Jeremy Taylor.

The whole works of the Right Rev. Jeremy Taylor (Volume 11) online

. (page 11 of 50)
Online LibraryJeremy TaylorThe whole works of the Right Rev. Jeremy Taylor (Volume 11) → online text (page 11 of 50)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


this (asSalmeron observes of these three opinions, as he cites
them out of Scotus), " that the true body of Christ is there,
because to deny this were against the faith ;" and therefore,
this was then enough to cause them to be esteemed catho-
lics, because they denied nothing, which was then against
the faith, but all agreed in that, yet now the case is other-
wise ; for whereas one of the opinions was, that the substance
of bread remains, and another opinion, that the substance
of bread is annihilated, but is not converted into the body of
Christ ; now both of these opinions are made heresy ; and
the contrary to them, which is the third opinion, passed into
an article of faith : " Quod vero ibi substantia panis non re-
manet, jam etiam ut articulus fidei definitum est, et conver-
sionis sive transubstantiationis nomen evictum :" so Salme-
ron. p Now, in Peter Lombard's time, if they who believed
Christ's real presence, were good Catholics, though they be-
lieved no transubstantiation or consubstantiation, that is, did
not descend into consideration of the manner, why may they
not be so now ? Is there any new revelation now of the man-
ner? Or why is the way to heaven now made the narrower
than in Lombard's time ? For the Church of England believes
according to one of these opinions ; and therefore is as good
a catholic Church as Rome was then, which had not deter-
mined the manner. Nay, if we use to value an article the
more, by how much the more ancient it is, certainly it is more

n Innocent, de Offic. Mis. part. iii. c. 18.

Cap. cum Martha in gloss. Extrav, de Celebr. Miss. P Ubi supra.



OF TRAXSUBSTANTIATION. 99

honourable that we should reform to the ancient model, ra-
ther than conform to the new. However, this is also plainly
consequent to this discourse of Sahneron : " The abettors of
those three opinions, some of them do deny something that
is of faith ; therefore the faith of the Church of Rome now is
not the same it was in the days of Peter Lombard." Lastly,
this also is to be remarked, that to prove any ancient author
to hold the doctrine of transubstantiation, as it is at this
day an article of faith at Rome, it is not enough to say, that
Peter Lombard, or Durand, or Scotus, &c., did say, that
where bread was before, there is Christ's body now ; for they
may say that and more, and yet not come home to the pre-
sent article ; and therefore E. W. does argue weakly, when
he denies Lombard to say one thing, viz. ' that he could not
define whether there was a substantial change or no' (which
indeed he spake plainly), because he brings him saying some-
thing, as if he were resolved the change were substantial,
which yet he speaks but obscurely. And the truth is, this
question of transubstantiation is so intricate and involved
amongst them, seems so contrary to sense and reason, and
does so much violence to all the powers of the soul, that it
is no wonder, if, at first, the doctors could not make any
thing distinctly of it. However, whatever they did make of it,
certain it is they more agreed with the present Church of
England, than with the present Church of Rome ; for we
say as they said, Christ's body is truly there, and there is a con-
version of the elements into Christ's body ; for what before
the consecration in all senses was bread, is, after consecration,
in some sense, Christ's body ; but they did not all of them
say, that the substance of bread was destroyed ; and some of
them denied the conversion of the bread into the flesh of
Christ ; which whosoever shall now do, will be esteemed no
Roman Catholic. And therefore it is a vain procedure to
think they have proved their doctrine of transubstantiation
out of the fathers also ; q " If the fathers tell us, that bread is
changed out of his nature into the body of Christ ; that by
holy invocation it is no more common bread : that as water
in Cana of Galilee was changed into wine ; so in the evan-
gelist, wine is changed into blood : that bread is only bread
before the sacramental words, but after consecration is made

i E. w. p. 37.



100 OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION.

the body of Christ." For though I very much doubt, all
these things in equal and full measures cannot be proved out
of the fathers, supposing they were, yet all this comes not
up to the Roman article of transubstantiation : all those
words are true in a very good sense, and they are in that
sense believed in the Church of England ; but that the bread
is no more bread in the natural sense, and that it is naturally
nothing, but the natural body of Christ ; that the substance
of one is passed into the substance of the other, this is not
affirmed by the fathers ; neither can it be inferred from the
former propositions, if they had been truly alleged : and there-
fore all that is for nothing, and must be intended only to
cozen and amuse the reader that understands not all the
windings of this labyrinth.

In the next place I am to give an account of what passed
in the Lateran Council upon this article. For, says E. W. r
the doctrine of transubstantiation " was ever believed in the
Church, though more fully and explicitly declared in the
Lateran Council." But in the ' Dissuasive' 5 it was said, that
it was ' but pretended to be determined in that council, where
many things indeed came then in consultation, yet nothing
could be openly decreed.' Nothing, says Platina ; that is,
says nay adversary, ' nothing concerning the Holy Land, and
the aids to be raised for it : but for all this, there might be a
decree concerning transubstantiation.' To this I reply, that
it is as true that nothing was done in this question, as that
nothing was done in the matter of the holy war ; for one
was as much decreed as the other. For if we admit the acts of
the council, that of giving aid to the Holy Land 1 was decreed
in the sixty-ninth canon, alias seventy-first. So that this
answer is not true : but the truth is, neither the one nor the
other was decreed in that council. For that I may inform this
gentleman in a thing, which possibly he never heard of; this
Council of Lateran was never published, nor any acts of
it, till Cochlseus published them, A.D. 1538. For three years
before this, John Martin published the councils; and then
there was no such thing as the acts of the Lateran Council
to be found. But you will say, How came Cochlaeus by them ?
To this the answer is easy : There were read in the council

r P. 37. * Letter to n Friend, p. 18.

'Ad liberandum terram sanctam de manibus impiorum. Eitrav. de Judeeis et
Saracents. Cum sit.



OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION". 101

sixty chapters, which to some did seem easy, to others bur-
densome ; but these were never approved, but the council
ended in scorn and mockery," and nothing was concluded,
neither of faith, nor manners, nor war, nor aid for the Holy
Land, but only the pope got money of the prelates to give
them leave to depart. But afterward Pope Gregory IX.
put these chapters, or some of them, into the decretals ; but
doth not entitle any of these to the Council of Lateran, but
only to Pope Innocent in the council, which Cardinal Per-
ron, ignorantly or wilfully mistaking, affirms the contrary.
But so it is that Platina affirms of the pope, " Pluriina
decreta retulit, improbavit Joachimi libellurn, damnavit
errores Almerici." The pope recited sixty heads of the
decrees in the council, but no man says the council decreed
those heads. Now these heads, Cochlscus says, he found in
an old book in Germany. And it is noways probable, that
if the council had decreed those heads, that Gregory IX.
who published his uncle's decretal epistles, which n.ake
up so great a part of the canon law, should omit to publish
the decrees of this council ; or that there should be no
acts of this great council in the Vatican, and that there
should be no publication of them till about three hundred
years after the council, and that out of a blind corner, and
an old unknown manuscript. But the book shews its ori-
ginal, it was taken from the decretals; for it contains just
so many heads, viz. seventy-two ; and is not any thing of
the council, in which only were recited sixty heads, and they
have the same beginnings and endings, and the same notes
and observations in the middle of the chapters: which
shews plainly they were a mere force of the decretals.
The consequent of all which is plainly this, that there was
no decree made in the council, but every thing was left un-
finished, and the council was affrighted by the warlike
preparations of them of Genoa and Pisa, and all retired.
Concerning which affair, the reader that desires it, may re-
ceive further satisfaction, if he read the ' Antiquitates Bri-
tannicae' in the life of Stephen Langton out of the lesser
history of Matthew Paris ; as also Sabellicus, and Godfride,
the monk." But since it is become a question, what was

n Vide Praefat. Later. Concil. secundum p. Crab.

* Vide Matt. Paris, ad A.D. 1215, et Naacteri general. 41,ndeundem annum;
(ft Sabellicum Ennead. 9, lib. vi. ; et Godfridum Monacbum, ad A.D. 1213.



10'2 OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION.

or was not determined in this Lateran Council, I am con-
tent to tell them that the same authority, whether of pope or
council, which made transubstantiation an article of faith,
made rebellion and treason to be a duty of subjects ; for in
the same collection of canons they are both decreed and
warranted under the same signature, the one being the first
canon, and the other the third.

The use I shall make of all is this; Scotus was observed
above to say, that in Scripture there is nothing so express as
to compel us to believe transubstantiation, meaning, that
without the decree and authority of the Church, the Scripture
was of itself insufficient. And some others, as Salmeron y
notes, affirm, that Scripture and reason are both insufficient
to convince a heretic in this article ; this is to be proved " ex
conciliorum definitione, et patrum traditione," &c. " by the
definition of councils, and tradition of the fathers," for it were
easy to answer the places of Scripture which are cited, and
the reasons. Now, then, since Scripture alone is not thought
sufficient, nor reasons alone, if the definitions of councils
also shall fail them, they will be strangely to seek for their
new article. Now for this, their only castle of defence is the
Lateran Council. Indeed Bellarmine produces the Roman
Council under Pope Nicolas the Second, in which Beren-
garius was-forcecl to recant his error about the sacrament, but
he recanted it into a worse error, and such which the Church
of Rome disavows at this day: and therefore ought not to
pretend it as a patron of that doctrine, which she approves
not. And for the little council under Gregory VII. it is just
so a general council, as the Church of Roa:e is the catholic
Church, or a particular is a universal. But suppose it so
for this once; yet this council meddled not with the ' modus,'
viz. transubstantiation, or the ceasing of its being bread, but
of the real presence of Christ under the elements, which is
no part of our question. Berengarius denied it, but we do
not, when it is rightly understood. Pope Nicolas himself
did not understand the new article ; for it. was not fitted for
publication until the time of the Lateran Council, and how
nothing of this was in that council determined, I have already
made appear : and therefore, as Scotus said, the Scripture
alone could not evict this article ; so he also said in his ar-
gument made for the doctors that held the first opinion men-

1 Tract. 16, torn. ix. p. 110.



OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 103

tioned before out of Innocentius : "' Nee invenitur ubi ecclesia
istarn veritatem determine! solenniter; Neither is it found
where the Church hath solemnly determined it." And for his
own particular, though he was carried into captivity by the
symbol of Pope Innocent III. for which by that time was pre-
tended the Lateran Council ; yet he himself said, that, before
that council, it was not an article of faith : and for this thing
Bellarmine 2 reproves him, and imputes ignorance to him,
saying, that it was because he had not read the Roman Coun-
cil under Gregory VII. nor the consent of the fathers. And to
this purpose I quoted Henriquez, saying, that Scotus saith
the doctrine of transubstantiation is not ancient;* the author
of the Letter denies that he saith any such thing of Scotus :
but I desire him to look once more, and my margent will
better direct him.

What the opinion of Durandus was in this question, if
these gentlemen will not believe me, let them believe their
own friends. But first let it be considered what I said, " viz.
that he maintained (viz. in disputation) that even after con-
secration, the very matter of bread remained. 2. That by
reason of the authority of the Church, it is not to be held.
3. That nevertheless it is possible it should be so. 4. That it is
no contradiction, that the matter of bread should remain, and
yet it be Christ's body too. 5. That this were the easier way
of solving the difficulties." That all this is true, I have no bet-
ter argument than his own words, which are in his first ques-
tion of the eleventh distinction in 'quartumnum. ll.etn. 15.'
For indeed the case was very hard with these learned men,
who, being pressed by authority, did bite the file, and sub-
mitted their doctrine, but kept their reason to themselves :
and what some in the Council of Trent observed of Scotns,
was true also of Durandus and divers other schoolmen, with
whom it was usual to deny things with a kind of courtesy.
And therefore Durandus in the places cited, though he dis-
putes well for his own opinion, yet he says the contrary is
' modus tenendus de facto.' But besides that his words are,
as I understand them, plain and clear to manifest his own
hearty persuasion, yet I shall not desire to be believed upon
my own account, for fear I be mistaken ; but that I had

* Lib. iii. de Eucliar. c. 23. sect. Unum taraen.

a Scotus negat ductrinam de conversione et transubst. esse antiquam. Hen-
riquez, lib. viii. c. 23, in marg. ad liter. H.



104 OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION.

reason to say it, Henriquez b shall be my warrant : " Durandus,
dist. qu. 3. ait esse probabile sed absque assertione," &c.
He saith, " It is probable, but without assertion, that in the
eucharist the same matter of bread remains without quantity."
And a little after he adds out of Cajetan, Paludanus, and Soto,
that this opinion of Durandus is erroneous, but after the
Council of Trent it seems to be heretical : and yet, he says,
it was held by ^Egidius and Euthymius, who had the good
luck, it seems, to live and die before the Council of Trent ;
otherwise they had been in danger of the Inquisition for
heretical pravity. But I shall not trouble myself further in
this particular; I am fully vindicated by Bellarmine him-
self, who spends a whole chapter in the confutation of this
error of Durandus, viz. that the matter of bread remains, he
endeavours to answer his arguments, and gives this censure
of him; " Itaque sententia Durandi haeretica est, therefore
the sentence of Durandus is heretical ;" although he be not
to be called a heretic, because he was ready to acquiesce in
the judgment of the Church. So Bellarmine : who, if they say
true, that Durandus was ready to submit to the judgment of
the Church, then he does not say true when he says, the
Church before his time had determined against him : but
however, that I said true of him, when I imputed this opi-
nion to him, Bellarmine is my witness. Thus you see I had
reason for what I said, and by these instances it appears
how hardly, and how long, the doctrine of transubstantiation
was, before it could be swallowed.

But I remember that Salmeron tells of divers, who, dis-
trusting of Scripture and reason, had rather in this point
rely upon the tradition of the fathers ; and therefore I de-
scended to take from them this armour, in which they trust-
ed. And first, to ease a more curious inquiry, which in a
short ' Dissuasive' was not convenient, I used the abbreviature
of an adversary's confession. For Alphonsus a Castro con-
fessed that ' in ancient writers there is seldom any mention
made of transubstantiation :' one of my adversaries' 1 says,
this is not spoken of the thing, but of the name of transub-
stantiation ; but if a Castro meant this only of the word, he
spake weakly when he said, that the ' name or word was

b Summa lib. viii. c. 23, p. 448, lit. C. in marg.

c Lib. iii. de Eucbar. c. 13. d Letter, p. 21.



OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 105

seldom mentioned by the ancients.' 1. Because it is false
that it was * seldom' mentioned by the ancients ; for the word
was hy the ancient fathers ' never' mentioned. 2. Because
there was not any question of the word, where the thing was
agreed ; and therefore as this saying so understood had been
false, so also if it had been true, it would have been imperti-
nent. 3. It is but a trifling artifice to confess the name to
be unknown, and by that means to insinuate that the thing
was then under other names ; it is a secret cozenage of an
unwary reader, to bribe him into peace and contentedness for
the main part of the question, by pleasing him in that part
which, it may be, makes the biggest noise, though it be less
material. 4. If the thing had been mentioned by the an-
cients, they need not, would not, ought not, to have troubled
themselves and others by a new word ; to have still retained
the old proposition under the old words, would have been
less suspicious, more prudent and ingenious : but to bring
in a new name is but the cover for a new doctrine ; and
therefore St. Paul left an excellent precept to the Church to
avoid " prophanas vocum novitates, the profane newness
of words," that is, it is fit that the mysteries, revealed in
Scripture, should be preached and taught in the words of
the Scripture, and with that simplicity, openness, easiness,
and candour, and not with new and unhallowed words, such
as is that of transubstantiation. 5. A Castro did not speak
of the name alone ; but of the thing also, " de transubstantia-
tione panis in corpus Christi, of the transubstantiation of
bread into Christ's body;" of this manner of conversion,
that is, of this doctrine; now doctrines consist not in words
but things ; however, his last words are faint, and weak, and
guilty ; for being convinced of the weakness of his defence
of the thing, he left to himself a subterfuge of words.

But let it be how it will with a Castro (whom I can very
well spare, if he will not be allowed to speak sober sense, and
as a wise man should), we have better and fuller testimonies
in this affair; "That the fathers did not so much as touch
the matter or thing of transubstantiation," said the Jesuits
in prison, as is reported by the author of the ' Modest Dis-
course;' and the great Erasmus, 6 who lived and died in the

e In Priorem Epist. ad Corinthios: citante etiam Salmeron. torn. ix. tract. 16,
p. 108.



106 OF TRANSUBSTANTIATTON.

communion of the Church of Rome, and was as likely as any
man of his age to know what he said, gave this testimony in
the present question : " In synaxi transubstantiationem sero
definivit ecclesia, et re et nomine veteribus ignotam ; In
the communion, the Church hath but lately defined transub-
stantiation, which, both in the thing and in the name, was
unknown to the ancients."

Now this was a fair and friendly inducement to the reader
to take from him all prejudice, which might stick to him by
the great noises of the Roman doctors, made upon their pre-
tence of the fathers being on their side ; yet I would not so
rely upon these testimonies, but that I thought fit to give
some little essay of this doctrine out of the fathers them-
selves/

To this purpose is alleged Justin Martyr's saying of the
eucharist, that " it was a figure, which our Lord commanded
to do in remembrance of his passion." These were quoted,
not as the words, but as the doctrine of that saint ; and the
Letter will needs suppose me to mean those words, which are,
as I find, in pp. 259, 260, of the Paris edition. g " The obla-
tion of a cake was a figure of the eucharistical bread, which
the Lord commanded to do in remembrance of his passion."
These are Justin's words in that place, with which I have
nothing to do, as I shall shew by and by : but because Car-
dinal Perron intends to take advantage of them, I shall
wrest them first out of his hands, and then give an account
of the doctrine of this holy man in the present article ; both
out of this place and others. TTJJ <r,u,i8cfo.tu; voogposa, " The
oblation of a cake was a figure of the bread of the eucharist,

o

which our Lord delivered us to do ; " therefore says the car-
dinal, the eucharistical bread is the truth,' since the cake
was the 'figure' or the shadow. To which I answer, that
though the cake was a figure of the eucharistical bread, yet
so might that bread be a figure of something else : just as
baptism, I mean the external right, which although itself be
but the outward part, and is the ricror, or ' figure' of the in-
ward washing by the Spirit of grace, and represents our being
buried with Christ in his death, yet it is an accomplishment,
in some sense, of those many figures, by which (according

f Videat lector Picherelli Exposit. Verborum Institutionis Coenie Domini, et
ejusdem dissertationem de Missa. 8 A .D. J615.



OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 107

to the doctrine of the fathers) it was prefigured. Such as, in
St. Peter, the waters of the deluge ; in Tertullian, were the
waters of Jordan into which Naaman descended ; in St.
Austin, the waters of sprinkling ; these were types, and to
these baptism did succeed, and represented the same thing
which they represented, and effected or exhibited the thing
it did represent, and therefore, in this sense, they prefigured
baptism : and yet that this is but a figure still, we have St.
Peter's 11 warrant : " The like figure whereunto even baptism
doth also now save us (not the putting away the filth of the
flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God.")
The waters of the flood were TI/TOC, ' a type' of the waters ot
baptism ; the waters of baptism were dar/Vucrov, that is, ' a
type answering to a type:' and yet even here there is a
typical representing and signifying part, and beyond that
there is the ' veritas,' or the ' thing signified ' by both . So it is
in the oblation of the cake, and the eucharistical bread, that
\vas a type of this, and this the avrirwrov, or ' correspondent'
of that ; a type answering to a type, a figure to a figure ; and
both of them did and do respectively represent a thing yet
more secret. For as St. Austin said, these and those are
divers in the sign, but equal in the thing signified ; divers in
the visible species, but the same in the intelligible significa-
tion ; those were prornissive, and these demonstrative ; or, as
others express it, those were pronunciative, and these of the
Gospel are contestative. So Friar Gregory of Padua' noted
in the Council of Trent : and that this was the sense of Justin
Martyr, appears to him that considers what he says. 1. He
does not say the * cake' is a type of the bread, but ' the obla-
tion' of the cake ; that is, that whole rite of offering a cake,
after the leper was cleansed, in token of thankfulness, and
for his legal purity, was a type of the bread of the eucharist,
" which, for the remembrance of the passion, which he
suffered for these men whose minds are purged from all
perverseness, Jesus Christ our Lord commanded to make or
do." To do what ? To do bread ? or to make bread ? No,
but to make bread to be eucharistical, to be a memorial of
the passion, to represent the death of Christ : so that it is
not the cake and the bread that are the type and the anti-
type ; but the oblation of the cake was the figure, and the

h 1 Pet. iii. 21. A.D. 1547.



108 OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION.

celebration of Christ's memorial, and the eucharist, are the
things presignified and prefigured ; but then it remains, that
the eucharistical bread is but the instrument of a memorial
or recordation, which still supposes something beyond this,
and by this to be figured and represented. For as the apo-
stle says, " Our fathers did eat of the same spiritual meat,"
that is, they ate Christ, but they ate him in figure, that is, in
an external symbol : so do we : only theirs is abolished, and
ours succeeds the old, and shall abide for ever. Nay, the
very words used by Justin Martyr do evince this, it is cigrog



Online LibraryJeremy TaylorThe whole works of the Right Rev. Jeremy Taylor (Volume 11) → online text (page 11 of 50)