The Novelty of Popery Opposed to the Antiquity of True Christianity, Book 7 · Controversy 11 · Chapter 10
CHAP. X. Some paſſages of the Councils upon this ſubject.
THE Councils ſpeak the ſame language as we heard the Fathers ſpeak. The Council of Nice in the 5. Canon ſpeaking of the Euchariſt, ſaith,(a)foreign. That all bitterneſs of ſpirit being taken away, the gift which is preſented unto God may be pure. It is evident that this Council believed that ſometimes an impure gift is preſented unto God in the Euchariſt, and that the offering becomes impure and defiled when it is preſented with hatred and animoſity. They did not then believe that the gift was the natural body of Chriſt. For it is alwayes pure and cannot be defiled by the vice of the perſon that offereth it.
The Council of Ancyra in the 2. Canon commands the Deacons who have ſacrificed unto Idols to abſtain from the Sacred ſervice, and forbids them to preſent either the bread or the cup. For the Deacons in thoſe dayes carried to the Communicants in the Church the bread and the cup: Which was not done but after the conſecration. Yet that which they preſented is called bread by the Council;(b)foreign, &c. foreign. Let the Deacons that have ſacrificed abſtain from all divine ſervice, and preſent no more neither the bread nor the cup.
The Council of Neoceſarea in the 13. Canon,(c)foreign. The Country Prieſt cannot offer in the principal Church of the Town when the Biſhop or the Prieſts of the Town are preſent, nor give the bread in the prayer, nor the cup.
The third Council of Carthage in the 24. Canon preſcribeth,(d)foreign. That in the ſacred ſervice nothing be offered but the body and blood of the Lord (as alſo the Lord commanded it) that is, the bread and wine mingled with water. See here above two hundred Biſhops, of whom Auſtin was one; and that man ſo famous, Aurelius Biſhop of Carthage, expounding theſe words the body and blood of Chriſt, as ſignifying bread and wine mingled with water. When the Fathers call that which is received in the holy Communion, bread and wine, our adverſaries will have them to ſpeak figuratively, and that by bread and wine they underſtand the body and blood of Christ under the ſpecies of bread and wine. But here is a Council that teacheth the clean contrary, that when they called that which is offered in the holy Communion the body and blood of Christ, by that body and blood they meant bread and wine mingled with water. Can any of our adverſaries boaſt that he underſtands the Fathers better then the Fathers underſtood themſelves? or who will take upon him the authority of correcting the interpretation which themſelves give unto their words?
Becauſe this Canon grieveth the Roman Church, it was corrupted and clipt in the Latim Tomes of the Councils publiſhed by our adverſaries, where there is only,(e)Ut in Sacramentis corporis et ſanguinis Domini nihil amplius offeratur quam ipſe Dominus tradidit, hoc eſt, panis et vinum aquâ miſtum. That in the Sacraments of the body and blood of the Lord nothing be offered but what the Lord hath commanded, even bread and wine mingled with water. But God permitted that this falſification ſhould be clearly convinced. For in the ſixth Council of Constantinople gathered again in the pallace of Trull to make Canons, this ſame Canon of the third Council of Carthage is repeated word by word, as we alledged it;(f)Trullana Synodo Can. 32. foreign. The holy Fathers aſſembled at Carthage did expreſly call it to remembrance, that in the ſacred ſervice nothing ſhould be offered but the Lords body and blood, as alſo the Lord hath commanded it, that is, bread and wine mingled with water. And it is found ſo, not only in the Greek Copies, but alſo in the ſame Latin Tomes. The corrupters of the Canon of the Council of Carthage having corrupted it in one place, forgot to corrupt it in another.
In Balſamon Patriarch of Antioch who hath reduced the Canons of the Councils into a body and made comments upon them, this Canon is found as we alledged it; as alſo in Zonaras, and in the Canons publiſhed by du Tillet, yea in all the Greek Copies publiſhed by our adverſaries. The words of Balſamons Comment upon this Canon, are conſiderable,(g)Balſam. in Synod. Carth. Can. 40 p. 653. Edit. Pariſ. foreign. The two and thirtieth Canon of the Synod of Trull giveth an ordinance at large, that the unbloody ſacrifice be made with bread and wine mingled with water, becauſe bread is the figure of the Lords body, and the wine a figure of his blood. Zonaras ſaith the ſame upon the ſame Canon.
It is to be noted that the growth of the adoration of images and that of the doctrine of Tranſubſtantiation, were contemporanean and kept pace together. Damaſcenus (whom we may call the Peter Lombard of the Grecians) in the eight age, maintained the adoration of Images, and writ alſo for the defence of the other abuſe. And the ſame man was the firſt that imagined ſome change in the ſubſtance of the bread. Thus the enemy of our ſalvation, Satan, laboured to plant theſe two ſorts of idolatry at the ſame time.
The ſeventh Council of Conſtantinople in the year 754. was aſſembled purpoſely to oppoſe the adoration of Images; by the order of that Council Images were pulled down in all the Eaſt. As for Tranſubſtantiation, which was not believed in the Greek Churches, and is not yet to this day, the ſame Council knowing that private men were ſecretly ſowing that darnell, by a ſingular prudence and dexterity made one plaiſter to ſerve to heal two ſores, and confounded two errours by one true doctrine, teaching that the true Images are thoſe which Chriſt hath eſtabliſhed in his Church, even the Sacraments; ſaying,(h)foreign. That the holy Sacrament was choſen by Chriſt, as no other form or figure under heaven being able to repreſent his incarnation. They add(i)foreign That he gave to his Miniſters this ſign and moſt evident commemoration. Again(k)foreign. The Lord hath commanded us to offer the ſubſtance of bread, which is not made in humane form, leſt that idolatry ſhould creep in. In the ſame place the bread is called foreign, The holy image of Chriſt. (l)foreign, &c.And the true image of his natural body, to oppoſe it to the falſe images in ſtone or picture.(m)foreign. And the image of his fleſh given by God.
In that Council there were 338. Biſhops; ſo the ſeeds of idolatry were weeded out for that time.
But God irritated by the wickedneſſe of men, ſuffered that a monſter of impiety ſhould reign at Conſtantinople, the execrable woman Irene, who put out the eyes of her own ſon, and deprived him of the Empire. This woman to ſtrengthen her uſurpation by the faction of the Image-worſhippers which was powerful, ſet up Images again over all the Eaſt, and aſſembled a Synod at Nice (An. 787.) in which ſhe cauſed the Council of Conſtantinople to be condemned. That abominable Council eſtabliſhed the adoration of Images, ſo far as to pronounce anathema to all that would go ſo far as to venerate them, and no further. In the records of that Council theſe goodly ſentences are extant, That Imago eſt melior oratione. That images are of equal value with the holy Goſpel. That Angels are corporal, having an aiery or a fiery body. And as for that the Council of Conſtantinople had pronounced about the holy Sacrament, namely that the bread is the image and figure of Chriſts body. This is the judgement which that goodly Council pronounced about that;(n)Act. 6. Videtur quidem tota oratio abominanda, &c. Nemo enim unquam ſanctorum Apoſtolorum qui tubae ſunt Spiritus Sancti, &c. incruentum noſtrum ſacrificium imaginem certe illius dixerit. All that language ſeems abominable to us, &c. And which of the Saints and Apoſtles (who are trumpets of the Holy Ghoſt) did ever call our unbloody ſacrifice an image of the Lords body?
We may well think that the Council of Conſtantinople was approved of God, ſince it was ſo diſapproved by ſuch a deteſtable aſſembly. To be condemned by ſuch a rout, was a commendation, and an argument of goodneſs. Wherefore Charlemayne, who at that time held the Empire of the Weſt, cauſed that Council of Nice to be condemned by a contrary Council which he aſſembled at Franckford.
I wonder how theſe Fathers of Nice, who affirm that the Apoſtles never ſaid that the unbloody ſacrifice is a figure of Chriſts body, did not know, that the Apoſtles call the Lords Supper the remembrance of the Lords death, and the commemoration of Chriſt, which is as good as calling it a figure, and that they never call it a ſacrifice▪
But the Popes being bent to build the myſterie of iniquity, undertook with all their power the defence of that Council of Nice. So far that Pope Adrian who lived in the time of that Council, writ a book in the defence thereof, yet without medling with Tranſubſtantiation, againſt which Bertram the Prieſt writ a book (now extant) by the command of King Charls the Bald, for which the ſaid Bertram received no blame or reprehenſion, becauſe the Roman Church had not yet pronounced any judgement upon that matter.
Yet the enemy of our ſalvation was preparing the way, to bring in by the ſame way two ſorts of Idolatry. For then he began to forge a multitude of miracles by images, and by the Hoſt, to invite the people to worſhip them. In the following Ages images began to ſpeak, to ſweat, to bow the head, and to make congies; and breaſts of fleſh grew upon an image of our Lady. At the ſame time it was reported, that at the Maſs in ſuch and ſuch places a pretty little child was ſeen entring into the mouth of the communicants: That an Hoſt being pricked had bled: That in a chalice blood was found: That an Aſs leaving his oats, had kneeled before an Hoſt that paſt by: That Bees having found an Hoſt left in the fields, had built a Chappel of wax upon it. Stories which I have ſeen my ſelf painted at Paris in St. Gervas cloyſter. And of theſe Surius and St. Auſtinin are full.
Pope Innocent the third, in the third book of the Myſteries of the Maſs, ch. 1. ſaith, that ſome Shepherds having learned the words of the Conſecration, and ſinging them in the fields, were ſmitten by Gods hand. Durandus in the fourth book of his Rational, chap. 35. addeth, that theſe Shepherds having pronounced the conſecrating words upon the bread of their dinner, did tranſubſtantiate all into fleſh. And that to avoid that inconvenience for the future, it was commanded, that theſe words ſhould be pronounced with a low voice, that the people might not learn them. Bellarmin receiveth that hiſtory as true in his firſt book of the Maſs, chap. 12. The reaſons which Pope Innocent brings in the fore-alledged place are notable. Becauſe (ſaith he) Chriſt hid himſelf from the multitude. Alſo becauſe Anna ſaid her prayer with a low voice. And becauſe it is written, that dying flies ſpoil the ointment of the Apothecary. Ergo, &c. Who ſo will ſee a multitude of ſuch miracles, let him read(o)Jodoci Coccii Theſaurus Tom. 2. l. 6. Art. 8. p. 694. Idocus Coccius in the ſecond Tome of his collection of Fathers. Of ſuch miracles no trace is found in any of the antient Writers. For St. Baſils life, where ſome ſuch miracles are found attributed to Amphilochius, is a fabulous and ſuppoſititious book, as Bellarmin ſhews it in his book of Eccleſiaſtical Writers.
In that age the uſe of Scripture was loſt among the people, which then applied themſelves altogether unto images, well called the books of ignorant men; And the whole religion began to conſiſt in viſiting relicks, hearkning after miracles, cloathing images, and keeping ſinging men, whoſe loud melody might fill the vaults of Temples.
Errors being then in their growth, the Popes Thunders and Interdicts came ſoon after, and Mendicant Fryers, and the Great Pardons, and the fear of Purgatory, and the turning of beads, with prayers in a tongue unknown to him that ſaith them, and the word of Tranſubſtantiation eſtabliſht by an Article of a Council.