accounting for certain y that this bread which is feen by us, is not bread, though our tafte judge it to be bread • but that it is the body of Chrif : And the wine which is feen by us is not wine, hut the blood of ChrrlK']

Anfw. Here Idefirethe Reader to note, i. That this one Sentence is all that hath any words thatfoundlikehls Sentence (that there is no true bread and wine) of all that he bringeth to prove Univerfal Tradition* 2. That this Book called Cyril's Cat, Myfiagog. is queftioned. 3. That

H 2 the

C5»)

the Auther plainly declarcth himfelf againft Tranfub-ftantiation.

Which I prove, i. The Aflfertion which he ftateth i% that the bread and urine ( for fo he calleth them ) are not [bare, or meer bread and w/»*]_but Chrift's body and blooA ; which we all aflert•: As the King's Statue in Brafs is not bare Brafs. 2. He next bids us not judge by our tafle, that it is bare bread. And after when he faith it is not bread and vpine,. and appealeth to Faith from Senfe, it is but his repeating cf what he before aflerted • meaning that though Senfe perceives nothing but bare bread and wine,-yet Faith perceiveth Chrift's body and bloody and io it is not to be called bread and wine, for all proper denomination, is from the Form 5 and the Form of a Sacrament is Relative, (as of a Statue, Image, symbol, Sign, &c.) and it is Relatively Chrift's body and blood, So that it is but, that it's bare bread, that he denyeth •, as we do.

3, Moft fully, he tells us his mind. Cat. 3. p. 235. [For as the bread of the Eueharift after the Invocation of the Holy Ghoft, is no more Common bread, but is the body of Chrifl -, jo alfo this holy Oyntmsnt is no more meer Ointment, nor ( if any one had rather fo [peak ) Common, novo it is Confecratedr, but it is a Grace {or Gift ) which caufeth the pre fence of Chriji^ and the Holy Ghofi ; that is 9 of his Divinity:'] So that if you take him to aflert the Tranfubftantiation of bread^ you muft fay that he takes Ojl alfo to be Tranfitbfantiate into Grace, or the Holy Ghoft. For he faith, that one is fo as the other is changed. That is, they are no more meer or common bread, or Ojl,

VIII. His laft is out of Juftin Martyr y who faith [_ We do not tafo thefe things as. Common md ordinary bread, &c. An[ve>

C5P)

An\w. i. There is not one word in J'uftin Martyr here that we do not own, and fay ; (nor do we defire to worlhip God by any other Liturgy, or Order of Worfliip, than that which he defcribeth as then the Practice of the Chriftian Church. O that we might all unite in that defcribed Order!

2. And if any may be yet unsatisfied what Tradition faith, hear J uft in farther, A.oi, 2. (Truly the (veil) [ivhen the Pre fide nt hath given thanks y and all the people acclaimed, theje that with us are called Deacons, dijlri)ute to every one present Bread and Wine and water, and bring them to thofe that are abfentf] It is bread and wine whendiftributcd.

And Dial. Cum Tnph. [ The Offering of Flower delivered to be offered for them that were cleanfed of the Le-profe, was a Type of the Bread of the Eucbarift, which our Lord Jefus Chri[\ commanded us to make in re mem* branee of his Paffionf\

Thus you fee to what his boaft of Univerfal Tradition is come.

Read but Da/Uus de Cult it Latinorum, and you will fee that there Universal Tradition was againft them.

The forefaid Author of the Dialogue, called, [Full and eafie fatisfaclion which is the true Religion,'] to thefe fore-mentioned addeth more, which you may rcid,pag. 140, &c, viz. Iren.tii-s laying, [For .ts the bread which is of the Earthy receiving the Divine Invocation, is not now common bread, but the Eucharifl, con fifing of two things, the Terrene and the Coelejlial, &c. Lib, 4. ^.34.

Origin in Mat. 25. calling it [Bread, and a typical and fymbolical body y which profteth none but the worthy Receivers, and that according to the proportion of their .Faith ; which no wicked man eateth, &c t

Eufeb.

(6o)

Eufeb.Gefar. Demonftr. Evang. I; i.e. 10. [Celebrating duly the Memorial, of the body and blood of cbnjl — Seeing we receive the Memorial of this sacrifice, to be perfected on the Tablei by the Symbols of his bodi and moft pre. thus blood—UbS. He delivered us to ufe bread as the Symbol of his own body,

Ephr. (in Bibiioth Photii, p. 4 1 *- Ed.Auguih) The body of Chrift which Believers receive, lofeth not his fenji-ble fubftance, and is not feparated from the intelligible

(rrace.

o

And ad eos qui filii Dei, &c [ Take notice diligently, how takin* bread in his hands he blefledit, and brake it, /.^Figure of his immolate Body . and he Ue[\ed the Cup, and gave it to his Difcifles, as a Figure of his

fretious blood.

Theodoret in Dialog, de Immutab. againft an Eutycbian, who pleaded, that Bread in the Euchanft was turned into Chrifts Body, faith, [The Lord who called that meat and bread, which naturally was his body, and who again called himfelf a Vine, did honour the Viftble Signs with the Names of his Body and Blood \ not having changed their Nature, but added Grace to Nature,'] Can any Proteftant fpeak plainer than this ? .

And Dial. i. [The Divine Myftenes are Signs of the

true Body. . . .

And further, anfwering the Eutychian, he iaith, [By the Net which thou m made art thou, taken : For even after the Cmfccration tie myflical Sig^s change not their -Nature, for they remain in all their fir'ji SUBS TA Nl t, Figure, 4nd Form, andarevifible, and to be handle* M before?, This is not plain enough for aPapift.

Nor Gelafim cont. Neflor.& Butuh. [Verily the Sacrament of the body and blood of Chrift which we take ts a , J J Divine

C60

Divine things for wh^cb and by which we are made partakers of the Divine Nature ; and. yet it ceafeth not to be the SUBSTANCE ^NATURE ofbreadand wine : And certainly the Image and fmitittide of the Body and Blood of chrifl are celebrated, in the action of the My-pries.*] O dark layings!

£ Cyr:l,A'ex. in /< ?*$• c > 14- U^'c' 11 ^ t0 Hi W^*W& Vijci'jfes jragr,;j/,ti of tread, JayiHgjTakc, cai y this is my body.]

Facundus is there cited as from Molinxus (!.o. c. 5.*. 404. though I have not the Author) laying \_ire c.U! that the body and blood of Chrij}, which is the Sacrament of his body in the Consecrated bread and cup. Not that the bread is prop'rly his body, and the cup his blood, but because they contain the My fiery ofhis body and blood.']

To thefe I might add plain Teltimonies out of moll of the Ancients, who write on this fubjed: Such, e.g. as thefe words of Gregor. Nyjjen Or at. de B apt if. As the Al-tar natura r ,y is but common Stone, but being consecrated be* cometh a holy Table, an unfpotted Altar ; fo the bread of the Enchartft is At fir ft ordinary, but being myjlerioujly facrificed > it is, and is called, The body of Chrifl : , and is effectual to great things: And as the Trie ft who was yeflerday a Lay-wan, by the blcffing of Ordination is made a Teacher '*f Godlinefs, *nd a Steward of the Myflcries, and though not changed in b:dy or jhape, yet is changed and made better as to his foul, by an invifible power and grace . fo alfo by the fame consequence water, being nothing but Water of it felf y yet bleH by the heavenly grace, reneweth man by working in him the fpiritual regeneration.

Is Stone in the Altar, or the Priefl ordained, or miter in Baptifm tranfubftantiated ?

If Charles the Grcar was a Hereticfc, the Pope is greatly

(62)

ly beholden to a Heretick. In his Epift. to Alcunius he faith, [Chrifi at his Suffer did break the Bread to his Difi rifles, and likemfe gave them the Cup, in Figure of his body and blood • and [o left to us this great Sacrament for cuf benefit!] This was his Tradition.

Amalarius Praef. de Offic. Ecclef. [/ am [wayed in all that I write by the judgment of holy men and godly Fathers ; yet what I judge my [elf I [peak : Tho[e things which are done in the celebration of Divine Service^ are done in the Sacrament of the Paffion of our Lord, .ts he him[eif commanded. Therefore the Priest offering the bread with the wine and water in the Sacrament, doth it in the fie ad of chrifi 5 and the bread and wine and water in the Sacrament represent the fiefi and blood of Chrijh For Sacraments are [omewhat to rejemble tho[e things whereof they are Sacraments. Therefore let the Priefl be like to Chrifi, as the bread and liquors are like the body and blood

if Chrifi.~]

[The Sacrament of the body of chrifi is in[ome manner the body of Chrifi: For Sacraments Would not be Scra-ments, if in [ome things they had not the likenefs of that whereof they are Sacraments. Now by reafon of this mutual likene[s, they are often called by that which they repre-fin\ —■ Sacraments have the virtue to I ring us to tbofe things, of which they are Sacraments!]

Walafridus Strabo de reb. Eccl.cap. 16., faith, [Chrifi gave to his Di[cipies the Sacrament of his body and blcod in the [ubfiance of bread and wine7]

Bernard an. 1120. Serm.de Purific. Alar, faith, [The Boc'y of Chrifi in the Sacrament is the food of the Soul, not of the Belly . therefore we eat him not corporally^ but in the manner that chrifi is meat, in that (ame manner we underfiand that he is eaten. And Serm. de S* Martin.

The

C*3)

The fame F/eJl) is given us to this day, but Spiritual I) not Corporally^}

To conclude, If the words This is my Body are to be taken literally, then fo are the reft • [ This Cup is the New Te[iamcnt in my Blood.J And then the Cup is Tranfubftantiated into the New Teftament.

And he that at once doth believe that Chrift hath a. Glorified Spiritual Body , that Fleih and Blood doth not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven , that the Bread and Wine ceafeto be Bread andwine^ and are turned fubftan-tially into the very Flejb and Blood of Chrift, and yet that the Pope and his Clergy are not Enemies of Chrift and Souls, who deny this Blood to the People, and give them but a half Chrift and a half Sacrifice, when he is praifed by all Saints for warning them from their fins in his Blood -, this Man and his Leaders ieem to be Educated in fuch an Academy, as F eft us thought Paul had been, and to be made by Satan the Stumbling-block of the unbelieving World, to perfwade them to laugh at Chriftianity as we do at the Fopperies of Mahomet\ Alcoran •, and to make all the Nations of Heathens and Infidels believe that they cannot be Chriftians, unlefs they will be mad and fenfe-lefs too: While Senfes, Reafon, Scripture, the Hiftory of the Church, and Writings of the Ancients,the Tradition and Judgement of the far greateft part of the Church, together with Charity, Humanity, and Peace, are all denyed in obedience to one Man y that, becaufc one Prince and his Clergy made him the firft Biihop in hisEmpire and Councils, feigneth himfelf to be the Univerfal Monarch of the World •, and undertaketh an Apoftlefbip and Government at the Antipodes ( when his zealoufeft Bimops formerly fome of them thought there was no fuch place -,) and obligeth himfelf to the care of Souls farther than

C*4)

Drake and Candijh Sailed, even in abundance of unknown Lands 5 and fas his Agents oonfelfed to the Ah affixes ) where his Miflioners have no accels.

The ium of all the Hiftory of this Matter is, The Fathers culled it as we do, fometime Chrift's Body, and fometime ^he Figure, or reprefentation of his Body, and often Bread : And from the Name, in the dark Age, the Thing grew controvated, and France was the chief Seat of the Contention: Bellarmine himfelffaith,that an. 820. [PafchafiusRatbertus,^ Abbot ^ was the firfi Man that fe-rioujly and copiottjh Wrote of the truth of the Body and Blood of the Lord in the Euch riji againft, Bertram^ who he thinks was one of the firlt that Wrote againft it. Bell, de fcript. Eccl.Johan.Parifienfis and the Sorbonifts concluded that neither Opinion was de fide : But the Pope chanced to be on the other* and the Council of Trent hath now made it de fide. Qu. Whether the Sorbonifts knew not that Tradition which Parents teach their Children ? nor any of thofe that were againft Ratbertus ?

But the Difcourfer pretendeth in the end to Anfwer Objections: But he rirft made them himfelf fo thin, that he might not defpair of faying fomething, which a Man deep in his Cups, or one that is little ufed to the Exercife of his Brain, might poffibly. take for a Rational Anfwer. But if the Reader be a Man that will be at fo much pains to efcape delufion, as to Head over the Arguments againft Tranfubftantiation in the forementioned (little) Book of R, B. and then try whether he can here find them Anfwered 5 I may conjecture that he will not boaft ©f the Difcourfer's performances.

He begins the Objection with a [ why doth not this marvelom change appear to our Senfes, as well as other mrvthfts mrh: as the wtter turned into Wine, &c]

C'5)

Iconfefs it is ftrmgc F-'e/b and Blood, that no fenfe can perceive : But affiritual Body may be out of the perception of our Senfe. But did not the Difcourfer know, that it is another kind of Objection that we make ? Not {yvhy doth not God fhe.v m t e Miracle to our Senfe? ] but {whether God deceive all our- Senfes and Intellect which there perce;ve Breadavd wine, -when there is none ? 1 It is not, whether Senfe pertefoe Ckrifl ? but, [n'Av/7- seafeper^ ceive Bread and mni ? ] It is not, whether Senfe tk> pri~ lativfy nrtperceiv ; but, whether it here Ptfitfatly trre % and the firft intellective perception of the fenfate Object, be an Errour ?

But under the Coats of this firft part, he brings in a little of the true Objection at laft, [ i; // wc>dd f.^ow, that " we mght call in quejiion the whole Myjlery of Cbriftia-" nity, &c7\

His Aniwer to all is, By & liftimRia* of Miracles ; feme are to convince Unbelievers • fomt to ?aniii$c and fave Believers : And thefe are not to he the oljecl of our Senfes. He inftanceth in Baptism, if winch ^ as an outward and viCiole Si<?n* is wrought an invifi'le Grace in the Soul of the baptized • though view the Chid as much as you will, you can by none of your Senfes perceive any mutation wrought.

Anfw. As your Tranfubjlantiation feemeth devifed to make Infidels, io doth your Doctrine of £aptj(w ieem made to make AnabaptiJIs. Is it by a Miracle that Bap-tifm givctli Grace to the Adult, or not ? If not, will not Men rather turn Anabaptifts, than believe that Infants can have no Grace by Baptifm, but by Miracle $ when that Sacrament was inftituted to give Grace to the Adult without a Miracle, and Scripture mentioneth no fuch difference of the Effects ? But if it be by Miracle to the

(66)

Adult, is it not alfo by Miracle, that Men receive Grace by Reading, Preaching, or other means ? You'll never prove one a Miracle, and not the other. And before we come to the Difpute between the Jefuites and fome Fry-ars, the Armimans againft fome Caivini[ts^ whether all Grace wfu\ed be a Miracle, we mud beftow more time to agree of the definition of a Miracle, than is congruous to our prefent bufinefs. Overdoing is undoing : They that will make Men believe, that all Grace and Chriftianity is a Miracle, I doubt, do but drive men from the belief of all.

But this Difcourfer tells us, that you fee no change on a Child. Anfw. And is all a Miracle that is unieen ? Is God a Miracle ? Are Angels and all Spirits Miracles ? Is the Soul of a Man, or of a Beaft, or the Life of a Plant a Miracle^becaufe unfeen? Then all Grace however wrought is a Miracle ♦, yea, and every thought of a mans heart both good and evil.

Is all a Miracle that is done by God alone, without fe-cond Caufes ? Then his moving the firft created Motor were a Miracle. And yet who can fay, that no fecond Caufe is uled in the conveyance of Grace ?

But if you could prove that Word and Sacraments work Grace by miracle, you would make us lefs wonder that it is no more common: And here the Prieft cannot do this Miracle when he will, for it muft be on a difpoled Subject: But your Priefts can make Bread to be no Bread, by miracle, when they will. But S. Paid faith, Are all works of miracles'? But how much greater Miracles your Priefts are feigned to work, than the raifing of Lazarus 9 or any fuch like 5 and how your feigned Miracles are confufed, is fhewed fully by the forefaid Author.

But the Qjieftioa, whether the Sacrament work by.

miracle/

C<7)

miracle, is one • and that, whether it be it felfa miracle, is another.Gods workings are fecret to us,as the wind whole courfe we cannot defcribe^^.j.But is theSacrament it felf a Miracle ? The Word is not lb: Baptifm is not fo: You feign not your Confirmation to be lb: (though Cyril a-forefaid make the change of the Bread and of the Oyl to be alike.) And is only this one Ordinance a Miracle ?

But if it were, what's that to the pofitive deception-of all ourSenfes ?

He tells us of the Hypoftatical Union, anlwered before: What Senfes are deceived by that? Doth Senfe judge that Chrift was not God ? Or that there is no Trinity ? Or that a Virgin may not conceive ? Not at all: Senfe neither tells us that it is fo, or that it is not. Therefore to tell us of things hidden from Senfe,. is impertinent. All the fpiritual and nobleft parts of N iture are out of the reach of our bodily Senfes: But Senfe is our only firft perceiver of all its own proper Objects, and the Intellects firit perception of them, is only as they are fenfate.

But the only pertinent Anfwer given, is, \jve may al-way truH our Senses about their oven Objects, and in due eircumjlances, and when tve haze not pofttive grounds to think, either God Almighty by himfelf, or by an Angel\ or permijfn'ely by a Devil, represents things otherrvife than they are7\

Anfrv. When things are represented otherrvife than they */*<?, it is either in other Jenjib/e qualities than they havc y or elfe fomething elfe is under thofe qualities, than what thev naturally fignifie •, or elfe it is by altering the Senfe, Organ, or Medium. The firft is a meer contradiction : To male an Object, to be what it rv.ts not, is ufual; but to make it at the fime inftant to he what it is not, is a contradiction. Therefore by representing you cannot rationally

nally mean this •, c. g. To rcprefent a rough thing as imooth, a little thing as great, a white thing as black, by real alterations or thole qualities making them to be fo.

But to make them feem fo, when really they are not fo > muft be by the failing of the Medium, Organ, Scnfe, phantafie, or Intellect,

i. And for the Medium, no doubt but God can fo alter it eafily, as to deceive all mens Senfes: And in our prefent cafe, where all the five Senfes of all the found men in the World, that try, are pretended to be deceived, God is able to do it, by altering the Medium of every Senfe that hath a Medium : (For whether tacius have Any diftinct from the Organ is undetermined.)

2. And the fame is to be laid of the Organ^ Sexfe, Phantafie, and Intellect: Quoad potent/am, no doubt but that God that can annihilate them can deprave them w hen he pleafe, and make a man fenfelefs, deceived, doting, melancholy, or mad •, either privatively, by withholding his neceffary natural aids 5 or poftivelj, by overcoming contraries.

But the Queftion is not, Whether God can do tiiis per potenti m ; but, Whether he will do it, or can will to d* it in fuch cafe as ours, in confidence with his Governing wifdom and Goodness, and that Truth and Con/lancj which he manifelteth in the Government of the World. That he may and doth penally make men fenfelefs, mad, and dead, we doubt not; and that thofe that would not receive the love of the Truth, that they might be faved, may permiflively be given up to ftrong delufions to believe a Lye : That all they might he damned that believed not the truths but had pie a fur c in unrig hteoufnefs, 2 Theff. 2. ii 3 12*

But

e<*9)

But that God doth thus (not penally, but) as a bleffing, and not upon mens forfaking him and his Truth, but while he is communicating Himfilf and hU Truth to them, and to make a Deceit or Lye the ordinary Means of Truth and Holinefs, and that he fliould do this ordinarily as the Govormur, Bene faff or, and Saviour of Mankind, and lb make Falfliood (not of his permitting, but of his own effecting) to be the ordinary way of frvina men; all this is contradiction • contrary to his Will revealed in Nature and Scripture, and contrary to his Perfection, who needed not to Govern the World by Deceit or Lyes, as want* ina; neither Poivcr, ivifdom, or Goodnefs to do otherw iie. Grace confifteth in the illumin.tticn of the Mnd, which revealeth Truth, and not in theErrour or Deception of the Mind, by deceiving the Scnfes. Gods Works of Nature difcerned or perceived by our Natural Senfe and Phantafie, and lb by Natural Apprehenfion of the Intellect, are his fir ft way of Revelation, in which he is moft clear and confiant. And we are Men and Animals before we are Believers, and Faith is grafted into the Stock of Nature, and reclifietb, illuminateth, elevateth, per-fecieth it, but doth not deftroy it, deprave it, deceive men, and make them mad or fenielefs.

But you tell us of many excepted Cafes, in which God may deceive our Senles, or we may not truft them: No doubt, we may never truft them for that which belongs not to them, but is beyond them, (as to know whether God can affume Flefh, whether he can impregnate a Virgin • whether there be Trinity in Unit)' : There be many things that Senfe is no Judge of, one way or other. But when there is an ObjecJ near m, Auly fcituate, which Senfe was made to perceive, (as a quantitative, fapid^ •eUrifcroHs, &c, fub/lance) and there is no natural defect

sr\

C7°)

in Medium, Organ, Senfe, Phantafie, or Natural Intellect, to tell us of fuch excepted Cafes, is, i. To deface or (lander the Providence of God, who Governeth by truth and order: 2. To make Mercy to confift in the iubverfi-on of Nature, and Penal Atts to be gracious. 3. To leave man utterly uncertain of every Article of Faith, yea, to bring in Scepticifm, and leave us no certainty in the world. For if God may and do, in fo many Cafes as you name, deceive all the Senles and Perceptions of all men, even his faithfulleft Servants in the World, by Himfelf) by Angels, by Devils permitted^ hov fliall any man know when he doth otherwise ? You fay, [7/// vpe have pojitive grounds to think thcfe.~\ But, if God can do thas^ how can you tell that he doth it not without telling «*, or giving us pojitive grounds'?. Andwhoknow-eth what thofe pofitive grounds are? Or that ever he read or heard a word, or law a thing which you may call a ground ? For if you know not fir ft that the perception of Senfe, and things fen fate is true, you know not that ever you heard any thing to fufpend your belief of them: Or that what you hear is true. And how will you prove againft the Infidels, that God cannot Lye, or deceive us by a Prophet, an Angel, or a Voice from Heaven, or a Writing, if he can and do daily deceive all our Senfes, about fuch Objects as they are made to perceive ?

And what a War do you raife againft the life of Faith, as if it had not difficulties enough without fuch ? If you Ihould fet a Candle before Infidels or doubting per/ons, and fay, \Jfthisbe Light , the Gofpel is fa/fej would you be a Preacher of Chrift or Satan? And if you fet the Confecrated Bread And wine before them, and fay, [See them^fmell^ tafte, feel them; if this be Bread and wine the GofpeJ is falfe . ] would you not be the Preachers of

T nfi^eltf\; ? ]3 u t

C70

But I muft confider, that fo much being faid already in the forefaid Dialogue, which you give no AnrVer to, I muft ratlier flay till that be anfwered, than repeat it here.

But, at the leafr, you fatisfie us, when you grant, that we muft truft our Senfes 'till we have poftive grounds for the contrary • and lo the Cafe before us is this: You (ay, [They that will be faved, muft believe that God in mercy to illuminate mens minds, deeeiveth all the found mens Sen-fes in the world (that try) about thofe things which naturally .ire the proper Objects of Senfe, and duly qualified.; and they m'tfl believe that there is no Bread or H ine,\\hen all their Senfes prejent them .is fneb to the Intellect, which ne-ceffarily perceiveth them ' fuch m [enfrte ; and they mufl believe, th.it to govern, illuminate, and fanftife teshj fuch deceit, God enable th every Priefl, how ignorant and wicked fcever, to verefie all the Contradict'ions before opened, and to vpork, as oft ns he pleaieth, in every Mafs above thirty Miracles, with many miraculous aggravations.] And the proof of all this is, i. That the fame Cbrift that laid [_l am the Door, the true Vine, the shepherd, a Sower, a Hu^.'an dm.in,the Bridegroom^ and [pAe ordinarily by Par i-bles 7 an4 faid in this fame Sacrifice or Sacrament [This Cup is the New Teflament in my blood :, ] and in all thefc is to be under flood p.irahltcally ; yet firing at the fame time [This is my Body] is to le understood literally, though S. Paul over and over caU it Bread."} 2. And this Expofi-tion is delivered to us by the Rom in Pope and h'S Clergie, and by forne Prices in the Ninth and Tenth Ages^ when their oven Writers fay, that their Popes were M nflers not to be named, and the Ages were for horrid Ignorance the (hame of the Church. And after that, 12 15. a General Council Decreed it fir ft, which alfo Decreed the. ex termini

K tion

th>» of aUcbrifiUns dsHeretjckj, that will believe mans Senses berei» y and tbeExeommunicatisn and Ds portion of all Temporal Lords^ thatwiU art exterminate at fuck Subjects^ and the difobliging their Vaffals from their jiUegiAxce^ and giving their DcminUns tcethers z irhile yet the Judgment And Tradition of the fur great?jl f&rt of the cbrijian World is againft them^ and the Writings of the Ancient Doctors oj c the chttrcb - and the Pope and its Clervie dire not pretend to bait received by .Memory and Tradition .in Expof'tion of the Bible ', nor do give m any proof of their pretended Tradition of this one Text^ that is con-(id-rable^ bejides their own bare word, This is the true Cafe.

TOSTSCTQTT.

Since the Writing of this, I firft faw Larrogues French Dilcourfe, and therein the Citation of Joh.Parifl-enjis Opinion about Tranfubftantiation, and the sorbo-nifis determination, that neither-Opinion was /. f^,and determined: And did they not thdi know Trad hi in ?

Since that I have leen Biihop Coufns Hiitory of Tran-fubfhntiation, which lb ful!y proveth the NoveJty of it> as againtt the Tndiion and Judgment of .' irch,

and that by Fathers a nd many Councils, in , t jjj Innoc. . and evenufrer Petrtu Blefenfls^ and 5 nen'is {\\ ho firft mane it) ?nd Innoc, 3, *vho in'il ed it, few believed it in moil Countries, jis^tl 1 Authors confei$ 5 that I repented t. ; ut I had

(73)

medled with die Citation of Authors, which is done by him (6 much better: And indeed fuch imaaf* cr I

ftimonyis produced by him, (and th.it ba fmall

Yolumn) to prove that the conitant judgment of the Chudl hath been agaiulr. TraniubfLntiati-n , thai I need not refer the doubting Reader to any other Book, nor provoke the Papiih CO trv their if length upon any other: ,"i hough HtfpijgidM^ Ujbfr, cbamier,

. and abundance more, have depx k beyond all reafonable contradiction.,)

FIP^IS.