and then made that his Body which was first bread, and so by blessing, it became flesh: for otherwise hee would not have said after he had blessed it, This is my body, unlesse by blessing it, he had made it his body." Cardinall Cajetan*.]

"That part which the Gospell hath not expressed, viz, the conversion of the bread into the body and blood of Christ, we have received expressly from the Church."

Christophorus, Archbishop of Cæsareat.] "Before the words (This is my body) were uttered by Christ, if the bread by benediction had not been his bodie, that proposition had not been true: for when Christ said, Take ye, eate ye, if at that time the bread by benediction were not changed, it will follow, that Christ did command his Disciples to take and eate the substance of bread and so we must deny the Article of Transubstantiation. Therefore it is most certaine, that Christ did not consecrate by those words, neither were they any part of consecration. And in this opinion both the Councell of Trent, and all Writers did agree, till the late times of Cajetan, that Christ did consecrate the bread by blessing it; and therefore we conclude this for an infallible truth, to which both Scriptures

* Quod Evangelium non explicavit expresse, ab Ecclesia accepimus, viz. conversionem panis in corpus Christi. Cajetan, tom. 3. q. 75. ar. 1.

+ Christoph. de Cap. Fontium, lib. de correctione Theol. Scol. Lege Christoph. fol. 11. 41. 87. 18. 23. 63. 58. fol. 7. 9. &c.

and

Saint Austin is so wholly ours in this poynt, that Maldonat the Jesuite noting his exposition upon those words of Scripture: The Fathers have eaten Manna, and are dead, &c. makes this confession : "I am perswaded, that if Saint Austen, being so great an enemy to Heretikes, had lived in these our dayes, would have been of another mind, when hee had once perceived the Calvinists' interpretation to bee almost the same:" and Gregory de Valentia, observing the manifest Testimonies of Theodoret, (viz.) That the consecrated elements did remaine in their proper substance, and shape, and figure; returnes the like answer: "It is not to be marvelled, if one or more of the ancient Fathers, (before the question of Transubstantiation was thoroughly debated in the Church) haye both thought lesse considerately and truely concerning Transubstantiation. And this is an answere (saith hee) briefe, and simple, and no way inconvenient." Thus it seemes Theodoret, with other Fathers, were ignorant of the greatest mysteries of their salvation. And S. Austen did not rightly understand the corporall presence; for hee would have

* The like place out of Vasques, infra p. 103. Hoc dico persuasum me habere, Sanctis Augustinum, si nostra fuisset ætate, longè alitèr sensurum fuisse hominem omni hæreticorum generi inimicissimum cum videret ad eundem ferè modum Calvinistas hunc et illum D. Pauli locum interpretari. Mald. in .Joh. 6. v. 50. num. 80, 81.

+ Minimè mirum est, si unus aut alter, aut etiam aliqui ex veteribus minimè consideratè et rectè hâc de re senserint. Greg, de Valent. de Transubst. lib. 2. c. 7. Cusan exercit. 1. 6.

changed

changed his opinion, if hee had lived in these dayes. But their learned Cardinall Cusanus is not so reserved in his opinion of the Fathers, he speaks plainely and openly; that "certaine of the Ancient Divines are found of this minde, that the bread in the Sacrament, is not transubstantiated or changed in Nature, but remaineth still, and is cloathed with another substance more noble than itselfe." And for conclusion of this poynt, many Writers and Schoolemen in their owne Church, are so farre from granting antiquitie and universalitie to this doctrine, that they professe, the tenet of Transubstantiation was lately received into the Church for a poynt of Faith.

Scotus tells us, that before the Councell of Lateran, Transubstantiation was not beleeved as a poynt of faith. This did Bellarmine observe as a thing remarkable in Scotus, although he doth not approve the same. And Suarez his fellow Jesuite professeth; The Schoolemen, which teach, that the Doctrine of transubstantiation is not very ancient, ought to bee corrected, such as Scotus was t. It is confessed then, that Scotus, and other Schoolemen did acknowledge Transubstantiation for a new doctrine; and it is most probable, that such Schoolemen as lived not long after the Councell of Lateran, (where that doctrine was decreed for a point of faith) best

* Unum addit Scotus, quod minimè probandum quòd ante Lateranense Concilium non fuisset dogma fidei. Bell. lib. 3. de Euchar, cap. 23.

† Suar. in 3. tom. in Euchar. d. sp. 70. sect. 2.

p.

602.

under

understood the Tenets of those times. In like manner, Durand, and some of his fellowe Schoolemen after him, professed openly, that the materiall part (or substance) of the Sacramentall bread was not converted. These Testimonies are so true and evident to the world, that Bellarmine doth confesse and avoyd that saying of Scotus with a minime probandum, &c. it must not be allowed; and as touching Durand, he answereth, his doctrine is hereticall, but he is no heretike, because he is ready to submit to the judgement of the Church.

To let passe Wicliffe, the Waldenses, and others who were condemned for Heretikes for professing the same doctrine; their owne Proctors, Hostiensis and Gaufridus tell us, that there were others in those dayes, who taught, that the substance of bread did remaine; and this opinion, say they, was not to bee rejected. If we descend to this last age, their owne learned Tonstall professeth, that the beliefe of Transubstantiation within lesse then 500 yeeres, was a matter of indifference, not an Article of faith. Of the manner and meanes of the Reall presence, how it might be, either by Transubstantiation, or otherwise, perhaps it had been better to leave to every man, that would bee curious, to his owne conjecture, as before the Councell of Lateran it was left and lastly, their owne

* Bell. de Euchar. lib. 3. c. 13. sect. 3. tom. 3.

† Durand in 4. Sent. dist. 10. q. 1. num. 13.

Erasmus

De modo quo id fieret fortasse satiùs erat, curiosum quemq.

relinquere

Erasmus concludes with a serò definiuit Ecclesia, &c. It was late ere the Church defined Transubstantiation.

Since therefore the Protestant Faith, touching the Spirituall and Sacramentall participation of Christ's body, was generally taught and beleeved in the former and the latter ages; since the doctrine of Transubstantiation hath no Unitie amongst the Romish Authors, no Universalitie amongst the ancient Fathers, no certaintie in the sacred Scriptures; Saint Austen's Profession shall bee my conclusion: "Whether concerning Christ, or his Church, or any thing that appertaineth to our faith and life, I will not say, if we (who are no way to be compared to him that so spake) but if an Angell from Heaven shall preach unto you any thing, besides that you have received in the Legall and Evangelicall Scriptures, let him bee

accursed *."

relinquere conjectura, sicut liberum fuit ante Concilium Lateranense. Tonstall, de Euch. lib. 1. p. 46. Eras. Annot. in J Corinth. vii.

* Sivè de Christo, sivè de Ecclesia, sivè de quacunq. aliâ re, qua pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram, non dicam nos, nequaquam comparandi ei qui dixit, sed si Angelum de cœlo vobis annuntiaverit præterquam quod in Scripturis Legalibus et Evangelicis accepistis, Anathema sit. Aug. contr. liter. Petil. lib. 3. c. 6. tom. 7.

PARAG.