Sacrament of his body and blood, which is in the consecrated ART. bread and cup, is called his body and blood: not that the XXVIII. bread is properly his body, or the cup properly his blood; but because they contain in them the mystery of his body and blood. St. Austin says, That Sacraments must have some resemblance of those things of which they are the Sacraments: so the Sacrament of the body of Christ is after some manner his body; and the Sacrament of his blood is after some manner his blood. And speaking of the Eucharist as a sacrifice of praise, he says, The flesh and blood of this sacrifice was promised before Ep. 23. the coming of Christ, by the sacrifices that were the types of it. ad Bonifac. In the passion the sacrifice was truly offered; and after his ascension it is celebrated by the Sacrament of the remembrance of it. And when he speaks of the murmuring of the Jews, upon our Saviour's speaking of giving his flesh to them, to eat it; he adds, They foolishly and carnally thought, Lib. xx. that he was to cut off some parcels of his body, to be given to con. Faust. them: but he shews that there was a Sacrament hid there. in Psal. And he thus paraphrases that passage, The words that Ixcviii. 5. have spoken to you, they are spirit and life: understand spiritually that which I have said; for it is not this body which you see, that you are to eat, or to drink this blood which they shall shed, who crucify me. But I have recommended a Sacrament to you, which being spiritually understood, shall quicken you and though it be necessary that it be celebrated visibly, yet it must be understood invisibly.

c. 21.

Cor.

c. 5.

Primasius compares the Sacrament to a pledge, which a Comm. in dying man leaves to any one whom he loved. But that 1 Ep. ad which is more important than the quotation of any of the words of the Fathers is, that the author of the books of the Sacrament, which pass under the name of St. Am- Lib. iv. de brose, though it is generally agreed that those books were Sacram. writ some ages after his death, gives us the of conprayer secration, as it was used in his time: he calls it the heavenly words, and sets it down. The offices of the Church are a clearer evidence of the doctrine of that Church than all the discourses that can be made by any doctor in it; the one is the language of the whole body, whereas the other are only the private reasonings of particular men: and, of all the parts of the office, the prayer of consecration is that which does most certainly set out to us the sense of that Church that used it. But that which makes this remark the more important is, that the prayer, as set down by this pretended St. Ambrose, is very near the same with that which is now in the canon of the Mass; only there is one very important variation, which will best appear by setting both down.

ART. That of St. Ambrose is, Fac nobis hanc oblationem, aXXVIII. scriptam, rationabilem, acceptabilem, quod est figura corporis.

et sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui pridie quam pateretur, &c. That in the canon of the mass is, Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quæ sumus benedictam, ascriptam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabilemque facere digneris: ut nobis corpus et sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui Domini nostri Jesu Christi.

We do plainly see so great a resemblance of the latter to the former of these two prayers, that we may well conclude, that the one was begun in the other; but at the same time we observe an essential difference. In the former this sacrifice is called the figure of the body and blood of Christ. Whereas in the latter it is prayed, that it may become to us the body and blood of Christ. As long as the former was the prayer of consecration, it is not possible for us to imagine, that the doctrine of the corporal presence could be received; for that which was believed to be the true body and blood of Christ, could not be called, especially in such a part of the office, the figure of his body and blood; and therefore the change that was made in this prayer was an evident proof of a change in the doctrine; and if we could tell in what age that was done, we might then upon greater certainty fix the time, in which this change was inade, or at least in which the inconsistency of that prayer with this doctrine was observed.

I have now set down a great variety of proofs reduced under different heads; from which it appears evidently that the Fathers did not believe this doctrine, but that they did affirm the contrary very expressly. This Sacrament continued to be so long considered as the figure or image of Christ's body, that the seventh General Council, which met at Constantinople in the year 754, and consisted of above three hundred and thirty Bishops, when it condemned the worship of images, affirmed that this was the only image that we might lawfully have of Christ; and that he had appointed us to offer this image of his body, to wit, the substance of the bread. That was indeed contradicted with much confidence by the second Council of Nice, in which, in opposition to what appears to this day in all the Greek liturgies, and the Greek Fathers, they do positively deny, that the Sacrament was ever called the image of Christ; and they affirm it to be the true body of Christ.

In conclusion, I shall next shew how this doctrine crept into the Church; for this seems plausible, that a doctrine.

XXVIII.

of this nature could never have got into the Church in ART. any age, if those of the age that admitted it had not known that it had been the doctrine of the former age, and so upwards to the age of the Apostles. It is not to be denied, but that very early both Justin Martyr and Irenæus thought, that there was such a sanctification of the elements, that there was a divine virtue in them: aud in those very passages which we have urged from the arguings of the Fathers against the Eutychians, though they do plainly prove that they believed that the substance of bread and wine did still remain; yet they do suppose an union of the elements to the body of Christ, like that of the human nature's being united to the divine. Here a foundation was laid for all the superstructure that was afterwards raised upon it. For though the liturgies and public offices continued long in the first simplicity, yet the Fathers, who did very much study eloquence, chiefly the Greek Fathers, carried this matter very far in their sermons and homilies. They did only apprehend the profanation of the Sacrament, from the unworthiness of those who came to it; and being much set on the begetting a due reverence for so holy an action, and a seriousness in the performance of it, they urged all the topics that sublime figures or warm expressions could help them with: and with this exalted eloquence of theirs we must likewise observe the state that the world fell in, in the fifth century vast swarms out of the North overrun the Roman empire, and by a long continued succession of new invaders all was sacked and ruined. In the West, the Goths were followed by the Vandals, the Alans, the Gepides, the Franks, the Sweves, the Huns, and the Lombards, some of these nations; and in the conclusion the Saracens and Turks in the East made havoc of all that was polite or learned; by which we lost the chief writings of the first and best times; but instead of these, many spurious ones were afterwards produced, and they passed easily in dark and ignorant ages. All fell under much oppression and misery, and Europe was so overrun with barbarity and ignorance, that it cannot be easily apprehended, but by such as have been at the pains to go through one of the ungratefullest pieces of study that can be well imagined, and have read the productions of those ages. The understanding the Scriptures, or languages, or history, was not so much as thought on. Some affected homilies or descantings on the rituals of the Church, full of many very odd speculations about them, are among the best of the writings of those times. They were easily

ART. imposed on by any new forgery; witness the reception XXVIII. and authority that was given to the Decretal Epistles of

the Popes of the first three centuries; which for many ages maintained its credit, though it was plainly a forgery of the eighth century, and was contrived with so little art, that there is not in them colour enough to excuse the ignorance of those that were deceived by it. As it is an easy thing to mislead ignorant multitudes, so there is somewhat in incredible opinions and stories, that is suited to such a state of mankind: and as men are apt to fancy that they see sprights, especially in the night, so the more of darkness and unconceivableness that there is in an opinion, it is the more properly calculated for such times. The ages that succeeded were not only times of ignorance, but they were also times of much corruption. The writers of the fourth and fifth centuries give us dismal representations of the corruptions of their times; and the scandalous unconstancy of the councils of those ages, is too evident a proof of what we find said by the good men of those days: but things fell lower and lower in the succeeding ages. It is an amazing thing, that in the very office of consecrating bishops, examinations are ordered concerning those crimes, the very mention of which give horror; De Coitu cum Masculo et cum Quadrupedibus.

The Popes more particularly were such a succession of men, that, as their own historians have described them, nothing in any history can be produced that is like them. The characters they give them are so monstrous, that nothing under the authority of unquestioned writers, and the evidence of the facts themselves, could make them credible.

But that which makes the introduction of this doctrine appear the more probable is, that we plainly see the whole body of the Clergy was every where so influenced by the management of the Popes, that they generally entered into combinations to subject the temporalty to the spiritualty and therefore every opinion that tended to render the persons of the Clergy sacred, and to raise their character high, was sure to receive the best entertainment, and the greatest encouragement possible. Nothing could carry this so far as an opinion that represented the Priest as having a character by which, with a few words, he could make a God. The opinion of Transubstantiation was such an engine, that it being once set on foot, could not but meet with a favourable reception from those who were then seeking all possible colours to give credit to

XXVIII.

their authority, and to advance it. The numbers of the ART. Clergy were then so great, and their contrivances were so well suited to the credulity and superstition of those times, that, by visions and wonderful stories confidently vouched, they could easily infuse any thing into weak and giddy multitudes. Besides, that the genius of those times led them much to the love of pomp and shew; they had lost the true power and beauty of religion, and were willing, by outward appearances, to balance or compensate for their great defects.

But besides all those general considerations, which such as are acquainted with the history of those ages know do belong to them in a much higher degree than is here set forth; there are some specialties that relate to this doctrine in particular, which will make the introduction of it appear the more practicable. This had never been condemned in any former age: for as none condemn errors by anticipation or prophecy; so the promoters of it had this advantage, that no formal decision had been made against them. It did also in the outward sound agree with the words of the institution, and the phrases generally used, of the elements being changed into the body and blood of Christ: outward sound and appearance was enough in ignorant ages to hide the change that was made. The step that is made from believing any thing in general, with an indistinct and confused apprehension, to a determined way of explaining it, is not hard to be brought about.

:

The people in general believed that Christ was in the Sacrament, and that the elements were his body and blood, without troubling themselves to examine in what manner all this was done: so it was no great step in a dark age to put a particular explanation of this upon them and this change being brought in without any visible alterations made in the worship, it must needs have passed with the world the more easily for in all times. visible rites are more minded by the people than speculative points, which they consider very little. No alterations were at first made in the worship; the adoration of the host, and the processions invented to honour it, came afterwards.

:

Honorius the IVth, who first appointed the adoration, Greg. Dedoes not pretend to found it on ancient practice: only he cret. Lib. commands the priests to tell the people to do it: and he iii. Tit. 42. at first enjoined only an inclination of the head to the Sacrament. But his successor Gregory the IXth did more resolutely command it, and ordered a bell to be rung at

cap. 10.