that he had appointed us to offer this image of his body, to wit, A R t. the fubftance of the bread. That was indeed contradicted with XXVIII. much confidence by the fecond Council of Nice, in which, in oppofition to what appears to this day in all the Greek liturgies, and the Greek Fathers, they do pofitively deny, that the facrament was ever called the image of Chrift; and they affirm it to be the true body of Chrift.

In conclusion, I fhall next fhew how this doctrine crept into the Church; for this feems plaufible, that a doctrine of this nature could never have got into the Church in any age, if those of the age that admitted it, had not known that it had been the doctrine of the former age, and fo upwards to the age of the Apoftles. It is not to be denied, but that very early both Juftin Martyr and Irenæus thought, that there was fuch a fanétification of the elements, that there was a divine virtue in them: and in those very paffages which we have urged from the arguings of the Fathers against the Eutychians, though they do plainly prove that they believed that the fubftance of bread and wine did ftill remain; yet they do fuppofe an union of the elements to the body of Chrift, like that of the human nature's being united to the divine. Here a foundation was laid for all the fuperstructure that was afterwards raised upon it. For though the liturgies and public offices continued long in the first fimplicity, yet the Fathers, who did very much study eloquence, chiefly the Greek Fathers, carried this matter very far in their fermons and homilies. They did only apprehend the profanation of the facrament, from the unworthiness of those who came to it; and being much fet on the begetting a due reverence for fo holy an action, and a seriousness in the performance of it, they urged all the topicks that fublime figures or warm expreffions could help them with: and with this exalted eloquence of theirs we must likewise observe the state that the world fell in, in the fifth century: vaft fwarms out of the North over-run the Roman empire, and by a long continued fucceffion of new invaders all was facked and ruined. In the Weft, the Goths were followed by the Vandals, the Alans, the Gepides, the Franks, the Sweves, the Huns, and the Lombards, fome of these nations; but in conclufion the Saracens and Turks in the East made havock of all that was polite or learned, by which we loft the chief writings of the first and best times; but instead of these, many fpurious ones were afterwards produced, and they paffed eafily in dark and ignorant ages. All fell under much oppreffion and mifery, and Europe was fo over-run with barbarity and ignorance, that it cannot be eafily apprehended, but by fuch as have been at the pains to go through one of the ungratefullest pieces of ftudy that can be well imagined, and have read the. productions of thofe ages. The understanding the Scriptures

E e 4

or

XXVIII.

ART. or languages, or hiftory were not fo much as thought one Some affected homilies or defcantings on the rituals of the Church, full of many very odd fpeculations about them, are among the best of the writings of thofe times. They were eafily imposed on by any new forgery; witness the reception and authority that was given to the Decretal Epistles of the Popes of the first three centuries, which for many ages maintained its credit, though it was plainly a forgery of the eighth century, and was contrived with fo little art, that there is not in them colour enough to excufe the ignorance of those that were deceived by it. As it is an eafy thing to mislead ignorant multitudes, fo there is fomewhat in incredible opinions and stories, that is suited to fuch a state of mankind; and as men are apt to fancy that they fee fprights, especially in the night; fo the more of darknefs and unconceivablenefs that there is in an opinion, it is the more properly calculated for fuch times. The ages that fucceeded were not only times of ignorance, but they were alfo times of much corruption. The writers of the fourth and fifth centuries give us difmal reprefentations of the corruptions of their times; and the fcandalous unconftancy of the councils of thofe ages, is too evident a proof of what we find faid by the good men of those days: but things fell lower and lower in the fucceeding ages. It is an amazing thing that in the very office of confecrating bishops, examinations are ordered concerning those crimes, the very mention of which give horror; De Coitu cum Mafculo & cum Quadrupedibus.

The Popes more particularly were such a fucceffion of men, that, as their own hiftorians have defcribed them, nothing in any hiftory can be produced that is like them. The characters they give them are fo monftrous, that nothing under the autho rity of unquestioned writers, and the evidence of the facts themselves, could make them credible.

But that which makes the introduction of this doctrine appear the more probable, is that we plainly fee the whole body of the Clergy was every where fo influenced by the management of the Popes, that they generally entered into com binations to fubject the temporalty to the fpiritualty; and therefore every opinion that tended to render the perfons of the Clergy facred, and to raise their character high, was sure to receive the best entertainment, and the greatest encouragement poffible. Nothing could carry this fo far as an opinion that represented the Priest as having a character by which, with a few words, he could make a God. The opinion of Tranfubftantiation was fuch an engine, that it being once fet on foot, could not but meet with a favourable reception from those who were then feeking all poffible colours to give credit to their au

thority

thority, and to advance it. The numbers of the Clergy were then fo great, and their contrivances were fo well fuited to the credulity and fuperftition of thofe times, that, by visions and wonderful stories confidently vouched, they could easily infufe any thing into weak and giddy multitudes. Befides, that the genius of thofe times led them much to the love of pomp and Thew; they had loft the true power and beauty of religion, and were willing, by outward appearances, to balance or compenfate for their great defects,

But befides all thofe general confiderations which fuch as are acquainted with the history of those ages know, do belong to them in a much higher degree than is here set forth; there are fome fpecialities that relate to this doctrine in particular, which will make the introduction of it appear the more practicable. This had never been condemned in any former age: for as none condemn errors by anticipation or prophecy; fo the promoters of it had this advantage, that no formal decifion had been made against them. It did alfo in the outward found agree with the words of the inftitution, and the phrases generally used, of the elements being changed into the body and blood of Chrift: outward found and appearance was enough in ignorant ages to hide the change that was made. The step that is made from believing any thing in general, with an indiftinct and confused apprehenfion, to a determined way of explaining it, is not hard to be brought about.

The people in general believed that Chrift was in the facrament, and that the elements were his body and blood, without troubling themselves to examine in what manner all this was done: fo it was no great step in a dark age to put a particular explanation of this upon them: and this change being brought in without any vifible alterations made in the worship, it must needs have paffed with the world the more eafily: for in all times vifible rites are more minded by the people, than speculative points; which they confider very little. No alterations were at first made in the worship; the adoration of the hoft, and the proceffions invented to honour it, came afterwards.

AR T.

XXVIII

iii. Tit. 42.

cap. 10.

Honorius the IVth, who first appointed the adoration, does Greg. Denot pretend to found it on ancient practice: only he commands cret. Lib. the priests to tell the people to do it: and he at first enjoined only an inclination of the head to the facrament. But his fucceffor Gregory the IXth did more refolutely command it, and ordered a bell to be rung at the confecration and elevation, to give notice of it, that fo all those who heard it might kneel and join their hands, and fo worship the host.

The first controverfy about the manner of the prefence arose incidentally upon the controverfy of images: the Council at Conftantinople

ART. Conftantinople decreed, that the facrament was the image of XXVIII. Chrift, in which the fubftance of bread and wine remained.

Thofe of Nice, how furiously foever they fell upon them for calling the facrament the image of Chrift, yet do no where blame them for faying that the fubftance of bread and wine remained in it: for indeed the opinion of Damafcene, and of most of the Greek Church, was, that there was an affumption of the bread and wine into an union with the body of Chrift. The Council of Conftantinople brought in their decifion occafionally, that being confidered as the fettled doctrine of the Church; whereas those of Nice did vifibly innovate and falfify the tradition: for they affirm, as Damafcene had done before them, that the elements were called the antitypes of Chrifl's body, only before they were confecrated, but not after it: which they fay none of the Fathers had done. This is fo notorioufly falfe, that no man can pretend now to justify them in it, fince there are above twenty of the Fathers that were before them, who in plain words call the elements after confecration, the figure and antitype of Chrift's body: here then was the tradition and practice of the Church falfified, which is no small prejudice against thofe that fupport the doctrine, as well as against the credit of that Council.

About thirty years after that Council, Pafchafe Radbert, Abbot of Corby in France, did very plainly allert the corporal prefence in the eucharift: he is acknowledged both by Bellarmine and Sirmondus, to be the firft writer, that did on purpose advance and explain that doctrine: he himself values his pains in that matter; and as he laments the flowness of fome in believing it, fo he pretends that he had moved many to affent to it. But he confeffes, that fome blamed him for afcribing a fenfe to the words of Chrift, that was not confonant to truth. There was but one book writ in that age to fecond him; the name of the author was loft, till Mabillon discovered that it was writ by one Herigerus, Abbot of Cob. But all the eminent men and the great writers of that time wrote plainly againft this doctrine, and affirmed, that the bread and wine remained in the facrament, and did nourish our bodies as other meats do. Those were Rabanus Maurus, Archbishop of Mentz; Amalarius Archbifhop of Triers; Heribald, Bishop of Auxerre; Bertram, or Ratramne; John Scot Erigena; Walafridus Strabus; Florus, and Chriftian Druthmar. Three of thefe fet themfelves on purpose to refute Pafchafe.

Rabanus Maurus, in an epiftle to Abbot Egilon, wrote against Pafchafe for faying, that it was that body that was born of the Virgin, that was crucified and raised up again, which was daily offered up. And though that book is loft, yet as he himself refers his reader to it in his Penitential, fo

we

we have an account given of it by the anonymous defender of ART. Pafchase.

Ratramne was commanded by Charles the Bald, then Emperor, to write upon that fubject; which he in the beginning of his book promises to do, not trufting to his own sense, but following the steps of the holy Fathers. He tells us, that there were different opinions about it: fome believing that the body of Chrift was there without a figure: others laying that it was there in a figure, or mystery: upon which he apprehended that a great fchifm muft follow. His book is very fhort, and very plain: he afferts our doctrine as exprefsly as we ourselves can do: he delivers it in the fame words, and proves it by many of the fame arguments and authorities, that we bring.

Raban and Ratramne were, without difpute, reckoned among the first men of that age.

John Scot was alfo commanded by the fame Emperor to write on the fame fubject: he was one of the most learned and the most ingenious men of the age; and was in great esteem both with the Emperor, and with our King Alfred. He was reckoned both a faint and a martyr. He did formally refute Pafchafe's doctrine, and affert ours. His book is in

deed loft; but a full account of it is given us by other writers of that time. And it is a great evidence, that his opinion in this matter was not then thought to be contrary to the general fenfe of the Church in that age: for he having writ againft St. Auftin's doctrine concerning Predeftination, there was a very fevere cenfure of him and of his writings, published under the name of the Church of Lions: in which they do not once reflect on him, for his opinions touching the Eucharist. It appears from this, that their doctrine concerning the Sacrament was then generally received; fince both Katramne and he, though they differed extremely in the point of Predeftination, yet both agreed in this. It is probable that the Saxon homily, that was read in England on Eafter-day, was taken from Scot's book; which does fully reject the corporal prefence. This is enough to fhew that Pafchafe's opinion was an innovation broached in the ninth century, and was oppofed by all the great men of that age.

The tenth century was the blackeft and most ignorant of all the ages of the Church: there is not one writer in that age that gives us any clear account of the doctrine of the Church: fuch remote hints as occur do ftill favour of Ratramne's doctrine. All men were then afleep, and fo it was a fit time for the tares that Pafchafe had fown to grow up in it. The Popes of that age were fuch a fucceffion of monfters, that Baronius cannot forbear to make the faddeft exclamations poffible against

XXVIII.