all New Doctrines must have their Beginning of Place as well as Time) By what Name the Profeffors of it were diftinguish'd from other Hereticks, and what Councils were call'd to condemn it. Because there never was a noted Herefy in the World, but was diftinguish'd by fome Name, and condemn'd in fome Council, or by the Church Diffufive. Finally, you must inform me by what Methods it made fuch a prodigious Progrefs, as to be at length acknowledg'd, profefs'd, and maintain'd by the Universal Church, as I have fully proved it was in the Eleventh Century.

These are the most important Particulars, wherein I demand to be fatisfy'd. For Nothing lefs can fuffice to convince any Man of Senfe, that the Doc trine of Tranfubftantiation is a Novelty invented fince the Time of the Apostles. Neither muft you pretend to flur me off with precarious Gueffes, bare Poffibilities, or imaginary Suppofitions of your own fruitful Invention, but you must produce Authentick History to atteft the Facts I infift upon, as all Men of Learning can do to witness every Fact of Moment relating to any noted Herefy, that ever was in the World.

But, if neither you, nor any Body else can undertake this Task without expofing himself to the Laughter of Mankind: If there be no Ancient Hif tory Extant, in which there appears a fair Account both of the Beginning, the Author, Time, Place, and Progres of the Doctrine in Queftion, with the moft remarkable Events, that attended it till it's full Establishment in the Eleventh Century, when it was the publick Faith both of the Greek and Latin Church: If, I fay, nothing of all this can be found in any Ancient History or Records, then I repeat once more, what I faid before, that such a univerfal Silence selating to a Thing of that Moment is a moral Des

8.35 monftration. that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation never had any other Beginning than from the Apoftles themselves according to St Austin's Rule, which is grounded upon conftant Experience and common Senfe, viz. that when any Doctrine is found generally received in the Vifible Church in any Age whatsoever, whereof there is no certain Author or beginning to be found, then it is fure, that fuch a Doctrine came down from Chrift, and his Apostles. L. 4. de Bapt. C. 6.24. as allo Lib. de Unit. Eccl. C. 19.

Give me Leave, Sr, to illuftrate all this from an Example, which will fet the whole Matter in the cleareft Light. I maintain, that the Doctrine oppofite to Transubstantiation is an Herefy. If you ask me how I prove it to be one? I answer that I prove it from a full Collection of all fuch hiftorical Facts as I demand of you to prove that Tranfubftantiation is a Novelty or Herefy. For I will shew the Doctrine oppofite to it to be a Novelty brought into the Church many Ages after the Time of the Apostles. I will name the chief Author of it, the Time when, and the Place where he first broach'd it; the Name it was diftinguish'd by, and finally the Oppofition it met with in the univerfal Church.

It was first publickly maintain'd about the Middle of the eleventh Century at Lions in France. The chief Author of it was one Berengarius a Canon of that Place,and his Doctrine was call'd the Berengarian Herefy. He had few Followers in thofe Days, and himself-retracted it before he died. Yet it alarm'd the whole Church, and caufed very great Disturbances. The ableft Pens were employ'd against it, and it was condemn'd by eleven Provincial or National Councils before the End of that very Century. And all these Particulars with many more are tranfmitted to us by all the Eccle Gaftical Hiftories of that Age.

This I think fuffices to convince any Man of Senfe, that the Doctrine oppofite to Tranfubftantiation was regarded as an Herefy by the Catholick Church in the eleventh Century, and it follows manifeftly from it, that if Tranfubftantiation itself had ever been regarded as an Herefy by the Catholick Church in any of the preceding Ages, it must have undergone the fame Fate, found the fame Oppofition, if not greater by Reason of it's feeming Extravagance, caufed the fame Disturbances, excited the zeal of particular Perfons to write against it, and occafion'd the Calling of Councils to condemn it. But fince no ancient Ecclefiaftical Historian, or other Writer has ever Mention'd any fuch Thing: Since neither the Perfon by whom, nor the Place where, nor the Time when it was firft broach'd in any of thofe Ages, nor finally any Oppofition made to it by the Church in any Age between the Apostles and the eleventh Century was ever recorded in any Hiftory, that ever appear'd in the World; I fay once more that this is a moral Demonftration, that the Catholick Church has never regarded Tranfubftantiation as a Novelty or Herefy, but as a Doctrine derived from Christ, and his Apoftles. For it is wholly inconceivable, that the Doctrine oppofite to Tranfubftantiation should have been fo vigorously oppofed by the Church, if it were not a Novelty; and that Tranjubftantiation itself, if it were a Novelty, should never meet with any Oppofition at all. Now if you please, Sr, you may proceed to fome other Subject.

§. 36.

Concerning the Worship of the Crofs, and Images of Chrift.

»G. M Chrift fuppofed to be corporally in the S4Μ

Y Lord, not only the Hoft, or Body of

crament, but the Croß of Chrift, or any Effigies of that Croß, and the Images of Chrift are worshipp'd » in your Church with the Supreme Divine Adoration » of Latria, pag. 160.

L. Srs that's falfe, and being extremely injurious, 'tis rank Calumny: For I defy you to prove from any Carbolick Divine, that we worship the Croß or Images of Christ with SUPREME DIVINE ADORA

TION.

G. My Lord, it is taught by a great Saint of → your Church, whom you call the Angelical Doctor, » St Thomas Aquinas, who fays [3. Par. Qu. 2. Art 4.] » that Crux Crifti eft adoranda Adoratione Latria. And » again: Crucis Effigies in aliqua alia Materia --- La» tria adoranda eft. And in the Roman Pontifical it is » order'd that in the Proceffion of the Emperor and » a Legate of the Pope, the Legate's Crop shall be

carried on the Right Hand of the Emperor's » Sword, becaufe Latria is due to the Croß. pag. 161.

162.

L. Sr, I ftill infift upon it, that you wrong us; because the Words you have quoted, unless they be ftrain'd from the known Senfe of the Author, do not amount to what you charge us with, viz. that we worship the Croß or Images of Chrift with SUPREME DIVINE ADORATION, as I shall fully prove, when you make an End of what you have to lay upon Subject.

that

G. My

G. My Lord, in the Adoration of the Croß up- « on Good-Fryday (which is the principal Part for « the Office of that Day) the Croß being veiled is « discover'd to the People by Degrees; first one « Arm of the Croß, then another, and at last the « whole Croß is unveiled. And at each Time the Priest « fays ecce lignum Crucis, behold the Wood of the Croß: es and the People anfwer Adoremus, let us worship. pag. 161. c

L. But they do not fay, let us worship it with suPREME DIVINE ADORATION, nor do they intend it; fo go on.

G. And then the Priest first, and afterwards the People come upon their knees, and pay their Ado- « ration to the Croß. And remember that it is the « Adoration of Latria, which they give to it. pag. «

161. «

L. I remember it, Sr, in St Thomas's Senfe, which I shall explain prefently.

3.

G. Now for Images, the fame Aquinas before « mention'd tells us the Worship we pay them is « Religionis Cultus, a Religious Worship: And that it is « not a different Latrig which is given to Chrift, and « to his Images. Quod Imaginibus Chrifti exhibetur Cul- « tus, non diverfificatur ratio Latria, nec Virtus Reli- « gionis. 2da. 2da. Queft. 81. Art. 3. Refp. ad If e then there be but one Latria, and the fame that « is paid to Chrift and his Images, it will justify what « James Naclantus Bishop of Clugium writes in his « Expofition of the Epiftle to the Romans Ch. 1. that « the faithful ought not only to worship before the « Image (as fome perhaps out of Caution (peak) « but to worship the Image itfelf without any Scruple at all; and with the fame Sort of Worship as the « Prototype, or whom it reprefents. And if that is to « be worshipped with Latria, fo it's Image with La- is II. Part.

Ee