of Smyrna he has thefe remarkable Words (quoted allo by Theodoret) of the Hereticks of his Time. They do not admit Eucharifts and Oblations, because they do not confeß, THAT THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OR OUR SAVIOUR JESUS-CHRIST, WHICH SUFFER'D FOR OUR SINS, AND WHICH THE FATHER RAISED AGAIN BY HIS BOUNTY.

9. 30.

Transubstantiation not repugnant to the current Prin ciples of Philofophy.

G.

M

Y Lord, you have repeated many Times that the Substance of Bread and Wine are changed into the Body and Blood of Chrift, but that the Accidents of both remain.

L. Well, Sr, what then?

G. Then I ask, whether you know the Difference betwixt Substance and Accident? pag. iso. « 150.

L. Sr, when I was a Boy, I was taught to an fwer, that Substance is a Being which subsists by itself. And that the Effence of an Accident is not actual Inhefion, but a natural Exigency to inhere. So that tho by a Supernatural Power it may exift without any Subject, it ftill retains it's Effence, because it naturally requires a Subject, even when it exifts without

one.

G. My Lord, this feems to be a Philofophical Scheme › cook'd up expressly to make the hard Morfel of Tran fubftantiation go down the better.

L. Sr, I believe the Cookery do's not please your Palate. However 'tis good found Ariftotelian Philofophy. And Ariftotle (who lived long enough before Tranfubftantiation was known in the World, could not eafily be bribed by Papifts to come in to their

5.30. Notions. Now he taught expresfly, that Accidents are really diftinguish'd, and may confequently by a Supernatural Power be Separated from their Substance: as we fay they are in the Sacrament of the holy Eusharift. And fo we cannot be faid to have made a preBarious Philofophical Scheme in Favour of Tranfub ftantiation: fince we only maintain, that it is not repugnant to current principles held for many hundred Years before Chriftianity was establish'd.

G. My Lord, when the Subftance of Bread is gone, how can the Figure, and Colour, and Taft of it remain?» For then there will be Accidents of Nothing. » There will be Roundneß, and Nothing round; Whiteneẞ, and Nothing White; a Taft, and Nothing tafted; » Which is ridiculous. pag. 151.

. L. It is fo, Sr, if Quantity be Nothing. But Quan tity according to Ariftotle's Philofophy is a Physical Accident diftinct, and by Consequence feparable from Subftance; and it is the immediate Subject of the other Accidents mention'd by you; which in Reality are but fo many different Modifications of Quantity: And therefore cannot be deftitute of their proper Subject, whether Quantity be join'd to, or separated from it's Subftance; as it is in the Sacrament of the holy Eu charift.

"G. My Lord, if Quantity, and other Accidents » fubfift by themselves, why are they not Substances? » For that is the Definition you give of Subftance. pag. 151. 152.

L. Sr, the Reafon is, because they do not fubfift naturally by themselves, as Subftance do's, but only by a fupernatural Power..

» G. But if it be by Miracle, that they ftand by » themselves, then by Miracle they are Substances, » and there is an End of the Jargon. pag. 152.

L. Sr, I hope there is. For I have already told

you

185 you, that their Effence according to Ariftotle's Philo fophy (which I think you have not yet confuted) is not an actual Inhefion, but a Natural Exigency of it, which remains when they are miraculously fepa rated from their Subftance. And therefore, good Sr, the Miracle, by which they are thus feparated, do's not convert them into Subftances.

G. If your Lordship be in carnest about this s Logick of Substance and Accidents, will you lay a « good Wager upon it? pag. 153. «

L. Hudibras fays, Fools for Argument's lay Wa agers. G. Yet you have laid all your Honour and Ef-« tate upon it. But are you fo fure of it, that would take your Oath upon it ? pag. 153. "

you *

L. Whatever you may fancy, St, I do not know that I hazard the Value of a Farthing upon the Lo gical Queftion of Subftance and Accidents.

G. That's very ftrange, My Lord. Is it not a Point of Faith with you, that the Accidents of Bread and Wine remain after the Confecration?

L. It is, Sr; if by Accidents you mean the Signs or Appearances of Bread and Wine. But whether those Signs or Appearances be true Physical Accidents, or only Modifications of the Object, or fuch Impreffions made upon our outward Senfes by the Body and Blood of Chrift, as Bread and Wine, if they had been prefent, would have made; are meer School-Questions, upon which I shall never be difpofed to hazard eíther my Honour or Eftate, much lefs pawn my Soul upon the Truth or Certainty of them; the Faith of the Church being not the leaft concern'd in them.

G. But, My Lord, did you not just now defend Tranfubftantiation by the Philofophical Diftinction between Subftance and Accidents?

L. But, Sr, do you make no Difference between. Building Faith upon Philofophy, and shewing that A a

II. Part.

the one is not repugnant to the other? I believe all Myfteries of Faith purely upon Divine Revelation, and not upon their Non-repugnance to human Reason, which only shews them to be poffible. But if a Man be fuch a Trifler as to muster up Boyish Arguments from Philofophy against them, am I not a Debtor to the Wife and to the Unwife, and bound to shew that Christianity and Philofophy are not irreconcilable? And for this Reason I have infifted upon the Ariftotelian Diftinction of Accidents and Substance: Not that the Mystery of Tranfubftantiation is built upon that Philofophical Diftinction, or depends upon it, but only to convince you, that it is not repugnant to the cur rent Principles of Philofophy.

» G. My Lord, this is that Philofophy, and vain Deceit or Fallacy, which the Apostle fays will spoil » or hurt our Faith. Doting upon Questions and Strifes » of Words --- perverfe Difputings --- and Oppofitions of » Science falfely fo call'd, which fome profiffing have serr'd concerning the Faith. Cor. 2. v. 8. 1. Tim. 6. » V. 4. 5. 21. 22. pag. 153.

614

L. Sr, the Apoftle cenfures thofe, who draw Arguments from Philofophy to overthrow, or ridicule the facred Mysteries of Chriftian Religion. So that you have only provided a Scourge for your own Back; and, if you will but confider yourfelf attentively in the Looking-glafs St Paul has fet before you, it will difcover to you the weak Condition of your Caufe. I have proved Transubstantiation from Scriptures, and the unquestionable Tradition of the Church. And what do you oppofe against thefe folid Proofs but Arguments from human Realon, the Teftimony our Senfes, and poor Trifles of Philofophy, which the Apoftle juftly calls, Doting upon Questions and Strifes of Words, perverfe Difputings, and Oppofition of Science falfely fo call'd? Thefe are the Arguments, with which

of

you

attack us; and when we have the Condefcenhion to take Notice of them, and oppofe Philofophy against Philofophy (which indeed is more than you can in Rigour oblige us to in Controverfies of Faith) you cry out, that we have nothing but an unintelligible Jargon of Metaphyficks on our Side. As if Philofophy were intended only to run down Chriftian Religion, and it were an Abuse to employ any Part of it in it's Ser

vice.

ADVERTISEMENT.

N. B. that the Gentleman's whole Reply to the notorious Nonsense, he has made his Catholick Lord fpeak in his Cafe ftated, pag. 151. can only be usher'd in by the Nonsense itself which it confutes. This is the Reafon, why a great Part of pag. 151. 152. 153. is here o mitted. For tho his Lordship has now anfwer'd every Thing, that looks like an Objection in thofe Pages; it was impoffible to repeat Word for Word all the Gentleman's fine Drollery contain'd in them without making his Lordship perfonate the Dunce as effectual ly as he do's in the former Conversation. For he is there made to answer, pag. 151. that actual Inherence, or Infticking (to render the Farce more ridiculous) is the Effence of Accidents. And the Gentleman taking the Advantage of his Blunder draws Confequences from it, and plays moft unmercifully upon him. If any one has fo much Idle Time to throw away, he may read the foremention'd Pages in the Gentleman's Cafe ftated. Where he will fee how poorly his Lordship comes off at last: when weary of being pelted with hard