ART. "wounded for us." As this was given for a rule by the XXVIII. great doctor of the Latin Church, fo the fame maxim had been delivered almoft two ages before him, by the great Hom. 7. in doctor of the Greek Church, Origen, who fays, "that Levit. "the understanding our Saviour's words of eating his "flesh and drinking his blood, according to the letter, is "a letter that kills." These paffages I cite by an anticipation, before I enter upon the enquiry into the sense of the ancient Church, concerning this matter; because they belong to the words of the inftitution, at least to the dif courfe in St. John: now if the sense that we give to these words is made good, we need be at no more pains to prove that they are capable of no other fenfe; fince this muft prove that to be the only true fenfe of them. So that for all the arguments that have been brought by us against this doctrine, arifing out of the fruitfulness of the matter, we were not bound to use them: for, our doctrine being confeffed by them, it wants no proof; and we cannot be bound to prove a negative. Therefore though the copioufnefs of this matter has afforded us many arguments for the negative, yet that was not neceffary: for, as a negative always proves itfelf; fo that holds more especially here, where that which is denied is accompanied with fo many and so strange abfurdities, as do follow from this doctrine. The laft topic in this matter is the fenfe that the ancient Church had of it: for, as we certainly have both the Scriptures and the evidence of our fenfes and reafon of our fide, fo that will be much fortified, if it appears that no fuch doctrine was received in the first and beft ages; and that it came in not all at once, but by degrees. I fhall firft urge this matter by fome general prefumptions; and then I fhall go to plain proofs. But though the prefumptions fhall be put only as prefumptions; yet if they appear to be violent, so that a man cannot hold giving his affent to the conclufion that follows from them, then though they are put in the form of prefumptive arguments, yet that will not hinder them from being confidered as concluding ones. By the ftating this doctrine it has appeared how many difficulties there are involved in it: thefe are difficulties that are obvious and foon feen: they are not found out by deep enquiry and much fpeculation: they are foon felt, and are very hardly avoided: and ever fince the time that this doctrine has been received by the Roman Church, thefe have been much infifted on; explanations have been offered to them all; and the whole principles of natural philofophy philofophy have been caft into a new mould, that they ART. They are accustomed to think that ubication, or the being in a place, is but an accident to a fubftance: so that the fame bodies being in more places, is only its having a few more of thofe accidents produced in it by God: they are accustomed to think that accidents are beings different from matter: like a fort of clothing to it, which do indeed require the having of a fubftance for their subject : but yet fince they are believed to have a being of their own, God may make them fubfift: as the fkin of a man may ftand out in its proper shape and colour, though there were nothing but air or vacuity within it. They are accustomed to think, that as an accident may be without its proper fubftance, so fubftance may be without its proper accidents; and they do reckon extenfion and impenetrability, that is, a body's fo filling a space, that no other body can be in the fame space with it, among its accidents: fo that a body compofed of organs and of large dimenfions, may be not only all crowded within one wafer, but an entire diftinct body may be in every feparable part of this wafer; at least in every piece that carries in it the appearance of bread. Thefe, befides many other leffer fubtilties, are the evident refults of this doctrine: and it was a natural effect of its being received, that their philofophy fhould be fo tranfformed as to agree to it, and to prepare men for it. Now to apply this to the matter we are upon, we find none of thefe fubtilties among the ancients. They feem to apprehend none of thofe difficulties, nor do they take any pains to folve or clear them. They had a philofophical genius, and fhewed it in all other things: they difputed very nicely concerning the attributes of God, concerning his effence, and the Perfons of the Trinity: they faw the difficulties concerning the incarnation of the Eternal Word, and Chrift's being both God and man: they treat of original fin, of the power of grace, and of the decrees of God. They explained the refurrection of our bodies, and the different ftates of the bleffed and the damned. They faw the difficulties in all these heads, and were F f 4 very t ART. very copious in their explanations of them: and they may XXVIII. be rather thought by fome too full, than too fparing in the canvaffing of difficulties: but all those were mere fpeculative matters, in which the difficulty was not fo foon feen as on this fubject: yet they found thefe out, and pursued them with that fubtilty that fhewed they were not at all displeased, when occafions were offered them to fhew their fkill in answering difficulties: which, to name no more, appears very evidently to be St. Auguftin's character. Yet neither he nor any of the other Fathers feem to have been fenfible of the difficulties in this matter. They neither state them nor answer them; nor do they use those reserves when they speak of philofophical matters, that men must have used who were poffeffed of this doctrine: for a man cannot hold it without bringing himfelf to think and fpeak otherways upon all natural things than the reft of mankind do. They are fo far from this, that, on the contrary, they deliver themselves in a way that fhews they had no fuch apprehenfions of things. They thought that all creatures were limited to one place and from thence they argued againft the heathens, who believed that their deities were in every one of those ftatues which they confecrated to them. From this head they proved the Divinity of the Holy Ghoft; because he wrought in many different places at once which he could not do if he were only a creature. They affirm, that Chrift can be no more on earth, fince he is now in heaven, and that he can be but in one place. They say, that which hath no bounds nor figure, and that can neither be touched nor feen, cannot be a body: that bodies are extended in fome place, and cannot exist after the manner of spirits. They argue against the eternity of matter, from this, that nothing could be produced, that had a being before it was produced; and on all occafions they appeal to the teftimony of our fenfes as infallible. They fay, that to believe otherwife tended to reverse the whole ftate of life, and order of nature, and to reproach the providence of God; fince it must be said, that he has given the knowledge of all his works to liars and deceivers, if our fenfes may be falfe: that we must doubt of our faith, if the teftimony of hearing, feeing, and feeling, could deceive us. And in their contefts with the Marcionites and others, concerning the truth of Chrift's body, they appeal always to XXVIII. to the teftimony of the fenfes as infallible: and even ART. treating of the facrament, they fay, without limitation or exception, that it was bread, as their eyes witnessed, and true wine that Chrift did confecrate to be the memorial of his body and blood; and they tell us in this very particular, that we ought not to doubt of the testimony of our fenfes. Another prefumptive proof, that the ancients knew nothing of this doctrine, is, that the Heathens and the Jews, who charged them, and their doctrine, with every thing that they could invent to make both it and them odious and ridiculous, could never have paffed over this, in which both fenfe and reason feemed to be fo evidently on their fide. They reproach the Chriftians for believing a God that was born, a God of flesh that was crucified and buried: they laughed at their belief of a judgment to come, of endlefs flames, of a heavenly paradife, and of the refurrection of the body. Thofe who writ the first apologies for the Chriftian religion, Juftin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, Arnobius, and Minutius Felix, have given us a large account of the blafphemies both of Jews and Gentiles, against the doctrines of Chriftianity. Cyril of Alexandria has given us Julian's objections in his own words; who having been not only initiated into the Chriftian religion, but having read the Scriptures in the Churches, and being a philofophical and inquifitive man, must have been well inftructed concerning the doctrine and the facraments of this religion: and his relation to the Emperor Conftantine must have made the Christians concerned to take more than ordinary pains on him. When he made apoftafy from the faith, he reproached the Chriftians with the doctrine of Baptifm, and laughed at them for thinking that there was an ablution and fanctification in it, conceiving it a thing impoffible that water should wash or cleanse a foul: yet neither he nor Porphyry, nor Celfus before them, did charge this religion with the abfurdities of tranfubftantiation. It is reasonable to believe, that if the Chriftians of that time had any fuch doctrine among them, it must have been known. Every Chriftian muft have known in what fense those words, This is my body, and This is my blood, were understood among them. All the apoftates from Chriftianity muft have known it, and must have published it, to excufe or hide the fhame of their apoftafy; fince apoftates are apt to fpread lies of them whom they forfake, but not to conceal fuch truths as are to their preju ART. dice. Julian muft have known it; and if he had known XXVIII. it, his judgment was too true, and his malice to the Chriftian religion too quick, to overlook or neglect the advantages which this part of their doctrine gave him. Nor can this be carried off by faying, that the eating of buman flesh and the Thyeflean fuppers, which were objected to the Chriftians, relate to this: when the Fathers answer that, they tell the Heathens that it was a downright caJumny and lie; and do not offer any explanations or diftinctions taken from their doctrine of the Sacrament, to clear them from the mistake and malice of this calumny. The truth is, the execrable practices of the Gnoftics, who were called Chriftians, gave the rife to those as well as to many other calumnies: but they were not at all founded on the doctrine of the Eucharift, which is never once mentioned as the occafion of this accufation. Another prefumption, from which we conclude that the ancients knew nothing of this doctrine, is, that we find herefies and difputes arifing concerning all the other points of religion: there were very few of the doctrines of the Chriftian religion, and not any of the myfteries of the faith, that did not fall under great objections: but there was not any one herefy raised upon this head: men were never fo meek and tame as eafily to believe things, when there appeared ftrong evidence, or at leaft great prefumptions, against them. In these laft eight or nine centuries, fince this doctrine was received, there has been a perpetual oppofition made to it, even in dark and unlearned ages; in which implicit faith and blind obedience have carried a great fway. And though the fecular arm has been employed with great and unrelenting feverities to extirpate all that have opposed it; yet all the while many have ftood out againft it, and have fuffered much and long for their rejecting it. Now it is not to be imagined that fuch an oppofition fhould have been made to this doctrine, during the nine hundred years laft paft, and that for the former eight hundred years there fhould have been no difputes at all concerning it: and that while all other things were fo much queftioned, that feveral Fathers writ, and councils were called to fettle the belief of them, yet that for about eight hundred years, this was the fingle point that went down fo eafily, that no treatise was all that while writ to prove it, nor council held to establish it. Certainly the reafon of this will appear to be much rather, that fince there have been contefts upon this point these last nine ages, and that there were none the first |