the Aquarii who would not use Wine but Water onely in the holy Eucharist Epist 63. Vinum quo Christi sanguis ostenditur argueth in this manner Where there is no Wine in the Cup the bloud of Christ cannot be express'd for we see the bloud to be shown ostendi in the Wine And in his Comment upon the Lords Prayer he applies those words Give us this day our daily bread to the sacramental bread The same Cyprian declares in his Sermon of the Lords Supper what manner of body is in the Sacrament of the Eucharist when he saith Veracissimum sanctissimum creat corpus suum sanctificat De coena Dom. Who continually even to this present day doth create sanctifie and bless his Body distributing the same to godly Receivers Now it 's undeniable that Christ's very own proper body is not continually created sanctified or blessed The words of Athanasius are very remarkable Our Lord distinguisheth the Spirit from the Flesh Ad Serapion De Spir. S. In cap. 6. Joann V. Câ—prian de coena Dom. August de verbâ—s Apost Serm. 2. Tom. 10. spiritualiter intelligenda sunt nisi manducaveritis carnem c. Aug. Tract 27. in Joan. ubi plura that we might learn that the words he spake John 6. were not carnal but spiritual For to how many men was his body enough to eat that it should become the food of the whole World But therefore he mentions his Ascension into Heaven that he might draw us off from a corporal sense and thenceforward should understand his Flesh he spake of as heavenly and spiritual Food 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the words I speak to you are spirit and life as if he had said my Body which is shown and given for the World is given for food that it may be spiritually 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 communicated to every one Cyril of Hierusalem saith under the Type 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Bread Mystagog lib. 4. where he granteth that in John 6 c. Except ye eat is to be understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spiritually Christs Body is given thee and under the Type of Wine his Bloud Nazianzen termeth the Bread and Wine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 antitypes of Christs Body and Bloud In like manner Dionysius Areopag and Basil in his Liturgy But I must not forget Gregory Nyssen As saith he In Laudem Gorgoniae Orat. in Baptis the Altar is by Nature a common Stone but being consecrated to God's service is made an Holy Table and as the Eucharistical Bread is at first common Bread but when the Mystery i.e. Mystical Prayer of consecration hath sanctify'd it is called and is the Body of Christ As the Priest to day a common man by benediction is made a Teacher of Piety and nothing changed in body hath his soul transform'd by invisible Grace so the Water in Baptism when it 's nothing else but water by the heavenly blessing of Grace reneweth a man. Where it 's evident Gregory Nyssen alloweth no other Transubstantiation in the Eucharist than in Baptism the Ordination of a Priest or the Consecration of an Altar Chrysostom in his Epistle to Caesarius which is to be seen in the Florentine Library * Which is published since this Author wrote See the Exposition of the Doctrin of the Ch. of E. in answer to the Bishop of Meaux in Append. It is quoted by Damascen contra Acephalos Etiamsi Natura panis permansit Hom. 11. in Math. V. Athanas ad Serap de SS Comment in 1 Cor. 10. V. Chrysost Hom. 46. in Joan. Sicut mortis similitudinem sumpsisti ità etiam similitudinem pretiosi sanguinis De Sacramentis lib 4. cap. 5. Haec oblatio est figura corporis sanguinis Domini Ibid. Fide tangitur Christus non corpore as Peter Martyr a Florentine witnesseth as also in the University-Library at Oxford writeth after this manner Before the bread be sanctify'd we call it Bread but the divine Grace sanctifying it we call it the Lords Body altho the nature of bread remain These words directly overthrow Transubstantiation In another place the same Father discourses after this manner If it be so dangerous to apply to private uses these hallowed Vessels in the which is not the very true body of Christ but onely the Mystery of his Body is contain'd c. much more our bodies to sin Adding That we ought to climb up into Heaven when we receive the Communion if we would have the fruition of Christ's Body yea rather above the Heavens for saith he in another place Wheresoever the carcass is there will the Eagles be gather'd together The Lord is the Carcass because of his death and this is a Table for mounting Eagles not for pratling Jays I shall now add the words of St. Ambrose who discoursing of our Saviour's celebrating the holy Sacrament with his Disciples breaking bread and giving it to them saying Take eat this is my body c. adds As ye have received the similitude of my death so drink also the similitude of my precious bloud This oblation is the figure of the Body and Bloud of the Lord. In another place Christ is touch'd by Faith not bodily Let us now hear Theodoret's testimony Our Saviour saith he In Lucam lib. 6. cap. 8. So Saint Jerom in Psal 50. Dei tui corpus sanguinem mente continge cordis manu suscipe in the institution of the Eucharist chang'd the names not natures of things and applied that to his body which belonged to the symbol or sign of it and to the sign what appertain'd to his body which he did that such as partake of the divine Mysteries should not be attent on the nature of those things they see but by the change of names should believe that mutation which is made by Grace For he that is Christ that called what is by nature a Body Wheat or Bread the same honoured the signs or symbols with the names of his Body and Bloud not changing their Nature Dial. 1.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but adding Grace to Nature And when the Eutychian Heretick would hence draw an argument that as the signs of Christs Body and Bloud are one thing before Consecration another after it so our Lord's body after it's Union to his divine Person ceased to be in substance what it appeared and was chang'd into the divine Nature of the Godhead Theodoret replieth upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You are taken in your own Net for the Mystical signs after Consecration recede not from their former nature but remain in their former substance form and appearance Mark. He saith not onely in their former form and appearance but in their substance also This is an irrefragable testimony against the Novel Doctrine of Transubstantiation I will add the words of Gelasius who was as some say Bishop of Rome but however one that liv'd towards the latter end of the fifth Century
tormented in the fiery flames of Purgatory The same Father in another place hath these words Hom. 5. in Genesin He that in this present life shall not wash away his sins shall find no consolation hereafter this is the time of combating that of crowning I shall onely add what he writeth in his second Homily upon Lazarus quoted by Bellarmin When we are departed hence it is not in our power to repent or to wash away the sins we have committed V. Cyril Alexand in Joan. lib. 12. c. 36. Thus we have seen that the Greek Fathers in the first Ages of the Church were not of the present Roman Faith as to this new Article of Purgatory I might descend lower were it not needless for 't is confess'd by some of the Romish Writers V. Polyd. Virg. de invent rerum lib. 8. c. 1. Alph. de Castro c. 8. p. 572. particularly Roffensis the Pope's Martyr in Henry VIII his days That in the ancient Fathers especially the Greeks there is either none or very rare mention of Purgatory Neither saith he did the Latin Fathers all at once receive it neither does the Greek Church at this day believe it This Concession is true for the Greeks in their printed Confession offer'd to the Council of Basil Jeremy Patriarch of Constantinople Ann. 1438. in his Censure of the Lutheran Confession and Cyril Patriarch of that Church in his Confession of Faith sent by him to Cornelius Hage Ambassadour for the States of Holland at Constantinople An. 1630. deny any purgation of sins after death by fire in Purgatory which say the Greeks in their Apology was condemn'd by the fifth General Council altho it is not now to be found in the late Editions of the Councils From what hath been said I hope it is evident First That there neither is nor ever was any Catholick or universal consent of all Christian Churches as to this new Roman Article of Faith viz. Purgatory Secondly That Bellarmin the Jesuit doth but abuse the World in quoting the Greek Fathers as owning it For is it probable that the Romans should understand their meaning in their Writings better than themselves It 's true some of them as Origen Gregory Nyssen c. mention Purgation of Souls from sin by Fire but it makes nothing for the Popish doctrine of Purgatory For First Origen's Purgatory is universal which all Prophets Apostles Origen in Exod. Hom. 6. the blessed Virgin must pass through not some onely neither very good nor very bad but of a middle sort as Romanists hold Secondly The Purgation Saint Basil Gregory Nyssen and others speak of is not before the Resurrection V. Origen in lib. Regum p. 36. Contra Celsum lib. 5. p. 241. Cyrilli Catech. l. 15. pag. 168. Ego puto quod post resurrectionem ex mortuis indigeamus sacramento nos eluente purgante Origen Hom. 14. in Lucam but at the end of the World by the fire of Conflagration which shall purge as some think the whole Creation so that at last all men even Devils too shall be saved as Origen held who turn'd Hell into Purgatory Such Sentences of the Fathers will not at all be serviceable to our Adversaries purpose So much for the Greek come we now to the Latin Fathers I shall begin with Tertullian who in his Apologetick Cap. 47. mentions onely two places to which Souls go Hell and Paradise In his Book De Testimon Animae Cap. 4. He thus bespeaketh the Soul We affirm thee to remain after death and to expect the day of judgment Expectare diem Judicii proque merito aut cruciatui destinari aut refrigerio utroque sempiterno and according to your behaviour to be destinated to torment or comfort and both eternal As for temporary torments in the fire of Purgatory before the day of Judgment Tertullian takes no notice of them In his fifth Book against Marcion Cap. 6. commenting on that famous place 1 Cor. 3. he rightly understandeth the Gold Silver Hay Stubble not of sins venial or mortal but Doctrines worthy or unworthy of the foundation i. e. Christ or Christian Religion Strom 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with whom agrees Clemens of Alex. in his fourth Book Cap. 34. against Marcion as also De Anima Cap. 35.55 he saith The Souls of all good Christians are in Abraham 's bosom in refrigerio a place of refreshment until the Resurrection as many of the ancient Fathers thought when they shall receive plenitudinem mercedis the fulness of their reward Not as Papists now teach any of them in Purgatorian torments It is farther observable that he there distinguisheth that place from Hell or any part of it as Purgatory is supposed to be And discoursing on those words apply'd by Romanists to Purgatory Thou shalt not come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing He affirmeth that all Souls abide apud inferos till the Resurrection Which utterly overthrows the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory and renders all their Masses Indulgences c vain and unprofitable From the Master let us pass to his Scholar Saint Cyprian who in his Epistle to Demetrian saith that at the ending of this temporal life we are severed into the receptacles either of eternal death or immortality Ad aeternae mortis vel immortalitatis hospitia dividamur p. 166. And in his Book De bono mortalitatis he comforts the Christians generally in a time of raging Pestilence with these considerations That the servants of Christ when they die depart as Simeon desired in peace Enter into Paradise go to Christ begin to reign with Christ that when they are taken out of the storms of this World they gain the haven of Rest and eternal security Securitatis aeternae portum petimus Lastly That after death the righteous are call'd ad refrigerium to refreshment not torment in Purgatory fire whither some are sent by the Romanists and the unrighteous to punishment All which expressions are utterly inconsistent with this new Article of Faith as every man not blinded with prejudice may easily discern To the same purpose in his Epistle to Antonium he adviseth in contradiction to the bitter doctrine of Novatus that pardon and peace should be granted to Penitents in extremis at or a little before their death Because saith he apud inferos exomologesis fieri non posset in Hell or the state of death or in the grave as the word Inferi is sometimes taken there can be no satisfaction made by suffering penance or punishment for sin It 's true in the latter end of the same Epistle he saith It 's one thing to be presently admitted to the reward of Faith or heavenly Glory and another to be purged from sins by being long tormented in fire But this testimony is no good proof of the Roman Purgatory in regard he there speaketh expresly De die judicii of the day of Judgement after the Resurrection whereas our Adversaries
Cap 19. Passio Domini in qua tingimur Mystag 4. In Sacramentis non quid sint sed quid ostendant attenditur quoniam signa sunt rerum aliud existentia aliud significantia Aug. cont Max. l. 3. c. 22. Ne quis attendat in eis quod sunt c. de Doctr. Christ c. 7. Hom. 16. in Sacram. Euchar. Tom. 6. wherein neither we nor our Adversaries admit of any Transubstantiation Thus Tertullian in his Book of Baptism saith that thereby we are dyed in the passion or bloud of our Lord. In like manner Cyril of Hierusalem after he had instructed Christians not to look upon the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament as mere Bread and Wine whatever sense suggesteth but as the body and bloud of Christ affirmeth the same of the Water in Baptism that it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mere or bare Water and the same he saith of the Oil in Chrism though neither of them are substantially chang'd into the very bloud of Christ Many more instances might be added but these may suffice I will onely take notice of a Similitude used by St. Chrysostom in which Bellarmin triumphs 'T is this As saith he Wax set on fire loseth its substance being turn'd into fire so by consecration the substance of the bread is chang'd into the flesh of Christ To which and the like expressions quoted out of the Fathers In Epiphanium pag. 244. pag. 288. I shall answer in the words of Petavius the Jesuit There are many things saith he in the Holy Fathers especially in Chrysostom scatter'd here and there in their Homilies which if you would reduce to the rule of exact Truth they will seem altogether void of good sense Sixtus Senensis lib. 6. Biblioth Annotat 152. Another of their own Church ingenuously aknowledgeth that Preachers such as the Fathers were in their Homilies and popular Discourses often speak things by an Hyperbole being carried away affectuum impetu orationis cursu with the heat of their affections which often saith he befell Chrysostom Yea Rhetoricati sumus ali quid declamationibus dedimus Saint Hierom confesses of himself We have play'd the Rhetoricians in a Declamatory way To close this Similitudes are the weakest kind of Arguments Neither may our Adversaries in prudence urge this similitude of fired Wax too vehemently against us If so they must necessarily grant that not onely the substance of the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament ceaseth to be but the very outward accidents also For when Wax is fired not onely the substance but the very accidents are disserent from what they were before And so much at present for Transubstantiation I pass to the next Article Purgatory 3. Art. Concerning Purgatory The Antient Fathers for five hundred years after Christ did not hold the Romish Doctrine of Purgatory as an Article of Faith yea some of them expresly contradict it I will begin with the Greek Fathers Clemens Romanus and Ignatius in their genuine Writings take no notice at all of it Justin Martyr denies it We believe saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ☜ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every man after his departure hence goeth according to his works either into everlasting punishment or life And immediately addeth Men would avoid sin if they consider'd that they must go without Repentance into eternal punishment by fire But of enduring temporal punishment for sin by fire not a word is to be found in all his Writings Quest 75. Amongst the Questions and Answers which are printed with his Works it is thus resolved After the departure of Souls out of their Bodies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presently they are by Angels carried to places fit for them the Souls of the just to Paradise of the unjust to Hell in which places they are kept until the Resurrection Here no notice is taken of Purgatory or any middle or third place out of which Souls may be deliver'd by Prayers Masses Indulgences c. It 's true this Writer is much younger than Justin Martyr but it maketh the more against our Adversaries for it sheweth that long after his death this Article of Roman Faith was not Catholick or universally received In Irenaeus as Erasmus also hath observ'd who was very well seen in his Writings there is no mention of Purgatory but in the close of his last Book there is somewhat contradicting it for without any distinction of Persons or sins mortal or venial he declares his opinion that the Souls of all Christ's Disciples go to one invisible place Origen Hom. 18. in Jeremiam pag. 163. edit Huet Dum hic sumus remedium non postea Vita Constant lib. 4.63 hades there remaining till the Resurrection as Tertullian Origen Lactanctius Ambrose and other of the Fathers held which is inconsistent with Purgatory as invocation of dead Saints also and contradicted by the Romanists Eusebius Caesariensis hath written several Volumes in all which as Scultetus hath noted there is not the least mention of Purgatory It 's true he relates how the people pray'd for the Soul of Constantine But Constantine as he assures us in the next Chapter went not to Purgatory but was taken up to his God and joined his divine part his Soul to God yea a little before his death he himself as Eusebius reports used these words Now I know my self to be happy to be now accounted worthy of eternal life Prayer then for the dead doth not necessarily infer Purgatory De Praep. Evang. lib. 11. c. 20. lib. 13. I grant he reporteth Plato's opinion concerning purgation of a middle sort of men by temporal punishments after death But adds that Plato through ignorance of the Scripture erred in many things I pass to Athanasius in all whose Writings tho many and large I can find no mention of this Article of Faith Purgatory and am the more confirm'd it cannot be found in regard Bellarmin quotes nothing out of him or Eusebius against us Gregory Nazianzen in his Oration in Caesarium Oratio 10. delivers himself thus I am mov'd by the sayings of the Wise that every Soul that is belov'd of God as the Souls sent by Romanists to Purgatory are acknowledg'd to be presently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the loosing from the body and departure hence that which darkned the mind being either purged or cast from it or done away in what sort I cannot well express whence it's evident he believed not they were purged by fire as Romanists peremptorily affirm beginneth sensibly to discern that good which remaineth for it to be filled with wonderful delight and to leap for joy But this wonderful delight and joy cannot consist with Purgatory torments or the fear of them Nazianzen then was no Papist in this point On those words Orat. de Paschate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye shall carry out nothing until the morning c. He saith Beyond or after this night i. e. after death there
any Saint As for the place usually quoted out of Justin M. to this purpose it is grosly perverted by false pointing The words are these But him i. e. God the Father and him who came from him and taught us and the Host of good Angels these things the Son and the Prophetick Spirit we worship and adore Bellarmine was not ashamed to render them thus But him the Father and his Son who came and taught us these things and the Host of good Angels and the Prophetical Spirit we worship and adore Thus by placing a note of distinction after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teaching us these things he abuseth his Reader into a conceit that the Primitive Christians as Justin here witnesseth did adore not only the Father Son and Holy Ghost but the Host of Holy Angels also Yea if the Cardinals reading be right then they worshiped and adored the Holy Angels in the third place next to the Father and Son before the Holy and Prophetical Spirit which certainly was far from the least thought or practice of the Primitive Christians or their Apologist Justin Martyr who elsewhere declares in his own and the Christians names that they worshipped as the Father and Son so in the third place not the Holy Angels but the Holy Ghost But enough of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only we may observe by the way with what honesty and fidelity our Adversaries quote the Fathers There is another place they bring out of Irenaeus Ut Maria Virgo sit Evae advocata Lib. 5. cont Haer. ultra medium That the Virgin Mary may be Eves Advocate Hence most impertinently they infer that Eve prayed or might pray to the Virgin Mary whereas all that can be concluded from those words is that the Virgin Mary prayeth for Eve. I wonder how it is possible to conceive that Eve should pray to the Virgin Mary some thousands of years before she was born The truth is those words of Irenaeus do not at all relate to any religious Advocation or Invocation for in that place he onely makes a Parallel or comparison betwixt Eve and the Virgin Mary that as Eve a Virgin brought sin and death into the World so Mary a Virgin brought forth a Saviour and Redeemer ut Maria sit Evae advocata that Mary might be an Advocate or Pleader to excuse the sin of Eve and defend the honour of the Sex. Take Tertullians Verses as a Comment on Irenaeus who speaks fully and clearly what he meant Virgo viro nocuit sed vir de virgine vicit Lib. 1. advers Marcionem V. Origen in Dialog p. 256. Tertul. de Habitu mulier c. 10. Virginis ut virgo caro carnis debita solvat That as by a Virgin came Death so also by a Virgin came deliverance from Death The Virgin Mary in and by her Son making full reparation or satisfaction for Eves transgression What Doth this concern religious Invocation of the blessed Virgin But I shall not satisfie my self much less others in bare Asserting Let us come to the trial of the Cause and produce our Witnesses Justin Martyr Ecclesia nec invocationibus Angelicis facit aliquid sed purè orationes dirigens ad Dominum Iren. lib. 20. c. 57. in fine Apol. 2. giving an account to the Emperor Antoninus of the Christian Religion saith We offer up the Sacrifices of Prayer and Thanksgiving to God We think him alone worthy of this Honour by whom all things were created And a little after We worship God alone The Church of Smyrna being accused by the Heathens Euseb Hist Eccl. lib. 4. c. 15. V. Lactant. Instit lib. 5. cap. 11. de vera relig c. 55. Cont. Faustum lib. 22. c. 21. as if they intended to worship their martyred Bishop Saint Polycarp answer in vindication of themselves We worship Christ the Son of God but Martyrs we worthily love 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his Disciples and faithful Servants whose memory on their Natalitia or Obit days we celebrate which exactly agrees with St. Austins's dogmatical resolution of this Question We honour Angels Charitate non servitute with love not service and in another place with the worship or honour of Love and Fellowship as holy Men are worshipped in this life Origen against Celsus Lib. 8 p. 386. Edit Cant. and the same he saith lib 5. c. 60. vet Edit The good Angels in some sense we reverence honour or worship as Gods Ministers but we worship one God and his onely Son with Prayers and supplications offering them to God by his onely begotten begging that he as our High Priest would present them to God. He saith not by the Intercession of Saints upon our Prayers to them or Angels but Christ the Son of God our High Priest whose peculiar Office it is as such to present our Prayers and spiritual Sacrifices unto God. And a little after God alone is to be prayed unto Prayers are to be offered also to his onely Son. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And whereas Celsus alledged as now Papists do the power of Courtiers to injure or help those who respect or disrespect them V. Ambros p. 300. in Rom. cap. 1. Origen adviseth him to commit and commend himself to God onely the Supreme Ruler of all things and to beg of him all that help and protection which cometh from Angels and just Men For saith he as the shadow follows the motion of the Body so he that pleaseth God hath the Friends of God V. Origen in Romanos 2. p. 140. Angels and blessed Souls favourable to him who will render God more favourable and will pray together with him although unrequested But of our praying therefore to them not a word is to be found in all his Books against Celsus yea in these words the ground of all Invocation of Saints or Angels is wholly taken away Not to weary the Reader lib. 5. in Cels p. 233. He saith all Prayers are to be offered up to God and that it is not fit or reasonable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to call upon Angels If not on Angels much less on Saints The same we find lib. 8. in Cels p. 402. Clemens Alexandrinus accounted it gross folly to beg of those who are no Gods as if they were Strom. 7. wherefore justly seeing there is one good God we and Angels beg of him the bestowing of good things Tertullian says Apologet. cap. 34. Praecepit Christus secretè orare ut quem ubique audire fideret ei soli Religionem offerret Tertullian Apologet. cap. 30. These things I can beg of none else but of him of whom I know I shall obtain them because he alone which Papists dare not deny granteth them and I to whom it belongeth to obtain them am his Servant whom not Saints or Angels I onely serve or observe And in another place We are to ask of him by whom something is promised i. e. God. Have Saints or Angels promised