The Catholic Doctrine of the Eucharist in All Ages, Preface

The Catholic Doctrine of the Eucharist in All Ages · Preface

THE PREFACE.

THE Diſpute which the firſt Treatiſe of the Perpetuity of the Faith hath occaſion'd on this Subject of the Euchariſt, has made ſuch a noiſe in the world, ſince Mr. Arnaud's laſt Book, that I have no need to give an account of the motives which engage me in this third Reply. Beſides, it is evident to every one, that the Cauſe which I defend, and which I cannot forſake without betraying my Truſt and Conſcience, obliges me neceſſarily to ſtate clearly matters of Fact, and maintain or refute thoſe Doctrins which are debated between Mr. Arnaud and me.

AND yet whatſoever juſtice and neceſſity there may be for publiſhing this Work, I am afraid ſome perſons will be diſpleaſed, ſeeing ſo much written on the ſame Subject; for this is the ſixth Book ſince the firſt Treatiſe of the Perpetuity has been publiſh'd, beſides two others of Father Nouet's and mine. And theſe Tracts which at firſt were but ſmall, have ſince inſenſibly grown into great Volumes. Yet for all this, we have not ſeen what Mr. Arnaud, or his Friends are oblig'd to produce as to the firſt ſix Centuries, of which without doubt much may be ſaid on both ſides.

IF any complain of this prolixity, I confeſs it will not be altogether without cauſe. For altho the Controverſie of the Euchariſt is one of the moſt important, that is between the Church of Rome and the Proteſtants, and which deſerves therefore to be carefully examin'd, yet ſince it may be treated, with greater brevity, even this conſideration of its importance, is a good reaſon for ſhunning all tedious Digreſſions, which tire the Readers mind, and divert it from attending to ſo neceſſary a truth. But it would be very unreaſonable to charge me with this irkſome length of our Debates, ſince none can be juſtly blamed, but thoſe who have firſt made this Labyrinth, and then plunged themſelves into it, to the end they might forcibly draw others after them. For as to my own part, I have ever proteſted, that I entred not into it, but in condeſcention only to follow them; and that I might endeavour to draw them out of it, and bring 'em into the right way.

IT is certain that for ending of this Controverſie, we muſt have recourſe only to the Holy Scriptures, by which we may examin the nature of the Sacrament, which our Saviour inſtituted, and the end which he hath appointed it for, the force of the Expreſſions which he hath made uſe of, the manner after which he himſelf did Celebrate it, the circumſtances which accompanied this Celebration, the Impreſſion which his Words and his Actions may be thought to make on the minds of his Apoſtles, who were eyewitneſſes of what they have delivered to us, and the agreement which this Sacrament ought to have with the other parts of the Chriſtian Religion; and in a word every thing which is wont to be conſider'd, when men make an exact ſearch after truth. This way without doubt would be the ſhorteſt and certaineſt, or to ſpeak better, the only certain method for ſatisfaction, and that which can only quiet the Conſcience: For the Sacraments of the Chriſtian Religion, being as they are, of an immediate Divine Inſtitution, our Faith, our Hope, and our obſervance of them, ought to be grounded immediately on the Word of God, there being no Creature who is able to extend them beyond the bounds of the Heavenly Revelation.

IT were indeed to be deſired, that the Author of the Perpetuity and Mr. Arnaud had taken this courſe; but ſeeing they have been pleaſed to take another, and enquire after the Faith of the Ancient Church, before the riſe of theſe Controverſies, they ought at leaſt to have ſpared their Readers the trouble of all fruitleſs and unprofitable Digreſſions: for ſo I call whatſoever they have done hitherto; eſpecially in Mr. Arnaud's laſt Volume. He hath engaged himſelf to give us another, wherein he promiſeth to enquire into the belief of the ſix firſt Ages, which plainly ſhews, that he himſelf confeſſes the neceſſity of ſuch a Diſquiſition. Wherefore then hath he not at firſt taken this courſe, ſeeing that at length he muſt come to it? What neceſſity is there of taking up imaginary ſuppoſitions concerning the diſtinct belief of the Preſence, or rather Real Abſence; and of the conformity of the Greeks and other Eaſtern Chriſtians with the Roman Church, in the Doctrin of Tranſubſtantiation?

WE have ſeen within a ſhort time three different methods of handling this Subject, that of Father Maimbourg's, that of Father Nouet's, and that of Mr. Arnaud. The firſt ſeems to put a ſtop to all farther enquiry, by this reaſon, that what hath been once eſtabliſhed, ought not to be called in queſtion; and on this Principle he juſtifies the Doctrin of the Real Preſence and Tranſubſtantiation, which having been decided by Councils, ought not again to be brought under examination. The ſecond conſents to a Review, and to this end allows us to ſearch for the true Doctrin of the Church in the Scriptures, and amongſt the Fathers from Age to Age. The laſt permits what hath been already decided to be called in queſtion, but withal, propoſeth for finding out the true Doctrin of the Church, that men ought alſo to hearken to ſuch arguments as are grounded on certain maxims which it ſuppoſeth.

OF theſe three methods, that of Father Nouets is certainly the moſt reaſonable and eaſie; and had he contented himſelf with the holy Scripture, without entangling himſelf in the Writings of the Fathers; which be himſelf hath compared to a Wood, where ſuch as are purſued do ſave themſelves: on this account his method had been commendable. That of Father Maimbourg is unjuſt, becauſe he ſets up the deciſions of Councils againſt us, not remembring that nothing can be preſcribed againſt Truth; especially when Salvation is concerned; and that the determinations of Councils are not conſiderable any farther with us, than they are agreeable with the holy Scripture, and the Principles of Chriſtian Religion; there cannot therefore be any more reaſonable or effectual way to end theſe particular Differences which divide us, than to examin ſtrictly and impartially whether this agreeableneſs which we plead for, be neceſſary or no. Yet it muſt be granted, that this method of Father Maimbourg's is far more direct, and better contriv'd than that of Mr. Arnaud's. For beſides, that it is more agreeable to the Doctrin and intereſt of the Roman Church, taking for its Principles the Authority of the Eccleſiaſtical deciſions, which the other doth not, it engageth not a man as the other doth into new Diſputes and new dangers: yet both of them avoid a thro ſearch into the bottom of the Controverſie. Now that which oppoſeth the judgment of the Councils can only involve us in that Debate which concerns the Authority of the Repreſentative Church and its Aſſemblies; whereas the other makes ſuppoſitions which we affirm to be falſe, and of which we pretend, there cannot any good uſe be made, even tho we were not able to ſhew the falſity of them; and by this means it entangles us into new and long Controverſies, whereby they gain nothing, but rather run a greater riſque of loſing the whole Cauſe which they defend, ſo that it ſeems this new way was invented for no other end but to give us new advantages againſt the Church of Rome and its Doctrins.

AND this will evidently appear, if we take but the pains to read this work. For firſt we ſhall ſee in general the uſeleſneſs of the ſuppoſitions and reaſonings of the Author of the Perpetuity and of Mr. Arnaud, and in particular the unprofitableneſs of their ſuppoſitions touching the Greeks and other Churches, which are called Schiſmaticks. This is the Subject of the firſt and ſecond Book. In the firſt I ſhow that the method of theſe Gentlemen can be of no effect in reſpect of us, and that we are not in reaſon oblig'd to hear, or anſwer them, whilſt they lay aſide the holy Scripture, which is the only Rule of our Faith; and yet leave unanſwer'd the proofs of fact, taken from the teſtimony of the Fathers; by which we are perſuaded that there hath been made a change in the Roman Church. In the ſecond I make it appear that tho it were granted that the Greeks and other Chriſtians of the Eaſt do agree with the Roman Church in the Doctrins of the Real Preſence and Tranſubſtantiation, yet the conſequences which theſe Gentlemen would draw thence will be of no force, for it will not hence follow that theſe Doctrins have been always received by the Chriſtian Church, which is the chief deſign of Mr. Arnaud's Book.

IN the ſecond place I diſcover the falſity of this ſuppoſition, that the true Greek Church, and other Eaſtern Chriſtians do believe Tranſubſtantiation, and Adore the Sacrament after the ſame manner as the Church of Rome does. The contrary of this will appear ſo plainly, and Mr. Arnaud's Proofs ſo ſolidly anſwered, that a man would wonder to ſee with what confidence he treats of this matter, in which he betrays ſo great ignorance and overſight. Here alſo his pretended proofs touching the Greeks, from the 7th. to the 11th. and touching the Latins in the 7th. and 8th. Centuries are fully confuted, together with the conſequences which he hath blindly drawn from thence of the conſent of all Chriſtian Churches in the Doctrins of the Real Preſence and Tranſubſtantiation. This is the Subject of the 3d. 4th. and 5th. Book. The third proves by many and clear arguments, that the Greeks do not believe Tranſubſtantiation, nor adore the Sacrament with the adoration of Latria, as the Church of Rome doth, and moreover ſhews particularly what their Doctrins are, wherein they agree with the Latins and with us, and wherein they differ. In the fourth I anſwer all Mr. Arnaud's Proofs, diſcovering their weakneſs, and make it appear, that the greateſt part of what he offers does neceſſarily conclude againſt him. And becauſe of the affinity of the matter, I examin at the ſame time his 7th. Book, wherein he treats of Greek Authors, of the 7th. 8th. 9th. and 10th. Centuries. In my fifth Book I paſs over to the other Chriſtians, which are called Schiſmaticks, Moſcovites, Armenians, Neſtorians, Jacobites, Coptics, Ethiopians, and ſhow they do not believe Tranſubſtantiation nor the Real Preſence, with the Latins. From thence I come to the Latins in the 7th. and 8th. Centuries, and examine Mr. Arnaud's 8th. Book, after which I conſider his 10th. Book, which concerns the conſequences drawn from the conſent of the Churches, which he pretends to have proved; and I make it appear that they are but Paralogiſms and Sophiſms.

IN the third place I lay open the falſity of Mr. Arnaud's ſecond ſuppoſition, touching the diſtinct belief of the Real Preſence, and refute his ſixth Book. Afterwards in refuting the ninth Book, I ſhow the abſurdity of his conjectures about the impoſſibility of a change, and demonſtrate that 'tis not only poſſible, but might eaſily happen. Laſtly, the innovation of Paſchaſius is as evidently prov'd as a thing of that nature can be. This is the ſubject of my ſixth Book.

NOW from all theſe diſcourſes it will evidently appear what I have already obſerv'd, That this new way hath not been laid open, but for to give us new advantages againſt the Church of Rome.

I speak not of the intention of theſe Gentlemen, for they have declared themſelves plainly enough againſt us, to leave no place for us to ſuſpect them of any colluſion. And the laſt Book of Mr. Arnaud hath provided againſt all ſuch ſuſpicions ſomething more perhaps than is reaſonable. But I ſpeak of the ſucceſs their method hath had, which hath been quite contrary to their intention. As for example, it hath given me occaſion to prove, that the Greeks did not believe Tranſubſtantiation, nor the Real Preſence, which the Church of Rome taught, when they condemned Berengarius, neither in the preceding nor following Ages: That whatſoever efforts the Latins have made ſince the 11th. Age to this preſent, to procure the reception of theſe Doctrins in Greece, yet the true Greek Church hath not embraced them: Neither do the Armenians and other Schiſmaticks believe them any more than the Greeks.

NOW who ſeeth not that the firſt and moſt natural conſequences which can be drawn from thence is, That theſe Doctrins are new; for if they were eſtabliſh'd at firſt together with the Chriſtian Religion, they would have appeared in thoſe Churches, and been retain'd among them after their ſeparation from the Latins, and that they do not appear, is a manifeſt ſign of their novelty. This conſequence is not like that of Mr. Arnaud, his and mine are not only contrary in the matter, but they are likewiſe very different in form; for mine is juſt and direct, whereas his is neither juſt nor true. For ſuppoſe the Greeks and other Eaſtern Chriſtians ſhould at this day believe Tranſubſtantiation, nay ſuppoſe they ſhould have believed it, ſome Ages ſince, what advantage can Mr. Arnaud make of this, ſeeing he hath been ſhewed ſeveral ways by which it might be introduced into their Churches? But if it be true that they held it not neither in the 11th, nor in the following Age, as I have invincibly prov'd, then it cannot be imagin'd how it ſhould diſappear, nor how the Latins who have for ſeveral Ages ſince, overſpread theſe Countreys with their Emiſſaries, would have ſuffered ſuch a Doctrin to be loſt amongſt them, which it was ſo much their intereſt to preſerve. Moreover, this ſame method hath furniſh'd me with an occaſion to overthrow the pretended impoſſibilities of a change; and to make appear on the contrary the facility thereof. Now ſuppoſe we could not anſwer the Arguments of the Author of the Perpetuity and Mr. Arnaud, this would be but little advantage to their cauſe: for ſtill our proofs of the matter of fact, would remain unanſwer'd, without the examination of which, the queſtion of the Perpetuity of the Doctrins in Controverſie cannot be decided. Whereas theſe having made it appear that their pretended impoſſibilities are mere Chimera's, and that this change might eaſily happen, this is a great inducement to believe our account of it is really true.

IT is then certain that theſe Gentlemen could not make a worſe choice for the intereſt of the Church of Rome than of ſuch a way, in which nothing of advantage to their Church can be expected, but ſhe is thereby expoſed to great fears and dangers; and that the cauſe which they have oppoſed is more beholding to them, than that which they have taken upon them to defend. Had it not been for them, perhaps we ſhould not have much troubled our ſelves either with diſcovering the real belief of the Greek Church, or that of the Armenians, or with the diſplaying the myſtery of their Seminaries and Miſſions, neither ſhould we have concern'd our ſelves in ſhewing how the change could be wrought, and how it was made.

AND having now given an account of the ſeveral parts of this work, and of the preſent ſtate of this Controverſie as to the matter of it, it is likewiſe fit to ſay ſomething of the manner in which I have handled it. One of my greateſt cares hath been religiouſly to keep to truth and ſincerity. For I am very ſenſible, that prejudice, partiality, love of vain glory, and even ſometimes a ſecret deſire of revenging a man's ſelf on his Adverſary, are paſſions which do commonly obtrude themſelves on us in Diſputes, and which never fail to corrupt the mind; I have therefore endeavoured to the utmoſt, not only to keep theſe from me, but likewiſe to watch againſt their ſuſprizes. And for this purpoſe I can affirm I have laboured as in the ſight of God, not propoſing to my ſelf any other aim than his glory and truth; always remembring that I write not a line of which I muſt not one day give him an account. I have not warp'd from that ſincerity and uprightneſs which an honeſt man ought to obſerve on theſe occaſions. I have not taken Mr. Arnaud's words in a wrong ſenſe, nor charged him with ſaying what indeed he ſaith not, nor ſtrained his expreſſions beyond their natural ſignification. No man can reproach me for making falſe citations, or maiming any paſſages, by ſuppreſſing that which is important; neither have I alledged them abuſively and contrary to the intention of their Authors. I hope there is no unfair dealings, either in my Arguments, or Anſwers, in my Suppoſitions, or my other Diſcourſes. I have followed Reaſon and Nature as much as I could, and have not made uſe of Philoſophy, but to ſtrengthen the ordinary notions of common ſenſe, and not to ſtifle or hinder their effects.

I hope likewiſe that I ſhall not be complain'd of as having not obſerved, either in general towards the Church of Rome, or in particular, towards Mr. Arnaud, all that moderation which might be reaſonably expected from me. I have noted the Errors and Sophiſms of Mr. Arnaud, which I have found very numerous, in every Subject on which he hath treated, eſpecially concerning the Greek Church. I was not a little troubled to ſee with what ſincerity he alledged ſeveral paſſages, whereof ſome are not faithfully tranſlated; and others ſo imperfectly, that he hath ſuppreſſed whole Clauſes, which would clear up the difficulty, and others which are palpably perverted, contrary to the ſenſe of their Authors. I could not but reſent his unhandſome dealing, when he diſjoynted from the ſeries of a diſcourſe, ſeveral of my words, to make them look of a quite contrary ſenſe than what was intended; or faſtned on them ſtrange chimerical ſenſes, that he might have ſome matter of triumph, or groundleſly ſlandered ſome famous men, or endeavoured to decry by violent and odious terms our morals, which cannot but be holy and pure, ſeeing we have no others, but what are taken from the Law and the Gospel. In fine, when he employs his declamatory ſtile, to dazle the eyes of the world, and to miſ-repreſent the truth. I have diſcovered ſeveral of his contradictions, and how much his opinions are influenc'd by his intereſt; ſeveral fallacious ſuppoſitions which he would have introduc'd into this Diſpute, and ſome vain and ill-grounded accuſations with which he hath charged me; are clearly laid open; and ſome faults of his in Hiſtory and Grammar I have but lightly touched upon. In ſhort, I have ſet before him what I believe he ought to have ſaid on theſe occaſions, and others of the like kind; and do moreover here proteſt that I ſhould have wholly ſpared him in the moſt part of theſe matters, had the intereſt of the cauſe which I take upon me to defend permitted me ſo to do. But what I have ſaid to him has been without ſharpneſs and paſſion, and even with as little complaining as may be againſt his ſtarch'd Prefaces, and imperious tartneſs, which appears throughout his whole Book, wherein I every where meet with the rough terms of Enthuſiaſm, Extravagancy, ſenſleſs Propoſitions, and other ſuch like expreſſions. I confeſs that theſe injurious terms were not at all pleaſing to me, and preſently I wondred that Mr. Arnaud ſhould uſe a ſtile ſo little becoming his profeſſion: but at length being accuſtom'd to it, I paſs'd over it, and have comforted my ſelf by the motives of Chriſtian patience. There are very deſerving perſons, even of his own Communion, whom he has handled no better than my ſelf; and after all, it ſuffices me to know that I have not given juſt cauſe for ſo great animoſity and bitterneſs, as I do believe ſome have already acknowledg'd, and which I believe Mr. Arnaud himſelf will acknowledg, when he has read my laſt Chapter, in which I anſwer his 11th. Book, which concerns our pretended perſonal differences.

AS to exactneſs, I believe I have kept as much to it as can be deſired, in ſuch an Anſwer as this. Indeed I have not followed blindfold Mr. Arnaud, when he ſtrayed from his own ſubject, as he has done in the laſt Chapters of his firſt Book; where he treats of Epiſcopacy, of Praying for the Dead, th' Invocation of Saints, the Worſhip of Relicks, and the Prohibition of certain Meats.

FOR ſeeing the matter in hand only concerns the Euchariſt, it would have been contrary to ſenſe, and a groſs abuſe to the Readers patience, to engage in theſe Controverſies, on each of which there might be written whole Volumes: not to ſay farther that I have endeavoured to avoid that prolixity which Mr. Arnaud ſeems on the contrary to have affected. But according to prudence and diſcretion, I have omitted nothing conſiderable in Mr. Arnaud's Book, which relates to our preſent Controverſie unanſwer'd, except the two Diſſertations of the Criticiſm on John Scot, and on Bertram, to which there is a diſtinct Anſwer preparing. It cannot be ſaid that Mr. Arnaud and his friends have done the like by me, for to ſpeak ingeniouſly and freely, is there any thing leſs exact or more careleſs than their large work, conſidering it as a Refutation of my anſwer to the Perpetuity, of which they have ſcarcely handled the tenth part? They have taken here and there ſome one of my paſſages ſeparated from the ſequel of my diſcourſe, and the greateſt part of them turn'd into another ſenſe, hereupon they have travelled from Eaſt to Weſt. And this they call the Perpetuity of the Faith defended, againſt the Book of the Sieur Claude, Miniſter of Charenton. But ſeeing I have followed the ſecond Treatiſe of the Perpetuity, and even accommodated my ſelf to its method, ought not then the Author in defending it againſt my Book …o follow me a little more cloſely? And when he was oblig'd to write a ſecond Volume, as to what respects the firſt ſix Ages, certainly he ought to have conſidered the reſt with ſome care. Mr. Arnaud's In his Preface.excuſe is vain and frivolous which he alledgeth for the length of this work. For to make it ſhort he needed only to have inſiſted on matters eſſential, avoiding fruitleſs digreſſions and retrenching injurious invectives. It is likewiſe a vain pretence of his, that in following my fancies, as he is pleaſed to speak, the connexion of his Principles with their conſequences, remain hid and obſcured. For what elſe does he intend by this, but to preſerve theſe colours and appearances which cannot otherwiſe ſubſiſt? Wherefore ſhould he call that method which the Author of the Perpetuity hath himſelf begun, and which I have but follow'd; wherefore I ſay ſhould he term this my fancies? Wherefore ſhould he at leaſt ſuppreſs ſeveral things which I propoſed in order to the diſcovery of the falſity of theſe pretended Principles and their conſequences, and wherefore muſt this neglect have the Title of the Perpetuity defended? For my part, who de not believe my ſelf bound to follow this example, I have examin'd whatſoever I found of importance in Mr. Arnaud, be it never ſo difficult. If I have changed his method in ſome places, it hath been to lay down a better, more ſhort and natural, as when I joyned his 7th. Book, which treateth of Greek Authors from the 7th. Age to the 11th. to the general Dispute touching the Greek Church, to avoid doing twice the ſame thing: or when I referred his ſixth Book touching the diſtinct belief of the Preſence, or Real Abſence, to the queſtion of the impoſſibility of a change, becauſe that in effect this diſtinct belief was not invented but for this purpoſe, or when I remitted what he ſaid of Paſchaſius and the Authors of the 9th. Age, in the ſecond part of his 8th. Book, to the account of the Innovation, becauſe this was its proper place. But even in this I have not at all weakened Mr. Arnaud's proofs, nor the leſs exactly examin'd his Book.

AS to what further remains, the Authors which I have made uſe of cannot be ſuſpected by Mr. Arnaud, ſeeing they are for the moſt part, either Greeks, or perſons of the Roman Communion, or Authors of former Ages, which neither one nor other of 'em have written with any foreſight of our debate. I have alledged but very few Proteſtants, and they ſuch of whoſe ſincerity there is no reaſon to doubt. Mr. Arnaud and his friends have not done the ſame, who have cited in this Controverſie, Acts and Atteſtations, ſent by the Emiſſaries, ſuch as the Acts of a Synod of Cyprus, the Profeſſion of Faith of ſix Prieſts belonging to the Patriarchate of Antioch, and ſuch like particulars in the 12th. Book, of the Writings of the Greeks, Armenians, or Neſtorians latinis'd, as of Manuel Calecas, of John Pluſiadene, of Adam Neſtorian, and of Hacciadour, an Armenian Patriarch now reſident at Rome, the teſtimonies of the Scholars of the Seminary of Rome, as of Payſius, Ligardius, of Abraham Ecchellenſis, and of Leo Allatius, &c. They have likewiſe frequently made uſe of him that has lately continued Baronius, named Odoricus Raynaldus a Prieſt of the Oratory at Rome; but if any would know of what authority this Author is, he may be inform'd by this deſcription: He is a man of little wit, of no judgment, no ſincerity, no credit, who takes matters upon truſt with an unſufferable boldneſs, and delivers the moſt unjuſtifiable pretenſions of the Court of Rome with the ſame confidence as if they were Articles of Faith, who citeth Authors known to be the moſt partial and paſſionate of all others, as Poggius, Blondius, Turrecremata, and ſuch like, as unreprovable witneſſes, and by following whoſe Teſtimonies, we ſhall be obliged to condemn the beſt of men, even thoſe whom God hath own'd by Miracles, who for want of proofs, makes uſe of unjuſt clamours and outragious declamations, unbecoming an Hiſtorian, who ought never to be led by paſſion. And in ſhort, ſuch a man than whom there was never any leſs fit, for ſo important a work, as is an Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory. And this is the true Character of this Author. Who would imagin that perſons who believe what I now rehearſed, and who deſire the whole world to be of the ſame judgment with them, ſhould make uſe of him, in a diſpute ſo important as this, and take from him the greateſt part of their Relations. And yet theſe are the Gentlemen who quote him at preſent with ſo great confidence, after they themſelves have repreſented him in the manner I mention'd. It was either Mr. Arnaud, or ſome of his Remarks on the 18th. Tome of the Eccleſiaſtical Annals of Rodoricus Raynaeldus. Aug. contr. Fauſt. lib. 32. ch. 16.Friends, who under the name of ſeveral Divines have taken the pains to publiſh their Animadverſions on this Hiſtory after a diligent peruſal of it. Whereupon may we not juſtly apply to them that of S. Auſtin to Fauſtus, Who is there that having decried a witneſs as falſe and corrupted, will ever again produce his teſtimony? If we believe him, and believe him not according to your fancy, it is not him whom we believe, but you. And if we muſt needs believe you, what need is there of your producing other witneſſes. We ſhall ſee what theſe Gentlemen will do henceforward, for ſhould they take the ſame courſe again as they have taken already in this occaſion, ſhould they pretend to quote no other Authors but what are decried, falſe Greeks, Scholars of the Seminaries, perſons won to the intereſts of Rome, or Proſelytes of its Doctrin, and remitted to its Sea, this would be as much as to ſay that their Authority would have a greater ſhare in this Controverſie than Reaſon, and perhaps they might be let alone to talk to themſelves, it being very unreaſonable that a man ſhould be continually employed in combating Phantaſms, and fighting with Shadows. For to maintain faithfully and ſolidly the Hypotheſis of the Author of the Perpetuity, This was moſt neceſſary to be prov'd, That the Real Preſence and Tranſubſtantiation were eſtabliſh'd and commonly held in all Chriſtian Churches, when Berengarius his Diſputations were on foot, for which end a thouſand atteſtations of perſons now living would be of no uſe. Theſe atteſtations may ſerve to ſhew that the care which hath been ſo long taken, and which is ſtill continued to introduce inſenſibly the Doctrins of the Roman Church into other Churches, by the ways which I have obſerved in my ſecond Book, and especially by their Miſſions and Seminaries hath not been altogether fruitleſs. But this is the greateſt abſurdity of all, to conclude from thence that the Doctrins in diſpute were every where eſtabliſhed in Berengarius's time, or that they were perpetual. There is reaſon to hope that the world will not ſuffer it ſelf ſo eaſily to be cheated, and what hath here been done will ſufficiently manifeſt the Truth.

WE live not now in the times of ignorance and darkneſs wherein mens credulity is eaſily abuſed. Our Age is an enlightned one, and its notices are clear and penetrant, and we ſhould ſoon ſee the downfal of ſeveral ancient Errors, were they not ſupported by the affinity which they have with mens temporal intereſts. God will break off this alliance when it ſhall ſeem good in his ſight, but it is our duty to keep firm in his truth and prefer the honor we receive from it, above all the advantages of the earth, and beſeech him that he would reconcile thoſe to it by his Grace, who are far from it, that all of us may have but one heart to fear him, and one and the ſame mouth to glorifie him.