neral council, as the church of Rome is the catholic church, or a particular is an universal. But suppose it so for this once, yet this council meddled not with the modus, viz. transubstantiation, or the ceasing of its being bread, but of the real presence of Christ under the elements, which is no part of our question. Berengarius denied it, but we do not, when it is rightly understood. Pope Nicholaus himself did not understand the new article, for it was not fitted for publication until the time of the Lateran council; and how nothing of this was in that council determined I have already made appear; and therefore, as Scotus said the scripture alone could not evict this article, so he also said, in his argument made for the doctors that held the first opinion mentioned before out of Innocentius, nec invenitur ubi ecclesia istam veritatem determinet solenniter, " neither is it found where the church hath solemnly determined it." And for his own particular, though he was carried into captivity by the symbol of pope Innocent the Third, for which by that time was pretended the Lateran council; yet he himself said, that before that council it was no article of faith; and for this thing Bellarmine reproves him, and imputes ignorance to him, saying, “that it was because he had not read the Roman council under Gregory the Seventh, nor the consent of the Fathers h." And to this purpose I quoted Henriquez, saying, "that Scotus saith the doctrine of transubstantiation is not ancient:" the author of the Letter denies that he saith any such thing of Scotus; but I desire him to look once more, and my margent will better direct himi.

What the opinion of Durandus was in this question, if these gentlemen will not believe me, let them believe their own friends. But first let it be considered what I said, viz. "that he maintained (viz. in disputation) that even after consecration the very matter of bread remained. 2. That by reason of the authority of the church it is not to be held. 3. That nevertheless it is possible it should be so. 4. That it is no contradiction that the matter of bread should remain, and yet it be Christ's body too. 5. That this were the easier way of solving the difficulties." That all this is true, I have no better argument than his own words, which are in his first question of the eleventh distinction in quartum numb. 11. et n. 15. For indeed the case was very hard with h Lib. 3. de Euchar. c. 23. sect. Unum tamen. i Scotus negat doctrinam de conversione et transubst. esse antiquam. Henriquez, lib. 8. c. 23. in marg. ad liter. H.

these learned men, who being pressed by authority, did bite the file, and submitted their doctrine, but kept their reason to themselves: and what some in the council of Trent observed of Scotus, was true also of Durandus and divers other schoolmen, with whom it was usual to deny things with a kind of courtesy. And therefore Durandus in the places cited, though he disputes well for his opinion, yet he says the contrary is modus tenendus de facto. But besides that his words are, as I understand them, plain and clear to manifest his own hearty persuasion, yet I shall not desire to be believed upon my own account, for fear I be mistaken; but that I had reason to say it, Henriquez shall be my warrant; Durandus dist. quæst. 3, ait esse probabile sed absque assertione, &c.; "he saith, it is probable, but without assertion, that in the eucharist the same matter of bread remains without quantity." And a little after he adds, out of Cajetan, Paludanus, and Soto, that this opinion of Durandus is erroneous; but after the council of Trent it seems to be heretical; and yet, he says, it was held by Ægidius and Euthymius, who had the good luck it seems to live and die before the council of Trent, otherwise they had been in danger of the inquisition for heretical pravity. But I shall not trouble myself further in this particular; I am fully vindicated by Bellarmine himself', who spends a whole chapter in the confutation of this error of Durandus, viz. that the matter of bread remains: he endeavours to answer his arguments, and gives this censure of him; Itaque sententia Durandi hæretica est; "therefore the sentence of Durandus is heretical;" although he be not to be called a heretic, because he was ready to acquiesce in the judgment of the church. So Bellarmine; who if he say true, that Durandus was ready to submit to the judgment of the church, then he does not say true when he says the church before his time had determined against him; but, however, that I said true of him, when I imputed this opinion to him, Bellarmine is my witness. Thus you see I had reason for what I said; and by these instances it appears how hardly, and how long the doctrine of transubstantiation was before it could be swallowed.

But I remember that Salmeron tells of divers, who, distrusting of scripture and reason, had rather in this point rely upon the tradition of the Fathers; and therefore I descended to take from them this armour in which they trusted. And first, to ease a more curious inquiry, which in a short dissuasive was not convek Summa, 1. 8. c. 23. p. 448, lit. C in marg. 1 Lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 13.

nient, I used the abbreviature of an adversary's confession. For Alphonsus à Castro confessed that in ancient writers there is seldom any mention made of transubstantiation. One of my adversaries says this is not spoken of the thing, but of the name of transubstantiation; but if à Castro meant this only of the word, he spake weakly when he said, that the "name or word was seldom mentioned by the ancients." 1. Because it is false that it was seldom mentioned by the ancients, for the word was by the ancient Fathers never mentioned. 2. Because there was not any question of the word where the thing was agreed; and therefore as this saying so understood had been false, so also if it had been true, it would have been impertinent. 3. It is but a trifling artifice to confess the name to be unknown, and by that means to insinuate that the thing was then under other names; it is a secret cozenage of an unwary reader to bribe him into peace and contentedness for the main part of the question, by pleasing him in that part which it may be makes the biggest noise, though it be less material. 4. If the thing had been mentioned by the ancients, they need not, would not, ought not to have troubled themselves and others by a new word; to have still retained the old proposition under the old words would have been less suspicious, more prudent and ingenious; but to bring in a new name is but the cover for a new doctrine; and therefore S. Paul left an excellent precept to the church to avoid prophanas vocum novitates, the profane newness of words; that is, it is fit that the mysteries revealed in scripture should be preached and taught in the words of the scripture, and with that simplicity, openness, easiness, and candour, and not with new and unhallowed words, such as is that of transubstantiation. 5. À Castro did not speak of the name alone, but of the thing also, de transubstantiatione panis in corpus Christi, "of the transubstantiation of bread into Christ's body," of this manner of conversion, that is, of this doctrine; now doctrines consist not in words but things; however his last words are faint and weak and guilty; for being convinced of the weakness of his defence of the thing, he left to himself a subterfuge of words.

But let it be how it will with à Castro, whom I can very well spare, if he will not be allowed to speak sober sense, and as a wise man should, we have better and fuller testimonies in this affair: that "the Fathers did not so much as touch the matter

m Letter, p. 21.

or thing of transubstantiation," said the Jesuits in prison, as is reported by the author of the Modest Discourse: and the great Erasmus", who lived and died in the communion of the church of Rome, and was as likely as any man of his age to know what he said, gave this testimony in the present question: In synaxi transubstantiationem sero definivit ecclesia, et re et nomine veteribus ignotam. "In the communion, the church hath but lately defined transubstantiation, which both in the thing and in the name was unknown to the ancients."

Now this was a fair and friendly inducement to the reader to take from him all prejudice, which might stick to him by the great noises of the Roman doctors, made upon their pretence of the Fathers being on their side; yet I would not so rely upon these testimonies, but that I thought fit to give some little essay of this doctrine out of the Fathers themselves".

To this purpose is alleged Justin Martyr's saying of the eucharist, that "it was a figure, which our Lord commanded to do in remembrance of his passion." These were quoted, not as the words, but as the doctrine of that saint; and the Letter will needs suppose me to mean those words, which are, as I find, in page 259 and 260 of the Paris edition, 1615; "The oblation of a cake was a figure of the eucharistical bread which the Lord commanded to do in remembrance of his passion." These are Justin's words in that place, with which I have nothing to do (as I shall shew by and by): but because cardinal Perron intends to make advantage of them, I shall wrest them first out of his hands, and then give an account of the doctrine of this holy man in the present article; both out of this place and others. Ts σμιδάλεως προσφορά, « The oblation of a cake was a figure of the bread of the eucharist, which our Lord delivered us to do:" therefore, says the cardinal, "the eucharistical bread in the truth, since the cake was the figure or the shadow." To which I answer, that though the cake was a figure of the eucharistical bread, yet so might that bread be a figure of something else; just as baptism, I mean the external rite, which although itself be but the outward part, and is the rúmos or figure of the inward washing by the Spirit of grace, and represents our being buried with Christ in his death, yet it is an accomplishment in some sense of those

66

n In priorem Epist. ad Corinthios, citante etiam Salmeron, tom. 9. tract. 16. p. 108.

o Videat lector Picherellum, Exposit. Verborum Institutionis Coenæ Domini, et ejusdem dissertationem de Missa.

many figures, by which (according to the doctrine of the Fathers) it was prefigured. Such as in S. Peter the waters of the deluge; in Tertullian, were the waters of Jordan into which Naaman descended; in S. Austin, the waters of sprinkling: these were types, and to these baptism did succeed, and represented the same thing which they represented, and effected or exhibited the thing it did represent, and therefore in this sense they prefigured baptism: and yet that this is but a figure still, we have S. Peter's warrantP; The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us ; not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God. The waters of the flood were rúπos, a type of the waters of baptism; the waters of baptism were avτíTUTOV, that is, a type answering to a type; and yet even here there is a typical representing and signifying part, and beyond that there is the veritas, or the thing signified by both. So it is in the oblation of the cake, and the eucharistical bread, that was a type of this, and this the avτíτνñоv, or correspondent of that; a type answering to a type, a figure to a figure; and both of them did and do respectively represent a thing yet more secret. For as S. Austin said, "these and those are diverse in the sign, but equal in the thing signified, diverse in the visible species, but the same in the intelligible signification;" those were promissive, and these demonstrative; or, as others express it, those were pronunciative, and these of the Gospel are contestative. So friar Gregory of Padua noted in the council of Trent9: and that this was the sense of Justin Martyr appears to him that considers what he says. 1. He does not say the cake is a type of the bread, but "the oblation of the cake," that is, that whole rite of offering a cake after the leper was cleansed in token of thankfulness, and for his legal purity, was a type of the bread of the eucharist," which for the remembrance of the passion which he suffered for these men whose minds are purged from all perverseness, Jesus Christ our Lord commanded to make or do." To do what? to do bread? or to make bread? No, but to make bread to be eucharistical, to be a memorial of the passion, to represent the death of Christ; so that it is not the cake and the bread that are the type and the antitype; but the oblation of the cake was the figure, and the celebration of Christ's memorial and the eucharist, are the things presignified and prefigured; but then it remains, that the eucharistical bread is but the inPI Pet. iii. 21. q A. D. 1547.