66

And this doubtless is the meaning of Origen in his eighth book against Celsus, p. 399. [c. 33. p. 766.]; where, speaking of the holy Eucharist, he says, that therein," we eat bread by prayer (i. e. by the prayer "of consecration for the descent of the divine Spirit upon it) made a certain holy body, which also sanc"tifies those who with a sound or sincere purpose "of heart use it s;" but that neither Justin Martyr, nor Irenæus, nor Origen ever dreamed of the transubstantiation of the elements, is most evident. For Justin Martyr and Irenæus do both of them plainly affirm, that by eating and drinking the bread and wine in the Eucharist, our bodies are nourished," and that the "bread and wine are digested and "turned into the substance of our bodies;" which to affirm of the glorified body of Christ were impious and blasphemous, and to affirm the same of the mere accidents of the bread and wine would be very absurd and ridiculous. And Origen expressly saith, "that what we eat in the Eucharist is bread, but "bread sanctified and made holy by prayer, and

66

66

which, by the divine virtue that accompanies it, "sanctifieth all those who worthily receive it." He that would see more of this notion of the ancient Fathers, and particularly those places of Justin Martyr and Irenæus fully cleared and vindicated from the forced and absurd glosses of the Romanists, may consult my learned friend Mr. Grabe, in his notes upon Justin Martyr's first Apology, of his own edition, p. 128, 129, but especially in his large and elaborate Annotation upon Irenæus, lib. IV. cap. 34. [c. 18.]

8

Αρτους ἐσθίομεν σῶμα γενομένους, διὰ τὴν εὐχὴν ἅγιόν τι καὶ ἁγίαζον τοὺς μεθ ̓ ὑγιοῦς προθέσεως αὐτῷ χρωμένους.

I shall dismiss this article with this one only observation, that after the prodigious doctrine of transubstantiation was confirmed by the first Lateran council, there were many in the communion of the church of Rome, who could not digest it, did not in truth believe it, and wished from their hearts that their church had never defined it. For this we have the ample testimonies of very eminent writers of that church. "The conversion of the "bread and wine into Christ's body and blood," saith Cajetan, par. 3. qu. 75. article 1. “all of us do "teach in words, but in deed many deny it, think

66

66

ing nothing less $. These are diversely divided one "from another. For some, by the conversion that "is in the sacrament, understand nothing but identity of place, that is, that the bread is therefore "said to be made the body of Christ, because where "the bread is, the body of Christ becomes present "also. Others understand by the word conversion "nothing else but the order of succession, that is, "that the body succeedeth and is under the veils "of accidents, under which the bread, which they suppose to be annihilated, was before." Occam, Centilogii conclus. cap. 39, saith, "There are three "opinions about transubstantiation, of which the "first supposeth a conversion of the sacramental "elements; the second the annihilation; the third "affirmeth the bread to be in such manner transub"stantiated into the body of Christ, that it is no way changed in substance, or substantially con"verted into Christ's body, or doth cease to be, but only that the body of Christ, in every part of

66

66

[i. e. though they think that they do not deny it: putantes se non negare illam.]

VOL. II.

"it, becomes present in every part of the bread." Waldensis, tom. II. de Sacram. Eucharistiæ, cap. 19. reports out of Chrysopolitanus Zacharias's book, entitled, In unum ex quatuor, “That there were some, "perhaps many, but hardly to be discerned and "noted, who thought still as Berengarius did." The same Waldensis, in the same book, cap. 64, saith, "That some supposed the conversion that is in the σε sacrament, to be, in that the bread and wine are "assumed into the unity of Christ's person; some "thought it to be by way of impanation, and some by way of figurative and tropical appellation. The "first and second of these opinions found the better "entertainment in some men's minds, because they "grant the essential presence of Christ's body, and "yet deny not the presence of the bread still re"maining, to sustain the appearing accidents." These opinions he reports to have been very acceptable to many, not without sighs, wishing the church had decreed that men should follow one of them.

66

It cannot be doubted, but that there are at this day many in the communion of the church of Rome, who are in the same perplexity about this article of transubstantiation, and have the same wishes, that their church had never made it an article of their faith; for the absurdities of transubstantiation, and the reason of mankind, are still the same. Now what a lamentable condition are they in, who are forced to profess (yea, and all ecclesiastics now by the Trent confession in the most solemn manner to swear) that they believe what they cannot for their hearts believe; whose consciences, between the determinations of their church, and the dictates of their own reason, yea, and sense too, are continually ground

as between two millstones! I have been long upon this article, but shall be more brief on the next.

66

The next article is this: "I confess also, that “under one kind only, whole and entire Christ, and "the whole sacrament is received t." Now this article of the "sufficiency of the sacrament of the Eucharist, taken only in one kind," as it refers to, and is designed to justify the practice of the Roman church, in the constant and public administration of the sacrament to all the laity only in one kind, viz. the bread, denying them the cup, is manifestly against our Saviour's first institution of the sacrament, against apostolical practice, and the usage of the universal church of Christ for a thousand years, as is confessed by divers learned men of the Roman communion. And yet, according to the Trent creed, all men are damned that do not assent to the insolent (and as I may justly term it) antichristian decree of the Roman church in this point. And who can without astonishment reflect on the stiffness and obstinacy and uncharitableness of the Trent Fathers in this matter? Before they met, when it was noised that a council should be called to redress the manifold abuses and corruptions that were in the church, it was the longing expectation and earnest desire of many good men, that, amongst other things, the communion in both kinds might be restored to the laity. There were a multitude of pious souls, as it were, upon their knees before them, thirsting after the cup of blessing, and earnestly begging for an entire sacrament. But those duri Patres, those hardhearted Fathers, had no compassion on them,

t Fateor etiam sub altera tantum specie totum atque integrum Christum verumque sacramentum sumi.

turned a deaf ear to their loud cries and supplications, only bidding them believe for the future, (what they could not believe,) that half the sacrament was every whit as good as the whole.

Immediately follows this article; "I firmly hold "that there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained "there are relieved by the prayers of the faithful ".” Now this article of a "purgatory after this life," as it is understood and taught by the Roman church, (that is, to be a place and state of misery and torment, whereinto many faithful souls go presently after death, and there remain till they are throughly purged from their dross, or delivered thence by masses, indulgences, &c.) is contrary to Scripture, and the sense of the catholic church for at least the first four centuries, as I have at large proved in a discourse concerning the state of the souls of men in the interval between death and the resurrection: which I am ready to communicate to monsieur de Meaux, if he shall desire it. Indeed the doctrine of purgatory is not only an error, but a dangerous one too, which (I am verily persuaded) hath betrayed a multitude of souls into eternal perdition, who might have escaped hell, if they had not depended upon an after-game in purgatory. But this article, being very gainful to the Roman clergy, must above others be held fast, and constantly maintained and defended. "I firmly hold it y."

Prayers for the dead, as founded on the hypothe

" Constanter teneo purgatorium esse, animasque ibi detentas fidelium suffragiis juvari.

* [Sermon III. p. 72.]

y Constanter teneo.

[This passage, "Prayers for the deadmisery and tor"ment," is taken almost literally from the third Sermon, p. 70, &c.]