speaks very many truths beyond the cure of their glosses; which they have changed and altered several times. But that this matter concerning St. Austin may be yet clearer, his own third book, 'De Doctrinâ Christianâ,' is so plain for us in this question, that when Frudegardus, in the time of Charles the Bald, had, upon occasion of the dispute, which then began to be hot and interested in this question, read this book of St. Austin, he was changed to the opinion of a spíritual and mysterious presence; and upon occasion of that his being persuaded by St. Austin, Paschasius Ratherdus wrote to him, as of a question then doubted of by many persons, as is to be seen in his epistle to Frudegardus. I end this of St. Austin with those words of his, which he intends by way of rule for expounding these and the like words of Scripture taken out of this book of Christian doctrine;' "Locutio preceptiva," &c. "A preceptive speech, forbidding a crime or commanding something good or profitable, is not figurative; but if it seems to command a crime, or forbid a good, then it is figurative: unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man,' &c. seems to command a wickedness, it is therefore a figure commanding us to communicate with the passion of our Lord, and sweetly and profitably to lay it up in our memory, that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us." I shall not need to urge that this holy sacrament is called "Eucharistia carnis et sanguinis, "The eucharist of the body and blood," by Irenæus; 6 "Corpus symbolicum et typicum," by Origen;-" In typo sanguis;" by St. Jerome; similitudo, figura, typus, ¿vтítunov, images, enigmas, representations, expressions, exemplars,' of the passion, by divers others: that which I shall note here is this, that in the council of Constantinople" it was publicly professed, that the sacrament is not the body of Christ Quoa, but Jére, not by nature, but by representment;' for so it is expounded. Τὸ θέσει ἥτοι ἡ εἰκὼν αὐτοῦ ἁγία, “ the holy image of it, and Τῆς εὐχαριστίας ἄρτον ὡς ἀψευδῆ εἰκόνα τῆς φυσικῆς σαρκὸς, ' the eucharistical bread is the true image of the natural flesh, and ἡ Θεοπαράδοτος εἰκὼν τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ, and ἀψευδῆς αὐτοῦ εἰκὼν τῆς ἐν σαρκὶ οἰκονομίας Χριστοῦ· “ A figure or o Lib. iii. c. 15, 16. A. D. 754. of 338. B. B. image delivered by God, of his flesh; and a true image of the incarnate dispensation of Christ 9. These things are found in the third tome of the sixth action of the second Nicene council, where a pert deacon, ignorant and confident, had boldly said, that none of the apostles or fathers had ever called the sacrament the 'image' of Christ's body; that they were called avrirura, ، antitypes, before consecration, he grants; but after consecration, they are called, and are, and are believed to be, the body and blood of Christ properly; which, I suppose, he might have learned of Damascene, who, in opposition to the Iconoclasts, would not endure the word type,' or 'image,' to be used concerning the holy sacrament; for they would admit no other image but that: he, in defiance of them who had excommunicated him for a worshipper of images, and a half Saracen, would admit any image but that; but denied that to be an image or type of Christ'. For Christ said not, This is the type of my body, but it is it. But, however, this new question began to brangle the words of type and antitype, and the manner of speaking began to be changed, yet the article, as yet, was not changed. For the fathers used the words of type, and antitype, and image, &c. to exclude the natural sense of the sacramental body; and Damascene, and Anastasius Sinaita, and some others of that age, began to refuse those words, lest the sacrament be thought to be nothing of reality, nothing but an image. And that this really was the sense of Damascene, appears by his words, recited in the acts of the second council of Nice, affirming, that the Divine bread is made Christ's body by assumption and inhabitation of the Spirit of Christ, in the same manner as water is made the laver of regeneration. But, however they were pleased to speak in the Nicene assembly, yet, in the Roman edition of the councils, the publishers and collectors were wiser, and put on this marginal note: ἀντίτυπα μετὰ τὸ ἁγιασθῆναι πολλάκις εὕρεται καλούμενα τω ἅγια δώρα "The holy gifts are oftentimes called types and figures even after consecration ;"-particularly by Gregory Nazianzen, and St. Cyril of Jerusalem. I remember only one thing objected to this testimony of so many bishops, that 4 Vide Concil. General. tom. iii. p. 599. edit. Rom. r De Fide, lib. iv. c. 14. Tò ɛửλoyndèv, but that the thing which had been blessed was wine,' he showed again, saying to his disciples, I will not drink of the fruit of this vine till I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."-Now St. Clement, proving by Christ's sumption of the eucharist, that he did drink wine, must mean the sacramental symbol to be truly wine, and Christ's blood allegorically, that holy stream of gladness;' or else he had not concluded, by that argument, against the Encratites. Upon which account these words are much to be valued, because by our doctrine in this article, he only could confute the Encratites; as by the same doctrine explicated, as we explicate it, Tertullian confuted the Marcionites, and Theodoret and Gelasius confuted the Nestorians, and Eutychians; if the doctrine of transubstantiation had been true, these four heresies had by them, as to their particular arguments relating to this matter, been unconfuted. 22. St. Cyprian, in his tractate de Unctione,' which Canisius, H rding, Bellarmine, and Lindan cite, hath these words, "Dedit itaque Dominus noster," &c. “Therefore our Lord, in his table in which he did partake his last banquet with his disciples, with his own hands gave bread and wine; but on the cross he gave to the soldiers his body to be wounded, that, in the apostles, the sincere truth, and the true sincerity being more secretly imprinted, he might expound to the Gentiles, how wine and bread should be his flesh and blood, and by what reasons causes might agree with effects, and divers names and kinds (viz., bread and wine) might be reduced to one essence, and the signifying, and the signified, might be reckoned by the same words:"—and in his third epistle hath these words, "Vinum quo Christi sanguis ostenditur," "wine by which Christ is shown or declared:" Here I might cry out, as Bellarmine upon a much slighter ground, "Quid clariùs dici potuit ?" But I forbear; being content to enjoy the real benefits of these words without a triumph. But I will use it thus far, that it shall outweigh the words cited out of the tract de Cœnâ Domini,' by Bellarmine, by the Rhemists, by the Roman catechism, by Perron, and by Gregory de Valentiâ. The words are these, "Panis iste, quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat, non effigie sed naturâ, mutatus omnipotentiâ verbi factus est caro, et sicut in personâ Christi," &c. "The bread, which the Lord gave to his 6 disciples, is changed, not in shape, but in nature, being made flesh by the omnipotency of the word;" and as in "the person of Christ the humanity was seen, and the divinity lay hid, so in the visible sacrament, the divine essence, after an ineffable manner, pours itself forth, that devotion about the sacraments might be religion, and that a more sincere entrance may be opened to the truth, whereof the body and the blood are sacraments, even unto the participation of the Spirit, not unto the consubstantiality of Christ." This testimony, as Bellarmine says, admits of no answer. But, by his favour, it admits of many: 1. Bellarmine cites but half of those words, and leaves out that which gives him answer. 2. The words affirm, that that body and blood are but a sacrament of a reality and truth; but if it were, really and naturally, Christ's body, then it were itself, veritas et corpus,' and not only a sacrament. 3. The truth [of which these are sacramental] is the participation of the Spirit;' that is, a spiritual communication. 4. This does not arrive ad consubstantialitatem Christi, to a participation or communion of the substance of Christ;' which it must needs do, if bread were so changed in nature, as that it were substantially the body of Christ. 5. These sermons of St. Cyprian's title and name are under the name also of Arnoldus, abbot of Bonavilla, in the time of St. Bernard, as appears in a manuscript in the library of All Souls College, of which I had the honour some time to be a fellow. However, it is confessed on all sides, that this tractate is not St. Cyprian's; and who is the father of it, if Arnoldus be not, cannot be known; neither his age nor reputation. His style sounds like the eloquence of the monastery, being direct friar's Latin, as appears by his honorificare, amaricare, injuriare, demembrare, sequestrare, attitulare, spiritualitas, te supplico,' and some false Latin besides; and therefore he ought to pass for nothing; which, I confess, I am sorry for, as to this question; because, to my sense, he gives us great advantage in it. But I am content to lose what our cause needs not. I am certain they can get nothing by him. For if the authority were not incompetent, the words were impertinent to their purpose, but very much against them: only let me add out of the same sermon these words: "Panis iste communis, in carnem et sanguinem mutatus, procurat vitam et incrementum corporibus, ideòque VOL. X. G ex consueto effectu fidei nostra adjuta infiru. argumento edocta et visibilibus sacramentis iness effectum, et non tam corporali quàm spirituali u cum Christo uniri:" "That common bread, b into flesh and blood, procures life and increment dies; therefore our infirmity, being helped with effect of faith, is taught by a sensible argumen effect of eternal life is in visible sacraments, a are united to Christ, not so much by a corporal, a ritual change." If both these discourses be pu let the authority of the writer be what it will, the better. 23. In the dialogues against the Marcionites, out of Maximus in the time of Commodus or Sc thereabouts, Origen is brought in speaking thus: E φασιν, ἄσαρκος, καὶ ἄναιμος ἦν, ποίας σαρκὸς, ἢ τίνος 5. ποίου αἵματος εἰκόνας διδοὺς ἄρτόν τε καὶ ποτήριον ἐνετέ μαθηταῖς διὰ τούτων τὴν ἀνάμνησιν αὐτοῦ ποιεῖσθαι; Marcionites say, Christ had neither flesh nor blood, flesh or of what blood did he, giving bread and the cr images, command his disciples, that by these a reme of him should be made?" 1. 24. To the same purpose are the words of Eus Τὰ σύμβολα τῆς ἐνθέου οἰκονομίας τοῖς αὐτοῦ παρεδίδου μα τὴν εἰκόνα τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος ποιεῖσθαι παρακελευόμενος. gave to his disciples the symbols of Divine economy, comm ing the image or type of his own body to be made:" and a τούτου δῆτα τοῦ θύματος τὴν μνήμην ἐπὶ τραπέζης ἐντελεῖν. συμβόλων τοῦτε σώματος αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ σωτηρίου αἵματος και θεσμοὺς τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης παρειληφότες. “ They receive command, according to the constitution of the New Testame to make a memory of this sacrifice upon the table, by the syn bols of his body and healthful blood." 25. St. Ephrem" the Syrian, patriarch of Antioch, 1 dogmatical and decretory in this question, τὸ παρὰ τῶν πιστῶν λαμβανόμενον σῶμα Χριστοῦ καὶ τῆς αἰσθητῆς οὔσιας οὐκ ἐξίσταται φύσεως, καὶ τῆς νοητῆς ἀδιαίρετον μένει χάριτος : “ The body of Christ, received by the faithful, departs not from his sensible S A. D. 190. t Lib. viii. de Monst. Evang. c. 1. lib. i. c. ult. u S. Ephrem. de sacris Antioch. Legibus apud Phot. lib. i. co. 229. Scotus Jesuita exponit iíorara. ' cognoscitur,' contra sensum loci. |