countenance before Abimelech, and then received the shewbread, that was a certain type of the eucharist, so Christ in the sacrament feigns himself to be bread, and yet is not bread, though he seems so to be most visibly."* Secondly, of Cardinal Francis Tolet: "The words of consecration are efficacious instruments whereby to transubstantiate the substance of the bread into the true body of Christ; so that after they are spoken, there remains in the host none of the substance of the bread, but only the accidents of it, which are called the properties of the bread, under which the true body of Christ is present."+ Thirdly, and lastly, of Cardinal Bellarmine: "The Catholic Church ever taught, that by the conversion of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ (which

conversione, commutatione, transformatione, sanctificatione, consecratione, benedictione, (tot enim fere nominibus appellata ab illis transubstantiatio est) firma sint, et non inania vel futilia; tum denique ut solidam corporis et sanguinis Christi præsentiam absque ullo loci motu tueri possumus.]

* Tom. xvi. disp. iii. in i. Ep. S. Petri [2. p. 67. Nam ut David coram Abimelec vultum suum mutavit, et tunc accepit panes propositionis, qui erant certus eucharistiæ typus, ita Christus in sacramento simulat se panem esse, qui proprie panis non est, etsi esse maxime videatur.]

Instr. Sacerd. 1. ii. c. xxvii. [p. 469, ed. 1603. Sunt enim illa verba, Hoc est enim corpus meum, ita efficacia, ut sint instrumenta transubstantiandi substantiam panis in

conversion hath been in after-times called transubstantiation), it comes to pass that the body and blood of our Lord are truly and really present in the sacrament."* It would be to no purpose to bring the testimonies of others of the Latin or Roman Church, who give to the pope an absolute power of defining what he pleaseth, for they are but the same stuff as these: but if any one hath a mind, let him consult Gretserus his defence of Bellarmine,† or his dialogue who first writ against Luther, who both reduce the whole matter to the judgment and decree of the pope.

8. Now, we leave inquiring what God is able to do; for we should first know His will in this matter, before we examine His power; yet thus much we say, that this Roman transubstantiation

Christi verum corpus ; ita ut post prolationem, in illa hostia non sit panis ulla substantia, sed sola accidentia ipsius, scilicet, quantitas, cum colore, et sapore, odore, et primis qualitatibus, quæ dicuntur species panis, sub quibus est verum corpus Christi præsens.]

* Controversiæ; de Euchar. iii. ch. xi. [Catholica Ecclesia semper docuit per conversionem substantiæ panis et vini in corpus et sanguinem Domini, quæ conversio postmodum transubstantiatio appellata est, fieri ut corpus et sanguis Domini vere ac realiter in sacramento eucharistiæ præsentia sint.]

+ Defensio Bellarmini, lib. iii. c. ix.

Sylv. Prieras sub initio. [See Lutheri Op. i. 62 sq. and Brown's Fasciculus, ii. 880.]

is so strange and monstrous, that it exceeds the nature of all miracles. And though God by His almightiness be able to turn the substance of bread into some other substance, yet none will believe that He doth it, as long as it appears to our senses that the substance of the bread doth still remain whole and entire. Certain it is that hitherto we read of no such thing done in the Old or New Testament; and therefore this tenet, being as unknown to the ancients as it is ungrounded in Scripture, appears as yet to be very incredible; and there is no reason we should believe such an unauthorised figment, newly invented by men, and now imposed as an article of Christian religion. For it is in vain that they bring Scripture to defend this their stupendous doctrine; and it is not true, what they so often and so confidently affirm, that the universal Church hath always constantly owned it, being it was not so much as heard of in the Church for many ages, and hath been but lately approved by the pope's authority in the councils of Lateran and Trent; as I shall prove in the following chapters.

CHAPTER V.

That neither the word nor name of transubstantiation, nor the doctrine or the thing itself, is taught or contained in holy Scripture, or in the writings of the ancient doctors of the Church, but rather is contrary to them; and therefore not of faith.

1. THE word transubstantiation is so far from being found either in the sacred records or in the monuments of the ancient fathers, that the maintainers of it do themselves acknowledge that it was not so much as heard of before the twelfth century. For though one Stephanus, bishop of Autun, be said to have once used it, yet it is without proof that some modern writers make him one of the tenth century; nor yet doth he say, that the bread is transubstantiated, but as it were transubstantiated, which, well understood, might be admitted.*

2. Nay, that the thing itself without the word, that the doctrine without the expression, cannot be found in Scripture, is ingenuously acknowledged by the most learned schoolmen, Scotus, Durandus, Biel, Cameracensis, Cajetan, and

* See ch. i. art. 6, ch. iii. art. 4, ch. iv. art. 5, and this ch. art. 5.

many more, who, finding it not brought in by the pope's authority, and received in the Roman Church, till 1200 years after Christ, yet endeavoured to defend it by other arguments.

3. Scotus confessed, "that there is not any place in Scripture so express as to compel a man to admit of transubstantiation, were it not that the Church hath declared for it,"* (that is, Pope Innocent III. in his Lateran council). Durandus said, "that the word is found, but that by it the manner they contend for cannot be proved.”+

* Scotus in iv. Sentent. d. xi. q. 3. [In opinione secunda (sc. non manere panem, nec converti, sed desinere per annihilationem, &c.) potest argui-quia ista transubstantiatio non videtur magis probari ex Scriptura, quam panem non manere, imo minus.-Principaliter autem videtur movere, quod de sacramentis tenendum est, sicut tenet sancta Romana Ecclesia; sicut habetur Extra. De hæreticis, ad abolendam. Nunc autem ipsa tenet panem transubstantiari in corpus et vinum in sanguinem.-Et si quæras quare voluit Ecclesia eligere istum intellectum ita difficilem hujus articuli, cum verba Scripturæ possent salvari secundum intellectum facilem, et veriorem secundum apparentiam de hoc articulo; dico, quod eo Spiritu expositæ sunt Scripturæ quo conditæ. Et ita supponendum est, quod Ecclesia Catholica eo Spiritu exposuit, quo tradita est nobis fides.]

+ Durand. ut supra. [Verbum audiri, sed ex verbo modum hunc sciri negavit Durandus. Orig. Lat. I cannot find any sentence like this in Durandus; but it is unquestionable that it contains his sentiments: as for instance : Satis etiam durum est, et derogare videtur immensitati divinæ potentiæ, dicere quod Deus non possit facere corpus

E