greater hopes of the union so much to be desired by the upright and well disposed of both parties.

In addition to these favourable sentiments of the Lutherans and Calvinists, we have some testimonies of your own countrymen in our favour. Bishop Forbes acknowledges the possibility of transubstantiation in the following terms; "There is too "much temerity and danger in the assertion of 66 many Protestants who refuse to God the power " of transubstantiating bread into the body of Christ. "Every one allows, it is true, that what implies "contradiction cannot be done. But as no indi"vidual person knows with certainty the essence of "each thing, and in consequence what does or does "not imply contradiction, it is an evident temerity "for any one whomsoever to place bounds to the power of God. I approve of the opinion of the theologians of Wittemberg, who are not afraid to "avow that God has power to change the bread " and wine into the body and blood of Jesus "Christ."

66

66

Thorndike allows of the change, and tells us in plain terms that "the elements are really changed "from ordinary bread and wine, into the body of "Jesus Christ, mysteriously present, as in a sacra"ment: and this by virtue of the consecration, and "in no wise by the faith of the receiver.'

221

Bishop Montague declares that the change is produced by the consecration of the elements. In support of this assertion, he cites passages from St. Cyril of Jerusalem, from the liturgy of St. Basil, from St. Cyprian and St. Ambrose: he renders the

!Epi. lis. 3, c. V.—Appeal., ch. XXXI.

expresssions employed by these Fathers, by the words transmutation and transelementation. Still after having confessed the change produced by the consecration, after asserting that it was recognised by the primitive Church, he changes sides and concludes by declaring against transubstantiation.'

Samuel Parker, bishop of Oxford, defends and proves it, as follows: "In the first place then it is "evident to all men, that are but ordinarily conver"sant in ecclesiastical learning, that the ancient "Fathers, from age to age asserted the real and "substantial presence in very high and expressive "terms. The Greeks stiled it, METABOLE, ME

66

TARRHUTHMISIS, METASKEUASMOS, METAPOIESIS, METASTOICHEIOSIS. And the Latines agreeable "with the Greeks, Conversion, Transmutation, Transformation, Transfiguration, Transelemen"tation, and at length Transubstantiation: By all "which they expressed nothing more nor less than

From all appearance he would have returned to it. This learned man thought almost in every thing with the Catholic Church, to which, it is said, he would have united himself, if his death which happened in 1641, had not prevented him from executing this resolution. Four years later, the same cause unfortunately upset the same project of a character still more celebrated for his learning and genius. Grotius, on quitting Paris, confided to his learned and worthy friend M. Bignon, that on his return from Sweden, where he was going to settle his affairs, he would give himself exclusively up to the affair of his salvation, and would unite himself to the Catholic Church. He was returning and had already reached Rostock, when he was seized with a sickness which deprived him of life, the Church of a valuable conquest, and the world of a memorable example. The fact is posiitvely asserted by M. Arnauld, who had it from M. Bignon himself.-We know that Father Petau, upon hearing of his death, celebrated mass for the repose of his soul,

1

"the real and substantial Presence in the Eucharist" The Bishop of Oxford was well aware that transubstantiation not only supposes the real presence but is actually the foundation of it, since, by virtue of the words, the substance of the body of Jesus Christ could not be found in the Eucharist, unless it had taken the place of the substance of the bread. "Thus far proceeded the old Church of England, "which as it was banished, so it was restored with "the crown. But by reason of the interval of "twenty years between the rebellion and restitution "there arose a new generation of divines that knew "not Joseph......... In short, if they own a real "Presence, we see from the premises how little "the controversie is between that and Transubstan“tiation, as it is truly and ingenuously understood

.....་

by all the reformed Churches. If they do not, "they disown the doctrine both of the Church of "England and the Church Catholick, and then if

they own only a figurative Presence (and it is plain "they own no other) they stand condemned of "Heresie by almost all the Churches in the christian "world: and if this be the thing pretended to be "set up (as it certainly is by the authors and con"trivers of it) by renouncing Transubstantiatior, "then the result and bottom of the law is under "this pretence to bring a new Heresie by law into "the Church of England."

'Bishop Parker's reasons for abrogating the Test. page 13, Oct. 30. an. 1678. printed an. 1688, London.-Page 62.--. Pages 65, 66,

You see, Sir, that if the doctrine of the real presence has found in your country a great number of defenders, that of transubstantiation has also had its distinguished advocates. You have seen them among the Lutherans, who in general are now become its declared enemies: moreover, (what indeed you yourself must be convinced of) even at the present day, the persons most attached to the confession of Augsburg and to their first reformers may still, without injury to their principles, enter completely into the catholie doctrine of the Eucharist, after the example of the pious and learned Hanoverian, the Abbé of Lokkum. You have heard the Lutherans prove with us to the Calvinists that it was impossible to admit the figurative sense, and not hold to the literal sense: and the Calvinists, joining us afterwards, in proving like us to the Lutherans that the literal sense ought no less necessarily to conduct them to the change of the substance. Thus you have seen them alternately ranged under the catholic standard, victoriously attacking one another with the arms they borrowed from us, and the Church triumphing in turns from the blows and the defeats they mutually inflicted upon each other.

I will here spare you the detail of the grammatical cavils invented by the Calvinists to authorize the figurative sense against the change of substance. I know what bickering they have borrowed from the rules of grammar, which have been as incorrectly forged as applied by them to each of the words, this is my body. I know also that they are not worth the trouble of being refuted, after having been so completely refuted by M. Nicole, with that depth, correctness and clearness which distinguish that great

controvertist. They easily vanish when brought in contact with the examples, of which the Holy Scripture furnishes us the idea and the subject. Could not Moses have said: This rod is a serpent, this water is blood? Could not Jesus Christ, at the marriage feast at Cana, have equally said: This water is wine? and when raising to life Lazarus or the only son of the widow of Naim, this dead person is living? Would not all these propositions have been true to the letter in spite of the pretended rules of grammar? and would the reformed ever succeed in demonstrating to us their incorrectness, by saying that if it is a rod, it is not really a serpent? if it is water, it is not really blood or wine? if they are dead they are not in reality living? Why persist obstinately in not seeing, and not acknowledging that in the mouth of God, or by his order these propositions operate what they declare? The Almighty commands, and nature instantly obeys. Jesus Christ commands, and the grave gives back its prey, and death releases its victim. He speaks, and the water has ehanged its substance into that of wine, and the bread its substance into that of his body."

'See Défense de la perpétuité de la Foi, tom. Ir.

2 Who can speak in this manner, except him who holds all "things in his hand? who can make himself be believed except "him to whom doing and saying is the same thing? My soul, stop "here without idle discussion! believe as simply, as firmly as thy "Saviour hath spoken, and with as much submission as he shewed "authority and power. He desires in faith the same simplicity

as he put into his words. This is my body; therefore it is his "body. This is my blood; it is therefore his blood. In the ancient "manner of communicating, the Priest said: the body of Jesus "Christ, and the faithful answered amen, it is so. All was done, "all was said, all was explained in three words. I am silent, I believe, 1 adore, all is done, all is said." Bossuet, medit. sur Evang., journ. 22e.

66