The Anatomy of the Mass, Book 1 · Chapter 14
CHAP. XIV. Confeſsion of our Adverſaries, acknowledging that Tranſubſtantiation is not grounded in the Scriptures. That the Primitive Church did conſecrate by the prayer, and not by theſe words, This is my body.
THe moſt learned of the Roman Church ground their Tranſubſtantiation not upon theſe words, This is my body, but upon the authority of the Church of Rome, which, as they hold cannot erre.
Scotus, which is termed the ſuttle Do… tor, upon the fourth of the Sentences Diſt. 11. quest, 3. ſaith: There is no place … be found in the Scripture, that may wi hout the determination of the Church, compell… man to beleeve the Tranſubſtantiation. VponUpon which place, Cardinall Bellarmine in his 3. booke of the Euchariſt chap. 23. ſpeaketh thus:*Secundo dicit non extare lo…ū ullū Scripturae tam expreſſu…, ut ſine declara …ne Eccleſ… … …dent… coga… Traſubſtant … …ionem admitt…. Et id non eſt omat… improhahile. Nam et ſi Scriptura quam … ſuprà ad dux…, videatur nobis … …ra, ut poſſi… … non prote…um… tamen an … ſit merito dubitar… po…eſt, cum … n…s doctiſſi… & acurat …mi, qual…s impr… Scotus …, …trarium ſentiant. Sc tus ſaith that there is no place in the Scripture ſo expreſſe, as to compell evidently without the declaration of the Church, to receive the Tranſubſtantiation. And that is not altogether improbable. For although the Scripture that we have alleaged, ſeeme to us ſo plaine that it may compell a man not proud or inſolent, yet nevertheleſſe it may juſtly be doubted whether it be ſo or no, ſeeing the moſt acute and learned men, ſuch eſpecially as Scotus was, are of a contrary opinion. And in the ſame place he tels us, that Scotus ſaith, that Tranſubſtantiation was not an article of faith before the Councell of Lateran, held Anno 1215.
For that cauſe Vaſquez. the Jeſuite upon the 3. part of Thomas, Diſp: 180. chap. 5. having repreſented the opinion of Scotus, who ſaith,*Scotus docet potuiſſe ſervari veritatem verborum conſecrationis, etiamſi in Euchariſtia maneret ſubſtantia panis & v ni. that the truth of the words of conſecration might have beene preſerved, though the ſubſtance of the bread and wine had remained in the Euchariſt, (to whom alſo Durand joyneth himſelfe) blameth Bellarmine without naming him, for ſaying, that the opinion of Scotus is probable, & accuſeth him of halting on both ſides. We ſee †Videas aliquos Theologiae Profeſſores noſtriceporis qui in utrā que partē al quā tulum clau, di…ātes non putant improhahile id quod Scotus de verhis conſecrationis dixit.(ſaith he) certaine profeſſors in Divinity in our times, who halting a little on both ſides, do not eſteeme improbable that which Scotus hath ſaid touching the words of conſecration.
Of that number of learned and acute men, was Cardinall Cajetan, who in hi… notes upon Thomas, ſpeaketh thus:*Cajetanus in 3. Thomae q. 75. art. 1. Alterum quod Evangelium non explicavit expreſſe, ab Eccleſia accepimus, ſcile converſionem panis in corpus Chriſti. Th… other point which the Goſpel expoundeth n… expreſly, we have received it from the Church to wit, the converſion of the bread into the body of Chriſt.
Item. Converſio non explicate habetur i… Evangelio. The converſion (of the bread) is not to be found explicitly in the Goſpel.
The Cardinall de Alliaco, †Petr. de Alliaco in 4. Sent. q. 6. art. 2. Patet quod ille modus eſt poſſibilis, nec repugnat rationi, nec authoritati Bibliae: immo eſt ſacilior ad intelligendum, & rationabilior quàm aliquis aliorum.It appears that this manner which ſuppoſeth that the ſubſtance of bread remaines ſtill, is poſſible, neither is it contrary to reaſon, nor to the authority of the Bible, but is more eaſie to conceive, and more reaſonable. And for this cauſe he is checked by Vaſquez the Jeſuite in the 3 Tome upon the 3 part of Thomas, Diſp: 180. cap: 5. And in that ſame place he ſaith that Durand followed the opinion of Scotus upon the 4. of the Sentences, Diſp. 11. queſt. 2.
Gabriel Biel in the 40 leſſon upon the Canon of the Maſſe:*Biel Lect. 40. Quomodo ibi ſit Chriſti corpus, an per converſionem a…icujus in ipſum, an ſine converſione incipiat eſſe corpus Chriſti cum pane, manentibus ſubſtantia & accidentibus panis, non invenitur expreſſumin canone Bibliae. How the body of Chriſt is there, whether it be by converſion of …me thing into it, or whether without conver…ion Chriſts body beginnes to be there with the bread, the ſubſtance and the accidents remaining, it is not expreſſed in the Canon of the Bible. And even there: That hath beene proved by the authority of the Church and of the Saints, for that cannot be proved by reaſon.
The ſame*Sed cur hunc intellectum difficilem Sancti dicere & Eccleſia determinarre elegerunt, cum ſcripturae poſſint exponi & ſalvari ſecundum intellectum facilem de hoc articulo. in the 41 leſſon asketh, Why the Saints and the Church have choſen to ſay and determine that that ſhould be underſtood in ſo difficult a manner: ſeeing the Scriptures may be expounded and kept in their ſoundneſſe, in a manner eaſie to be underſtood. To this he anſwereth, that the Church hath determined it ſo, meaning by the Church, not the Syrian, nor the Greeke or Ethiopian, but the Roman Church onelyonly.
Salmeron the Jeſuite in the thirteenth Treatiſe of the ninth Tome, expounding theſe words This is my body, ſpeaketh thus:b§ Secunda. Proſectò illis verbis nequaquam converſio ſignificatur ex vi verborum. Aliàs qui diceret Hoc eſt corpus meum, demonſtrando ſuum corpus, ſignificaret converſionem alicujus rei in ſuum corpus. Certainely theſe words doe not ſignifie that any converſion be made, by the force of the words. Otherwiſe he that ſhould ſay this is my body, in ſhewing his owne body, would ſignifie that ſome thing is converted into his body. And he inſiſtes very much upon this, that theſe words This is my body, are declarative or ſignificative of the thing which is, and not effective of that which is not.
Wherefore the ſame Jeſuite, in th… ſame Treatiſe,*Inno. 3. …ib 4. de Myſter. Miſſa cap. 6. Sane dic… poteſi quod Chriſtus v…rtute divina confe…t, & poſl… forma expreſſit, &c. Et cap. 17. Ab hajus quaeſtonis laqueo ſae…le ſe abſolvit qui d…cit, quod Chr…ſtus tunc conſcit cum hened c…t. joynes himſelfe to th… opinion of Pope Innocent the third, a who in the fourth booke of the Myſteries of the Maſſe, Chapters 6. and 17 teacheth that Chriſt made not the converſion of the bread by theſe words H… eſt corpus meum, but by his divine power, and by the bleſſing that had preceded. For he will have the pronouncing of theſe words to have another vertue at this day in the mouthes of Prieſts, than they had in the mouth of Chriſt. Which opinion of Innocent the third, is followed by Innocent the fourth, his Succeſſor, and by multitudes of Doctors, which Salmeron produceth*§ Porio pag. 82. in the ſame Treatiſe.
It is credible that theſe Popes and Doctors were moved to teach that Chriſt did not conſecrate by theſe words This is my body, but by the prayer … bleſſing he made before, becauſe the Fathers ſay the ſame, and that ſuch was the beleefe of the ancient Church. Juſtin Martyr bforeign.calleth that which wee receive in the Euchariſt a foode conſecrated by the prayer of the Word, that is to ſay Chriſt. Saint Auſtin in the third booke of the Trinity; Chapter 4. ſpeaking of that which we receive in the Sacrament, ſaith that it is taken of the fruits of the earth, & prece myſtica conſecratum, and is conſecrated by the myſticall prayer. |foreign.Origen in his eight booke againſt Celſus: * We eate loaves of bread which by the prayer are made one bodie, which is ſome holy thing. Ireneus in his fourth Booke, Chapter 34.*Qui eſt à terra panis percip …is vocationem De…, jam non eſt panis commun…s, ſed Euchariſi…a. The bread receiving the invocation of God, is no more common bread, but Eucharist. Baſil in the firſt booke of the holy Ghoſt, 27 Chapter, calleth the words of conſecration foreign, the words of invocation. Iſido us in the ſixth booke of Origines, in the Chapter de Officij…: *S…fic…ii di…tum quaſi ſacrii ſa…m, qu… ece m…ſti a conſecratur in me… …m pro … is dom…nuae paſſion v.The Sacrifice is ſo called, as if one ſhould ſay a ſacred deede, becauſe it is conſecrated by the myſticall prayer in remembrance of the Paſſion which the Lord ſ…ffeced for us. Yet at this day the Greek Churches conſecrate by the prayer, as Bellarmin acknowledgeth in the fourth Booke of the Euchariſt, Chapter*§ Habemus. 12. See the Canon Corpus in the ſecond diſtinction of the conſecration.
By this it is as cleare as the light, that the Ancient Fathers did not beleeve that by theſe words This is my body, any converſion of the bread was made.