more need of Symbols or Signs when the Body it self appears I refer the Reader to the Testimonies produced before Chap. 10. Position 2. out of S. Austin Sedulius Primasius Bede c. I will conclude this Chapter with a passage or two out of the Prayers after the Sacrament in the Old Liturgy used in Bertram's time (k) V. Bertram de corp sang Christi prope finem p. 112. Edit ult Lat. Engl. We who have now received the Pledge of Eternal Life most humbly beseech thee to grant (l) Ut quod in imagine contingimus Sacramenti manifesta participatione sumamus That we may be manifestly made partakers of that which we here receive in the Image of the Sacrament And thus afterwards (m) Ibid. p. 114. Perficiant in nobis quaesumus Domine tua Sacramenta quod continent ut quae nunc specie gerimus rerum veritate capiamus in another Prayer Let thy Sacraments work in us O Lord we beseech thee those things which they contain that we may really be partakers of those things which now we celebrate in a Figure Bertram Comments upon these Prayers in such passages as these Whence it appears says he that this Body and Blood of Christ are the Pledge and Image of something to come which is now only represented but shall hereafter be plainly exhibited therefore it is one thing which is now celebrated and another which shall hereafter be manifested And afterwards p. 115. The Prayer says that these things are celebrated in a Figure not in Truth that is by way of similitude or representation not the manifestation of the thing it self Now the Figure and the Truth are very different things Therefore the Body and Blood of Christ which is celebrated in the Church differs from the Body and Blood of Christ which is glorified since the Resurrection c. Ps 117. We see how vast a difference there is between the mystery of Christs Body and Blood which the faithful now receive in the Church and that Body which was born of the Virgin Mary which suffered rose again ascended into Heaven and sitteth at the right hand of the Father For this Body which we celebrate in our way to happiness must be spiritually received for Faith believes somewhat that it sees not and it spiritually feeds the Soul makes glad the heart and confers Eternal Life and Incorruption if we attend not to that which feeds the Body which is chew'd with our teeth and ground in pieces but to that which is spiritually received by Faith. But now that Body in which Christ suffered and rose again was his own proper Body which he assumed of the Virgin which might be seen and felt after his Resurrection c. It is very observable and a great confirmation of what has been said in this Chapter That the Ancient Christians of S. Thomas inhabiting the Mountains of Malabar in the East Indies agree with the Ancient Church in denying our Saviours Corporal Presence in the Sacrament of the Eucharist as appears from their Publick Offices and other Books mentioned in a Synod which was celebrated amongst them by Dom Aleixo de Menezes Archbishop of Goa in the Year 1599. In the fourteenth Decree of the third Action of the said Synod in which most of their Church Offices and other Books are Condemned for containing Doctrines contrary to the Roman Faith there is particular notice taken of their contradicting the Roman Faith in the point of Transubstantiation 1. The Book of Timothy the Patriarch is condemned for asserting through three Chapters that the true Body of Christ our Lord is not in the Sacrament of the Altar but only the Figure of his Body 2. The Book of Homilies is condemned which teacheth that the H. Eucharist is only the Image of Christ as the Image of a Man is distinguished from a real Man and that the Body of Christ is not there but in Heaven 3. The Book of the Exposition of the Gospels is condemn'd which teacheth that the Eucharist is only the Image of the Body of Christ and that his Body is in Heaven at the right Hand of the Father and not upon Earth 4. Their Breviary which they call Iludre and Gaza is condemn'd which teaches that the most H. Sacrament of the Eucharist is not the true Body of Christ Lastly The Office of the Burial of Priests is condemn'd where it is said that the most H. Sacrament of the Altar is no more but the virtue of Christ and not his true Body and Blood. This Synod was Printed in the University of Conimbra with the Licences of the Inquisition and Ordinary in the Year 1606. and is in the Possession of a Learned Person who gave me this account out of it CHAP. XII The Twelfth Difference The Fathers assert That Christ's Body is not eaten corporally and carnally but only spiritually But the Church of Rome teaches a Corporal Eating a Descent of Christ's Natural Body into ours and understands the Eating of Christ's Body literally and carnally IF the Church of Rome declares its own Faith when it imposes the Profession of it upon another and makes one abjure the contrary under pain of Anathema then I am sure it was once with a witness for the eating of Christ's Body in the most literal and proper Sense when An. Dom. 1059. Pope Nicholas II. and the General Council of Lateran prescribed a Profession of it to Berengarius made him swear it and anathematize the contrary as it is set down by Lanfrank (n) De Eucharist Sacram. adv Berengar which because the Nubes Testium tho' it has set down two other Forms durst not give us I will therefore here transcribe out of him Ego Berengarius indignus Diaconus Ecclesiae S. Mauritii Andegavensis cognoscens veram Catholicam Apostolicam Fidem anathematizo omnem Haeresm praecipue eam de quâ hactenus infamatus sum quae astruere conatur panem vinum quae in altari ponuntur post consecrationem solummodo Sacramentum non verum corpus sanguinem Dom. nostri Jesu Christi esse nec posse sensualiter nisi in solo Sacramento manibus Sacerdotum tractari vel frangi aut fidelium dentibus atteri Consentio autem S. Romanae Ecclesiae Apostolicae sedi ore corde profiteor de Sacramentis Dominicae mensae eam fidem tenere quam Do minus Venerabilis Papa Nicholaus haec S. Synodus authoritate Evangelica Apostolica tenendam tradidit mihique sirmavit scilicet Panem vinum quae in altari ponuntur post consecrationem non solum Sacramentum sed etiam verum corpus D. N. J. Christi esse sensualiter non solum Sacramento sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri jurans per S. homousion Trinitatem per haec sacrosancta Christi Evangelia Eos vero qui contra hanc fidem venerint cum dogmatibus sectatoribus suis
just as if a person taking a Journey from home should leave some pledge to one whom he loves that as oft as he look'd upon it he might call to mind his kindnesses and friendships So also Amalarius (m) De Offic. Eccles l. 3. c. 25. Edit Hittorpii p. 425. Christus inclinato capite emisit spiritum Sacerdos inclinat se hoc quod vice Christi immolatum est deo Patri commendat Christ bowing his head gave up the Ghost The Priest bows himself and commends to God the Father this which is offered as a Sacrifice in the place of Christ 5. Observ That altho' for the Reasons given the Fathers call the Sacrament Christs Body yet they plainly say that what is distributed in the Eucharist is without any life or sense which cannot be said of Christs natural Body Epiphanius (n) In Anchorat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We see what our Saviour took in his hands viz. Bread and having given thanks said This is mine and that and yet we see that it is not equal to it nor like it not to the incarnate Image not to the invisible Deity not to the Lineaments of members for this the Bread is of a round form and insensible as to any power Theophilus of Alexandria (o) Epist Paschal 2. Non recogitat aquas in Baptismate mysticas adventu Sp. Sancti consecrari panemque Dominicum quo Salvatoris Corpus ostenditur quem frangimus in Sanctificationem nostri S. calicem quae in mensa Ecclesiae collocantur utique inanima sunt per invocationem adventum Spiritûs S. sanctificari discoursing against Origen who did not believe that the H. Ghost did operate upon things inanimate says He Origen do's not remember that the mystical waters in Baptism are consecrated by the coming of the H. Ghost and that the Lords Bread whereby the Body of our Saviour is shown and which we break for our sanctification and the H. Cup which are all placed upon the Table of the Church and are indeed without life yet are Sanctified by the Invocation and advent of the H. Ghost S. Jerome (p) Epist ad Theoph. Alex. Ut discant qui ignorant eruditi testimoniis Scripturarum qua debeant veneratione Sancta suscipere Altaris servitio deservire sacrosque calices sancta velamina caetera quae ad cultum pertinent Dominicae Passionis non quasi inanima sensu carentia Sanctimoniam non habere sed ex consortio corporis sanguinis Domini eadem qua Corpus ejus Sanguis Majestate veneranda commending the foresaid work and admiring at the profit the Churches would reap thereby says That they who are ignorant being instructed by Scripture-Testimonies may learn with what veneration they ought to meddle with holy things and serve at the Altar and that the H. Chalices and H. Veils and the rest of the things that appertain to the Celebration of our Lord's Passion are not to be look'd upon as having no sanctity as being without life and sense but by reason that they accompany the Body and Blood of our Lord are to be venerated with the same majestick regard that his Body and Blood is 6. Observ That the Fathers speak of Divisions and parts of the Eucharist which cannot be truly said of the natural Body of Christ which the Rom. Church confesses to be impassible but only of the Sacramental Bread and Wine Cyprian (q) Lib. de Lapsis Quidam alius ipse maculatus sacrificio à Sacerdote celebrato partem cum caeteris ausus est latenter accipere sanctum Domini edere contrectare non potuit Another who was also defiled the Sacrifice being Celebrated by the Priest was so bold as privily to take a part of it with others but he could not eat and handle the Holy Body of the Lord. Clemens Alexandr (r) Strom. l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When the Bishop according to custom had divided the Eucharist they suffered every one of the people to take a portion of it Origen (s) Hom. 13. in Exodum Cùm suscipitis Corpus Domini cum omni cautela veneratione servatis ne ex eo parum quid decidat ne consecrati muneris aliquid dilabatur c. if they be his genuine words says When ye receive the Lords Body ye keep it with all caution and veneration lest any little portion of it should fall down lest any thing of the consecrated gift should slip down to the ground c. S. Basil (t) Epist 289. ad Caesariam showing that they that have received the Communion in the Church may reserve it and Communicate themselves at home with their own hand and that the practice was thus in Alexandria and Egypt adds that when the Priest has distributed the Sacrifice he that receives it whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and takes daily a part of that which was so given him ought to believe that he rightly receives it It is the same in virtue whether a person receive a single part from the Priest or many parts together S. Ambrose agrees with it (u) Epist 1. ad Justum Etsi parum sumas etsi plurimum haurias eadem perfecta est omnibus mensura redemptionis speaking of the Blood of Christ Whether thou takest says he a little or drinkest a larger draught there is the same perfect measure of redemption to all So also S. Austin (x) Epist 59. ad Paulin. Ad distribuendum comminuitur speaking of that upon the Lords Table which is blessed and sanctified which is Bread he says of it that it is broken into little parts to be distributed Which cannot be said of Christs proper Body And elswhere (y) Epist 86. ad Casulanum De agni immaculati corpore partem sumere his phrase concerning communicating is to take a part from the body of the immaculate Lamb. Also in another place he says (z) De Verb. dom serm 33. In accipiendo novimus quid cogitemus Modicum accipimus in corde saginamur In receiving we know what we think We receive a little portion and are fatted at heart Cyril of Alexandria (a) In Joan. 6.57 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says The least part of the Consecrated Bread which he calls the Eulogy mingles the whole Body into it self and fills it with its own energy and thus both Christ is in us and we again are in him Eusebius (b) Eccles Hist l. 6. c. 36. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tells the story of the Presbyter that when Serapion was a dying sent him by a Boy a little bit of the Eucharist And Prosper (c) Dimidium temporis c. 6. Brevem portiunculam Corporis Dominici has a like story of a possessed Woman that received a short and small portion of our Lords Body And P. Pius I in an Epistle attributed to him and made use of by Bellarmine
confute their Opinions differing from the pretended common Sentiments about the Body and Blood of Christ by what lay so plainly before them of his Body and Blood being in the Eucharist if they had believed it But I refer the Reader to Monsieur Allix his Dissertation before-named wherein he may find abundant Satisfaction in these Matters and also will see how sadly the Romanists are put to it to answer the Difficulties about the Blood of Christ which they pretend to shew in so many Churches and is produced in such Quantities that may well cause a new Doubt Whether if his Resurrection-Body have any Blood in it we must not suppose it to be of a new Creation since what was in his Body when he died cannot suffice to furnish more Blood if so much as their Vials and Glasses are filled withal CHAP. X. The Tenth Difference The Fathers assert positively that the substance of the Elements remain after Consecration that Bread and Wine are taken eaten and drunk in the Sacrament which all that believe Transubstantiation must deny WE have seen before that the Fathers say plainly that it was Bread which Christ called his Body when he blessed it Now we shall see that the Fathers are as positive that after Consecration and the change made by it yet still the Bread and Wine remains I begin with that famous Testimony of S. Chrysostome against the Apollinarians produced first by P. Martyr by some of our Adversaries charged upon him as his Forgery because it was so full against them by others shifted off to another John of Constantinople and denied to be S. Chrysostome's but vindicated for his See Append. to the Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England p. 142 143 c. by the Learned Bigotius who had transcribed it out of the Florentine Library of S. Mark 's Monastery and prepared it for the Press in his Edition of Palladius then suppressed by some Doctors of the Sorbonne and the printed leaves taken out of the Book but now lately recovered and published to their shame A passage of which the subject of this great contest I shall here set down Christ is both God and Man God Deus homo Christus Deus propter impassibilitatem Homo propter Passionem Unus Filius unus Dominus idem ipse proculdubus unitarum naturarum unam dominationem unam potestatem possidens etiamsi non consubstantiales existunt unaquaeque in commiâ—tam proprietatis conservat agnitionem propter hoc quod inconfusa sunt duo dico Sicut enim antequam sanctificetur Panis Panem nominamus divina autem illum Sanctificante gratiâ mediante sacerdote liberatus est quidem appellatione panis dignus autem habitus est dominici corporis appellatione etiamsi natura panis in ipso permansit non duo corpora sed unum corpus filii praedicatur Sic hic Divinâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est inundante corporis naturâ unum filium unam personam utraque haec fecerunt Agnoscendum tamen inconfusam indivisibilem rationem non in unâ solùm natura sed in duabus perfectis for that he is impassible Man for that he suffered One Son one Lord he the same without doubt having one Dominion one power of two united natures not that these natures are consubstantial seeing each of them do's retain without confusion its own properties and being two are inconfused in him For as in the Eucharist before the Bread is consecrated we call it Bread but when the grace of God by the Priest has consecrated it it has no longer the name of Bread but is counted worthy to be called the Lords Body altho' the nature of Bread remains in it and we do not say there are two Bodies but one Body of the Son. So here the divine nature being joined to the humane Body they both together make one Son one Person but yet they must be acknowledged to remain without confusion and after an indivisible manner not in one nature only but in two perfect natures Another remarkable Testimony is in Theodoret's Dialogues some part of which I hope the Reader will not think it tedious to be inserted here since by observing the thread of his Discourse he will see his undoubted sense to be that the substance of the Bread and Wine remain in the Eucharist and the change is by addition not annihilation and I will add his Greek where it is needful Dial. 1 Orthodoxus Do you not know that God called his Body Bread Erannistes I know it Orth. Elsewhere also he calleth his Flesh Wheat Eran. I know that also Unless a Corn of Wheat fall into the ground and die c. Orth. But in the delivery of the mysteries he called the Bread his Body and that which is mixed viz. Wine and Water in the Cup Blood. Eran. He did so call them Orth. But that which is his Body by nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is also to be called his Body and his Blood viz. by nature Blood. Eran. It is confess'd Orth. But our Saviour changed the names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and on his Body he imposed the name of the symbol or sign and on the symbol he put the name of his body And so having called himself a Vine he called the Symbol Blood. Eran. Very right But I have a mind to know the reason of this change of names Orth. The scope is manifest to those that are initiated in Divine things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For he would have those that participate the divine mysteries not to attend to the nature of those things that are seen but upon the changing of the names to believe the change that is made by grace For he that called his Body that is so by nature Wheat and Bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and again termed himself a Vine he honoured the visible Symbols with the appellation of his Body and Blood not altering nature but to nature adding grace Proceed we now to the next Dialogue Orth. The mystical Symbols offered to God by the Priests Dial. 2 pray tell me what are they signs of Eran. Of the Lords Body and Blood. Orth. Of his Body truly or not truly such Era. Of that which is truly his Body Orth. Very right For there must be an original of an Image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Painters imitate nature and draw the Images of visible things Era. True. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orth. If then the divine mysteries are Antitypes of a true Body then the Lords Body is a true Body still not changed into the nature of the Deity but filled with Divine Glory Era. You have seasonably brought in the Discourse of the Divine Mysteries for thereby I will shew that the Lords Body is changed into another Nature Answer therefore my Question Orth. I will. Era. What call you the Gift that is offered before the Priests Invocation Orth. I may not openly declare
aeterno anathemate dignos esse pronuncio c. I Berengarius unworthy Deacon c. knowing the true Catholick and Apostolick Faith do anathematize all Heresie especially that for which I have hitherto been defamed which endeavours to maintain that the Bread and Wine placed on the Altar after Consecration are only a Sacrament or Sign and not the true Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ and cannot save only in the Sign be handled or broken by the Priest's Hands or be ground by the Teeth of the Faithful But I agree with the Holy Roman Church and the Apostolick Seat and do with my Mouth and from my Heart profess That I hold the same Faith concerning the Sacraments of the Lords Table which our Lord and Venerable Pope Nicholas and this Holy Synod by Evangelical and Apostolical Authority has delivered to me to hold and confirmed to me viz. That the Bread and Wine which are placed on the Altar after Consecration are not only a Sacrament but also the true Body of our Lord Jesus Christ and is sensibly not only in the Sign and Sacrament but in truth handled and broken by the Priests Hands and ground by the Teeth of the Faithful Swearing this by the Holy and Co-essential Trinity and by the most Holy Gospels of Christ And as for those that oppose this Faith I judge them with their Opinions and Followers worthy of an eternal Anathema c. This we may look upon as the Belief of that Church then and this to be the manner of eating the Body of Christ since as Bellarmine well observes (o) De Sacr. Euchar. l. 3. c. 21. Nec coguntur ulli abjurare anathematizare sententias dubias sed eas tantùm quae damnantur ab Ecclesia tanquam haereses exploratae None are compelled to abjure and anathematize dubious Opinions but only such as are condemned by the Church as known Heresies But however Infallible this Pope and that General Council were this way of eating Christ's Body by tearing it with the Teeth was quickly opposed as a late Learned Preface to the Determination of Joh. Parisiensis shews at large Peter Lombard could not digest it (p) Sentent lib. 4. dist 12. Fractio partes quae ibi videntur fieri in Sacramento fiunt i. e. in visibili specie Ideoque illa Berengarii verba ita distinguenda sunt ut sensualiter non modo in Sacramento sed in veritate dicatur corpus Christi tractari manibus Sacerdotum Frangi verò atteri dentibus verè quidem sed in Sacramento tantum For tho' the Pope and Council defined That both the handling and also the breaking and tearing with the Teeth of Christ's Body were not only in the Sign and Sacrament but in Truth performed he makes a distinction and in express words cited in the Margin says That Christ's Body is handled indeed not only in Sacrament but in Truth but that it is broken and torn with the Teeth truly indeed but yet only in Sacrament That is in the visible Species as he before explains that Phrase Directly contrary to Berengarius's Recantation The words also of Job Semeca the Author of the Gloss upon the Canon-Law (q) Gloss apud Gratian. de Consecr Dist 2. c. Ego Berengarius Nisi sanè intelligas verba Berengarii in majorem incides Haeresin quam ipse habuit ideo omnia referas ad species ipsas nam de Christi corpore partes non facimus are very bold against it Unless you understand the words of Berengarius in a sound sense and there can be no other the words are so plain but what must contradict it you will fall into a greater Heresie than he was guilty of and therefore you must refer all to the Species that 's directly contrary to the Pope and Council for we do not make Parts of Christ's Body In fine all the great Writers especially the Jesuits have forsaken this Definition as not to be maintained and this Eating in the most proper sense is wholly discarded and we are told (r) De Sacr. Euchar. l. 1. c. 11. Ad rationem manducationis non est necessaria attritio sed satis est sumptio transmissio ab ore ad stomachum per instrumenta humana naturalia i. e. linguam palatum by Bellarmine That grinding with the Teeth is not necessarily required to Eating but it suffices that it be taken in and transmitted from the Mouth into the Stomach by humane and natural Instruments viz. the Tongue and Palate This way in plainer terms is swallowing the Body of Christ without chewing And indeed without this Descent of it into the Body there could no Account be given of that Prayer in the Roman Missal (s) Corpus tuum Domine quod sumpsi sanguis quem potavi adhaereat visceribus meis Lord let thy Body which I have taken and thy Blood which I have drunk cleave unto my Entrals They have also determined how long this Sacred Body makes its stay there Aquinas whom they all now follow says (t) In 3. part quaest 76. art 6. ad 3. Corpus Christi remanet in hoc Sacramento quousque species sacramentales manent Quibus cessantibus desinit esse corpus Christi sub eis The Body of Christ remains in this Sacrament so long as the Sacramental Species remain When they cease to be the Body of Christ ceases to be under them Thus also Domin Soto (u) In 4. dist 12. qu. 1. art 3. Est indubiè tenendum quod corpus sc Christi descendit in stomachum Cùm digestio fiat in stomacho illic desinunt esse species atque adeo corpus quare non descendit in ventrem We ought undoubtedly to hold That Christ's Body descends into the Stomach Since Digestion is made in the Stomach there the Species cease to be and so also Christ's Body and therefore will not descend into the Draught But now comes a scurvy Case that will force out the whole Truth Suppose by reason of any Disease the Species should descend further than the Stomach as in a Flux when there is no Digestion of the Species nor time to do it in the Stomach but they are presently carried downward whole or else brought up immediately as in case of sudden Vomiting This also is resolved by the same Principles So the last-named Author (x) Soto ibid. Sed si ob aliquem morbum species descenderent consequenter ipsum corpus descenderet emitteretur Pudor enim non debet esse in causa negandi veritatem If by reason of any Disease the Species should descend into the Draught he means the Body also it self would descend and be sent forth For Shame ought not to be a Reason for denying the Truth To which S. Antoninus (y) Part. 3. tit 13. cap. 6. sect 3. Igitur corpus Christi sanguis tamdiu manet in ventre stomacho vel vomitu quocunque alibi quamdiu
Ritual de S. Eucharist after receiving not presently to go out of the Church or talk or look about carelesly nor to spit nor read aloud Prayers out of a Book lest the Species of the Sacrament should fall out of their Mouths All this is preventing Care But now when Accidents do happen they seem by their ordering Matters to be in a frightful Concern and strange things are to be done if possible to make an honorable amends In the last Chapter I have given the Reader some Instances of those strange Things and will here only add two Cases which the Roman Missal provides for The first is If a Consecrated Host or any part of it should fall to the Ground the direction is (g) Missal Rom. de defect Missae c. 10. Sect. 15. That it be reverently taken up and the place where it fell must be cleansed and a little scraped away and such dust or scrapings must be put in the Holy Repository If it fell without the Corporal upon the Napkin Mappam or any ways upon any Linen Cloth such Napkin or Linen must be carefully washed and that Water poured out into the Holy Repository The second Case is When by negligence (h) Ibid. c. 10. Sect. 12. any thing of the Blood is Spilt If it fell upon the Earth or upon a Board it must be licked up with the Tongue and the place scraped sufficiently and such scraping be burnt and the Ashes laid up in the Repository But if it fell upon the Altar-stone the Priest must sup up the Drop and the place be well washed and that water cast into the Repository If it fell upon the Altar-Cloths and the Drop sunk as far as the second or third Cloth those Cloths must be thrice washed where the Drop fell putting the Cup underneath to receive the Water and that Water thrown into the foresaid place And so it directs to such washing when it falls upon the Corporal alone or the Priest's Garments c. I cannot but here annex also the Constitution which the Reader may find in the Appendix to the History of the Church of Peterburgh Pag. 344. being the first of two there set down directing what is to be done when any negligence happens about the Lord's Body and Blood and how to expiate the Crime When there is so great negligence about the Lord's Body and Blood that it happens to fall downward or into any place where it cannot be fully perceived whether it fell and whether any of it came to the Ground Let the Matter be discovered as soon as may be to the Abbot or Prior who taking some of the Friars with him let him come to the place where this has happened And if the Body shall have fallen or the Blood have been spilt upon Stone or Earth or Wood or Mat or Tapestry or such like let the dust of the Earth be gathered part of that Stone be scraped part of that Wood Mat Tapestry or the like be cut away and cast into the Holy Repository But if the place where it fell cannot be plainly discovered and yet it appear that it fell downwards in that place and about the place where it is thought chiefly to have fallen let there be the like gathering Scraping cutting away and casting into the Holy Repository Then they by whose negligence this has happened in the next Chapter shall humbly declare their Fault and on their naked Bodies receive Judgment judicium nudi suscipiant and Penance be enjoined them either of Fasting or Whipping or Rehearsing so many Psalms or such like Which Persons going back to their places from their Punishment de judicio all the priests then present shall rise up and with all devotion offer themselves to receive Punishment Then he that holds the Chapter shall detain seven of them which he pleases to chuse to receive the Judgment of whipping and command the rest to go away The Chapter being ended all prostrating themselves together shall say seven Penitential Psalms in the Monastery beginning to sing them as they go out from the Chapter Then shall follow after the Psalms the Pater Noster with these Chapters and Collects Let thy Mercy O Lord be upon us Remember not our Iniquities The Lord be with you Let us pray Hear O Lord our Prayers and Spare the Sins of those that confess themselves to thee that they whose guilty Consciences do accuse them thy merciful Pardon may absolve them Or that other Collect. O God whose property is always to have Mercy or such other collect for Sins But if the Blood fell upon the Corporal or upon any clean Cloth and it be certain whether it fell let that part of the Cloth be washed in some Chalice and the first Water it was wash'd in be drunk off by the Friars the other two washings be cast into the Repository The said Fault must be discovered in the first Chapter but they alone by whose negligence this has happened shall receive the foresaid Discipline but all the Friars shall say over in the Monastery all the seven Psalms with the Chapters and Collects as was said before If that day the short one for the Dead shall be read in the Chapter let them first sing my words going into the Church After that the seven Psalms as aforesaid But if in any other manner a lighter negligence shall happen relating to this Sacrament the Friar by whose Fault it happened shall be punished with a lighter Revenge at the discretion of the Abbot or Prior. Thus I have given a sufficient Specimen of the strange Caution and Fears the Roman Church are under lest any thing should happen even to the very least Particle or Drop of the Sacrament that is dishonourable And indeed their Caution is very agreeable to their Perswasions as I have before often hinted But now if we turn our Eyes upon the Ancient Church tho' we cannot question either their Devotion or reverent Behaviour in all Acts of Religious Worship and particularly in this great One yet there is not to be found any such scrupulosities about minute things nor such frightful apprehensions in the case of unforeseen Accidents nor such Expiations as we have before heard of They did not forbear to use the Common Bread as I said before tho' it might be more liable to crumble they took their Share from one Common Loaf they received the Wine without intinction or sucking it through Pipes c. Which are all later Inventions since the Faith was innovated concerning the Eucharist But because this is only a Negative Argument I will therefore add a Positive one to demonstrate that the Ancients were far from these Scrupulosities and also that they came into the Church with Transubstantiation and not before viz. The Practice of Communicating Infants It is not my Business here to prove that this was the common Usage in the Church from the Times of S. Cyprian at least even to later Ages which has been done effectually by others