About XX years after, in the year MLXXIX Pope Gregory the VIIth. began to be fenfible of this abfurdity; and therefore in another Council at Rome made Berengarius to recant in another Form viz. *that the bread and * Waldens. Tem. 2. c. 13. wine which are placed upon the Altar are fubftantially changed into the true and proper and quickning flesh and bloud of our Lord Jefus Christ, and after confecration are the true body of Chrift, which was born of the Virgin, and which being offered for the Salvation of the World did hang upon the Cross, and fits on the right hand of the Father.

So that from the first starting of this Doctrine in the fecond Council of Nice in the year DCCLXXXVII, till the Council under Pope Gregory the VIIth in the year MLXXIX, it was almoft three hundred years that this Doctrine was contested, and before this misfhapen Monster of Tranfubftantiation could be lick'd into that Form in which it is now fettled and establish'd in the Church of Rome. Here then is a plain account of the first rise of this Doctrine, and of the feveral steps whereby it was advanced by the Church of Rome into an Article of Faith. I come now in the

Third place, to answer the great pretended Demonftration of the impossibility that this Doctrine, if it had been new, fhould ever have come in, in any Age, and been received in the Church; and confequently it must of necessity have been the perpetual belief of the Church in all Ages: For if it had not always been the Doctrine of the Church, when ever it had attempted first to come in there would have been a great stir and bustle about it, and the whole Chriftian World would have rofe up in oppofition to it. But we can fhew no fuch time when it first came in, and when any fuch oppofition was made to it, and therefore it was always the Doctrine of the Church. This Demonftration Monfieur

D 2

Arnauld,

Arnauld, a very learned Man in France, pretends to be unanswerable: whether it be fo or not, I fhall briefly examine. And

First, we do affign a punctual and very likely time of the first rise of this Doctrine, about the beginning of the ninth Age; though it did not take firm root nor was fully fettled and establish'd till towards the end of the eleventh. And this was the most likely time of all other, from the beginning of Chriftianity, for so gross an Errour to appear; it being, by the confeffion and confent of their own Hiftorians, the most dark and dismal time that ever happened to the Christian Church, both for Ignorance, and Superftition, and Vice. It came in together with Idolatry, and was made use of to support it: A fit prop and companion for it. And indeed what tares might not the Enemy have sown in fo dark and long a Night; when fo confiderable a part of the Chriftian World was lull'd asleep in profound Ignorance and Superftition; And this agrees very well with the account which our Saviour himself gives in the Parable of the Tares, of the fpringing up of Errours and Corruptions in the Field of the * Matth. 13. Church. *While the men flept the Enemy did his work in the Night, fo that when they were awake they wondered how and whence the tares came; but being fure they were there, and that they were not fown at firft, they concluded the Enemy had done it.

24.

Secondly, I have fhewn likewise that there was confiderable oppofition made to this Errour at its first coming in. The general Ignorance and grofs Superftition of that Age rendered the generality of people more quiet and fecure, and difpofed them to receive any thing that came under a pretence of mystery in Religion and of greater reverence and devotion to the Sacrament, and that feemed any way to countenance

the

the worship of Images, for which at that time they were zealously concern'd. But notwithstanding the fecurity and paffive temper of the People, the men moft eminent for piety and learning in that Time made great refiftance against it. I have already named Rabanus Arch-Bishop of Mentz, who oppos'd it as an Errour lately fprung up and which had then gained but upon fome few perfons. To whom I may add Heribaldus Bishop of Auxerres in France, Io. Scotus Erigena, and Ratramnus commonly known by the name of Bertram, who at the fame time were employed by the Emperour Charles the Bald to oppofe this growing Errour, and wrote learnedly against it. And these were the eminent men for learning in that time. And because Monfieur Arnauld will not be fatisfied unlefs there were fome ftir and bustle about it, Bertram in his Preface to his Book tells us, that they who according to their feveral opinions talked differently about the mystery of Chrift's body and bloud were divided by no Small Schifm.

Thirdly, Though for a more clear and fatisfactory answer to this pretended Demonftration I have been contented to untie this knot, yet I could without all these pains have cut it. For fuppofe this Doctrine had filently come in and without oppofition, fo that we could not affign the particular time and occafion of its first Rife; yet if it be evident from the Records of former Ages, for above D. years together, that this was not the ancient belief of the Church; and plain alfo, that this Doctrine was afterwards received in the Roman Church, though we could not tell how and when it came in, yet it would be the wildest and most extravagant thing in the world to fet up a pretended Demonstration of Reafon against plain Experience and. matter of Fact. This is juft Zeno's Demonftration of

the

the impoffibility of motion against Diogenes walking before his Eyes. For this is to undertake to prove that impoffible to have been, which moft certainly was. Juft thus the Servants in the Parable might have demonftrated that the tares were wheat, because they were fure none but good feed was fown at first, and no man could give any account of the punctual time when any tares were fown, or by whom ; and if an Enemy had come to do it, he must needs have met with great refiftance and oppofition; but no such refiftance was made, and therefore there could be no tares in the field, but that which they call'd tares was certainly good wheat. At the fame rate a man might demonítrate that our King, his Majesty of Great Britain, is not return'd into England, nor restor❜d to his Crown; because there being fo great and powerfull an Army poffefs'd of his Lands, and therefore obliged by interest to keep him out, it was impoffible He fhould ever come in without a great deal of fighting and bloudshed but there was no fuch thing, therefore he is not return'd and reftor'd to his Crown. And by the like kind of Demonftration one might prove that the Turk did not invade Christendom last year, and befiege Vienna; because if he had, the moft Chriftian King, who had the greatest Army in Christendom in a readinefs, would certainly have employed it against him ; but Monfieur Arnauld certainly knows, no fuch thing was done: And therefore according to his way of Demonstration, the matter of fact, fo commonly reported and believed, concerning the Turks Invasion of Christendom and befieging Vienna last year, was a perfect mistake. But a man may demonftrate till his head and heart ake, before he fhall ever be able to prove that which certainly is, or was, never to have been. For of all forts of impoffibles nothing is more

:

evidently

evidently fo, than to make that which hath been not to have been. All the reafon in the world is too weak to cope with so tough and obftinate a difficulty. And I have often wonder'd how a man of Monfieur Arnauld's great wit and fharp Judgment could prevail with himfelf to engage in fo bad and baffled a Caufe; or could think to defend it with fo wooden a Dagger as his Demonftration of Reafon against certain Experience and matter of Fact: A thing, if it be poffible," of equal abfurdity with what he pretends to demonstrate, Transubftantiation it felf. I proceed to the

Third pretended Ground of this Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation; and that is, The infallible Authority of the prefent Church to make and declare new Articles of Faith. And this in truth is the ground into which the most of the learned men of their Church did heretofore, and many do ftill refolve their belief of this Doctrine: And, as I have already fhewn, do plainly fay that they fee no fufficient reafon, either from Scripture or Tradition, for the belief of it: And that they fhould have believed the contrary had not the determination of the Church obliged them otherwife.

.

But if this Doctrine be obtruded upon the world merely by virtue of the Authority of the Roman Church, and the Declaration of the Council under Pope Gregory the VIIth or of the Lateran Council. un-der Innocent the III. then it is a plain Innovation in the Chriftian Doctrine, and a new Article of Faith impos'd upon the Christian world. And if any Church hath this power, the Christian Faith may be enlarged and changed as often as men please; and that which is no part of our Saviour's Doctrine, nay, any thing though never fo abfurd and unreasonable, may become an Article of Faith obliging all Chriftians to the belief of it, whenever the Church of Rome fhall think fit to

stamp