Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 _. IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/chemicalchangeinOOabbariGh 
 
r 
 
CJmtral Cjjange 
 
 in ttt 
 
 €m|banft. 
 
 3it four letters CSe^iomg: 
 tje relationgf of faitj to 
 fenfe, from tje fcenclb 
 of laqueg? ^btiatiie, tip 
 3|o5n Ml. i^ameraep, ^.9^. 
 
 X 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF 
 
 CALIFORNIA. 
 
 In vamao they worihip me, teaching for doftrincs 
 the commandments of men. — Matt. vii. 7. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 SAMPSON LOW, SON, AND MARSTON, 
 
 MILTON HOUSE, LUDGATE HILL. 
 
 PUBLISHED FOR THE EDITOR, 
 

<g.t 
 
 TRIBUTE 
 OF FRIENDSHIP TO 
 
 ©enot agatias Eometo, 
 
 ENVOY EXTRAORDINARY AND MINISTER 
 
 PLENIPOTENTIARY, 
 
 AT WASHINGTON, FROM MEXICO. 
 
 iz^l 
 
i 
 
Cranflator'0 ^xtfut. 
 
 HE dejign of Louis XIV. to commit Turcnne 
 to the Roman creed gave the firjl impulje to 
 the controverjy that clojed with theje caujlic 
 letters of the Dean of Killaloo. 
 
 Louis, by injlinfl, bigot and defpot, tempted the ambition 
 of the chief captain of the age. 
 
 The politic Port Royalijls fent the Marjhal a thejis, 
 charging the aSual prejence on the Protejlant faith, and 
 change of faith to be impojQible. 
 
 Anne dc Nompar, his wife, an ardent Calvinijl, doubting 
 the Jlability of her hujband, he Jurviving her, induced 
 Claude, the great polemic of France, to expofe the fallacies 
 of Port Royal. 
 
 The cordial reception, by the Roman laity, throughout 
 
Tranjlator's Preface, 
 
 Europe, of Claude's Critique — written on a journey from 
 Languedoc to Montauban, circulated only in manujcript — 
 evoked the able work of Arnauld and Nicole, — La Per- 
 petuite de lafci dans FegUfe catholique fur r Eucharijlie. 
 
 Claude replied : Arnauld rejoined : Nouet, the Jefuit, 
 came to the relief of Arnauld, in the Journal des Sfavans : 
 Claude anjwered Nouet in the Provincial Letter that called 
 out two more folios from Arnauld, which Claude met with 
 equal ability and learning. A clique of the Janjenijls, 
 fecretly pleajed with the confufion of Port Royal, yet bound 
 in honor to appear in the lijls, ijjued their Juji prejudices 
 againji Cahinifm : Claude reviewed it in his majlerly 
 Defenfe de la Reformation. 
 
 Abbadie's iron pen, ever nibbed with mercilejs courtejy, 
 now the majjive mace of Richard, now wary and keen as the 
 Saracen's cimetar, gave the coup de grace to the Papal hero 
 of the clerical tilt. Our author was born in the Canton of 
 Berne, 1654: he Jludied at Saumur, was do^iorated at 
 Sedan and injlalled Pajlor of the French church of Berlin at 
 the injlance of Count d'Efpence. 
 
 He left his pajlorate to follow the fortunes of Marjhal 
 
Tranjlator s Preface, 
 
 Schomberg ; in Holland, they joined the Prince of Orange in 
 his Britijh coup d' Etat of 1688. 
 
 After the death of Schomberg, who fell in the battle of 
 the Boyne, Abbadie was prejented to the benefice of the 
 Savoy, London, and /oon after, preferred to the Deanery of 
 Killaloo, Ireland : he died in 1727. 
 
 His Traite de la Verite de la Religion Chretienne^ won the 
 applaufe of all Chrijlian fe6ls, and Jlill Jerves as a rich 
 armory to the Church. 
 
 The Jimple quejlion raijed at Port Royal, had involved 
 the entire Latin dogma ; that every atom of the elements^ by 
 confecration^ is changed into the natural hody^ foul^ and di- 
 vinity of the Son of God^ and to the blood that flowed from his 
 fide ; that very body, born of a virgin^ that hung upon the 
 crofs^ rofe from the dead^ and fits at the right hand of the 
 father. 
 
 To this tejl of faith, Rome is pledged no lefs by the 
 decrees of Lateran and Trent, than by the blood of that 
 noble army of martyrs who had not fo learned Chrifl, 
 
 She enforces it by threats of damnation, and ignores all 
 dodrine uncovered by the concurrence of the Apojlles, the 
 
Fathers and the Church, at all times and in all places : in 
 her own terje language, femper^ et ubique^ et ah omnibus 
 creditum. 
 
 The fubjed derives a fpecial interejl from the Quixotry of 
 her appeal to jcripture, which in waiving the frequent aegis 
 of tradition from her mojl offenjive and leajl tenable tenet, 
 expofes a tendon- Achilles to the jejl of the flippant, the 
 Jhafts of wit and the fcorn of reafon. 
 
 Probable idolatry invejls the quejlion with yet a deeper 
 interejl ; for if the dogma is not true, and the Roman 
 latriant jujlified by intention : intention atones all idolatry, 
 as all idolaters worjhip God in his image or in his works. 
 
 If the dogma is true, and by failure of intention of the 
 Priejl, the bread is unchanged to the living God, or Jhould a 
 defiant doSrine, adopted on credit, prove falje, is the 
 Catholic idolater fecure in the jponjbrjhip of his Church, 
 or in the funded merits of her faints ? No fads in hijlory 
 are more tangible than its birth, growth and canonical 
 adoption. 
 
 Like the figment of Purgatory until the Council of 
 Florence, and the immaculate conception of our own day. 
 
Tranjlator* s Preface. 
 
 1 1 
 
 this monkijh bantling was jojlled, de opinioney until vox 
 ecclefiae was forced to affiliate or ignore it. 
 
 The Fathers, indeed, exalted the efficacy of the fupper : 
 they hallowed the Jignificants by names of things Jignified, 
 and ajcribed to the blejOing a myjlic virtue, conjbnant to 
 Anglican teaching : yet the elements retained their normal 
 ejjence, and were tranjubjlantiated into our flejh, the living 
 Jacrifice: that, in the language of St. Augujline, neither 
 truth may be wanting in the Sacrament^ nor Pagans have 
 occafton to make us ridiculous for drinking the blood of one Jlain. 
 
 The idol Schijm of the eighth century, determined the 
 Greek dodrine. 
 
 The Seventh Ecumenical Council at Conjlantinople, a.d. 
 754, unanimoujly condemned the worjhip of images : their 
 decree ran : — the Savior having left us no other image of 
 himfelfy but the Sacrament^ in which the fubjiance of the 
 bread is the image of his body^ we ought to make no other 
 image of our Lord, 
 
 The Second Council of Nice, in 787, annuls the aft of 
 Conjlantinople, affirming the Sacrament after confecration to 
 be properly Chriji*s body and blood; not the image and antitype. 
 
12 Tranjlator s Preface. 
 
 This was the firjl official notice of the carnal prejence : 
 Rome trod in the jleps of Greece. 
 
 Pafcajius Ratbert, a BenediSine monk, a.d. 831, was 
 the firjl to give the novelty its odious form and prominence 
 in the wejlern Church ; it made him Abbot of Corbey, 
 provoked a Jharp conflict with Abbot Frudegard, a prompt 
 rebuke from the Scholiajls, and Jevered him from his abbey. 
 
 Pajcajius was anjwered by the learned Ratram, his 
 fubordinate, by the Bijhop of Auxerre, and by Scotus, the 
 father of fcholajlic divinity, all of them living and dying in 
 Roman communion ; ample proof that the change of Jub- 
 jlance was not then organic law : we oppofe this error, Jaid 
 the Archbijhop of Mentz, with all our might. 
 
 In the eleventh century, it is Jlill an open quejlion. 
 
 Berenger, archdeacon of Angers 1059, ^J diSfation of 
 the Council of Rome, Nicholas II. prejiding, abjures the 
 figure in form of execration againjl all who deny the true 
 body and true blood of our Lord to be veritably and fenfibly 
 handled and broken by the Priejiy and veritably and fenfibly 
 
 GROUND BY THE TEETH OF THE FAITHFUL. 
 
 Nicholas fends the glad tidings of the redemption of the 
 
Tranjlator s Preface, 13 
 
 Church from fcandal, throughout Italy, Gaul, Germany 
 and wherever the error had reached. Berenger, ejcaped 
 from the Council, forthwith retrafts his abjuration, on the 
 ground of coercion. 
 
 This feature of the creed Jeems to be canonically tranquil 
 for twenty years, although the Church has deteded a pravity 
 of Berenger^ and doubts that his didion, unlejs carefully 
 rendered, may favor of the leaven of herefy, in making parts 
 of Chriji's body. 
 
 Berenger is cajoled by a fafe condud of Gregory VII. to 
 the Sixth Council of Rome, 1079 : he and others boldly 
 advocate the figure. 
 
 A minority of the 150 Bijhops, after a Jharp Jlruggle, 
 yield to the majority vote. Berenger, in fear of perjbnal 
 fafety, revokes the retra6!ion of his abjuration, and again 
 relieves the anxiety of the Church, by defining the faith 
 in a Jbunder form of words, to wit : the creed of Nicholas, 
 and his Council of 113 Bijhops, amended by judicious 
 omijftons : all which Berenger repudiates by manifejlo, when 
 jafe in France. 
 
 The manner of the Eucharijl, apparently quieted at 
 
H 
 
 Tranjlator s Preface. 
 
 Lateran, is bitterly contejled after the lapfe of three cen- 
 turies, between the Dominicans and Francijcans at Trent, 
 the lajl general council of the Roman Church — the nuncio 
 Verona's compromije resolution dire£!s, the ufe of as few 
 words as pojjtble^ and terms fufficiently general to meet the 
 views of both. 
 
 It is a grave thought that a Je^tion of Chrijl's flock, 
 retaining traits by which Protejlants might profit, Jbmetime, 
 champion of the opprejjed, the kebla of learning, the altar 
 of Jacred art, cherijhing at the meridian of Jcience, the 
 jlagnant policy that persecuted Galileo, libels public fchools 
 as public pejis^ and liberty of confcience as the liberty of per- 
 dition. 
 
 Still more Jad, that a Church embracing within her pale 
 ]b many, with whom — through the mercies of unpromijed 
 grace — we trujl to tabernacle in the Jpirit land : pretends 
 to do what God cannot do ; create again the ineffable, Jelf- 
 exijlent I AM the uncreated creator. 
 
 Pagans, it is true, carve and worjhip their Gods, and can- 
 nibals eat their fellow-man : yet, in the annals of time, nay, 
 in the fancies of fable, none but the devotees of Mary and 
 
Tranjlators Preface, 
 
 her Son, animated with a firm hope^ penetrated with a lively 
 faith, inflamed with an ardent charity^ in an unknown 
 tongue, chaunt a crujl, into the body, foul and divinity 
 of their Maker and Redeemer, adore and Jwallow him. 
 
 Yet thefe are they, that claim exclujive right to wear the 
 ermine of reajbn, and to bear the vejjels of the Lord. 
 
 Had anathema dominion of thought, ocean would not 
 wed ocean with the iron ring, nor vapor Jweep the whirl- 
 wind — lord of fpace — nor Jcience, attejl Jehovah's glory, 
 and her holy mijjion, with the records of the rocks : nor 
 range the Jkies, to map the mazes of a thoujand worlds, nor 
 forge the bolts of heaven into bonds of Chrijlian love, 
 pealing hofannas over zones, flajhing paeans through the 
 floods, thrill the planet with a common pulje. 
 
 The piety of the Propaganda would be exhaujled in the 
 cruel artifice of tenors, the baptifm of bells, the torture of 
 heretics, the benediSion of horjes and ajjes, and in hawking 
 the mercies and manjions of another world. 
 
 When dejpotijm was fecure in ignorance, her Jpecious 
 ceremonial, her menacing oubliette and thumb-Jcrew could 
 Jhape the creed of the Sabot ; now, the fullen pupil of reform 
 
Tranjlator' s Preface. 
 
 taught that the world moves, Jpite of councils and curjcs, 
 renews her overtures to the Jenje of Jight. 
 
 Who can forbear a Jmile at your vijible miracles, your 
 winking and weeping madonnas, your fluxing the clotted 
 blood of Januarius, your forejls of Fera Crux? If thoje 
 fruits of fanciity are not impojlures to magnify the priejl, 
 give us a founder word. 
 
 Are your invijible miracles lejs prejiimptuous ? if wifer 
 than Omnijcience you Jubvene his polity by fraud, are 
 you Lord of Omnipotence, that you degrade the infinite 
 to the finite — jpeak into re-exijlence him that Jpake and 
 it was done, and multiply and Jacrifice in countlejs millions, 
 him that holdeth ^the waters in the hollow of his hand^ him 
 that inhabiteth eternity? 
 
 The Incarnation of the majs, that filches the miracles 
 from Chrijl, the foulejl Jlain of the Roman herefy, her 
 Jlake and fagot ultimatum ; a living fpring of laxity within, 
 and defedion from her fold, is the great gulf that funders 
 the unreformed from the universal church ; a putrid corpje 
 chained to St. Peter's Keys. 
 
You refer us to your own authority, we refer you to Patrijlic 
 authority, and to the author of authority : if you abide by 
 Holy writ, Abbadie tries the ijjue by the ordeal to which 
 Chrijl and his apojlles ajjigned it. 
 
 The Latin bride of Chrijl, overjhadoived by the power of 
 the moji high ; pliant, at her need or choice, wanton and vin- 
 didive where Jhe dare — united — unchurched by our Eajlern 
 mother, ignored by the Britijh Church planted in perjbn by 
 the apojlles, repudiated by her Jijler of Avignon ; frantic 
 anathemas bandied between rival popes ; councils wrangling 
 with councils, councils with Popes — Apojlolic — her Prelacy 
 brawling, fordid and profligate — her Hierarchs, fervi fervo- 
 rum Dei, always arrogant ; vicars of Chrijl, not feldom im- 
 pious and infamous — her creed ; the fame to-day ^ yefierday 
 and forever, Jhifting with the wind — her mangling and 
 jhackling of Scripture — her cloijlered and clerical celibacy; 
 its terrific readion ; her denial of Chrijl, prefaged in thofe 
 jlartling words, what have I to do with thee ? her ufurpation 
 of the Godhead ; her ajjumption of tranjbmnipotence — ««- 
 erring; a millennium of fchifm, pollution, fubterfuge and 
 crime fuperjcribed with God's name, had nerved the 
 
i8 
 
 Tranjlators Preface, 
 
 Chrijlian world for the fiat of the firjl bold Jpirit that 
 dared confront power with truth. 
 
 Time is the crucible of Jujlice; divine rights are merged 
 in Jong and Jlory ; Pontiffs and Princes reign by the grace 
 of the majfes. 
 
 Chrijl's nuncios conferred and revoked crowns in heaven 
 and on earth. Spain alone, the only Chrijlian harbor of 
 thejlaver, offers an ajylum to Pius, the only living Sovereign, 
 Chrijlian or Pagan, that has given language to fympathy with 
 human bondage. 
 
 By the laws of reaSion, Germany is Jceptical, France, in- 
 fidel ; the Papacy of Ireland, the price of her blood, in- 
 dependence and profperity, but an ulcer of Saxon hate. 
 
 Millions of Fenians brave Pope and priejlhood ; Scan- 
 dinavia, Holland, Prujjia, loathe their mediaeval hujks ; the 
 Jceptre of Europe is Protejlant by edi£i of the needle gun ; 
 the dry bones of Chili, Brazil, Peru, live at the touch 
 of progrejs ; Mexico has faith in freedom. 
 
 Italy, the cradle and grave of bigotry, has enfranchijed the 
 word of God, and the voice of nature ; Dominican cells, in- 
 quijitors' dens, ring with the clarion tones of Gavazzi ; con- 
 
Tran/lators Preface, 
 
 ventual mortmains are jecularized, vows of chajlity arc 
 voidable, clerical marriage, a civil contrail ; the Carbine, her 
 Go/pel, 
 
 The fuccejjor of Peter, vidim of the fuccejjbr of Pepin, 
 donor of Peter's patrimony, the tribute of Pepin's ujurpcd 
 crown of France; vice-gerent of God, omitted at fecular 
 councils, Jlripped of his kingdom of this zuorld, his pajloral 
 imprecations recoiled, Jheathes his vicarial Jword by com- 
 mand of his earthly majler. 
 
 Such are the repayments of divine vengeance — the fall of 
 Rome conjecrates the herejy of Luther. 
 
 No one who heeds the leJOfons of pajt, or pajjing hijlory, 
 can doubt, that Papifm lacks but the power to procrujl all 
 dij^idents to Theophagian rule ; the fame to-day^ yefterday 
 and forever. 
 
 It is no idle fear, that the Jacred college has final views in 
 the United States, a prize worthy her traditions ; the hun- 
 dred millions that will tread that foil in half a century, will 
 awe the world, for good or ill. 
 
 We dijlrujl that ^xxdidizn folicitude for the welfare of four 
 millions of liberated Africans, whoje liberation Romanijls 
 
20 
 
 TranJIator's Preface. 
 
 oppofed ; Jlill more, thoje faithful Jhepherds pojled on the 
 prairies, to prote^ the Chr ijii an flock ^ expofed to the incur/ions 
 of mercenaries and the ravages of wolves. 
 
 It may be a Napoleonic idea, in virtue of his temporal 
 vicariate, at once to cut the Papal knot, avenge the prejlige 
 of France, juUied by his Mexican fiafco, and rejlore ajcend- 
 ancy to the Latin race, by Jhifting to theje partes infidelium, 
 the Political See, the Anachronijm, the Solecijm, the 
 nuifance of Europe. 
 
 Our Jlern hybrid of Puritan and Huguenot, Jlill tolerant, 
 even of intolerance, is watchful of ambitious faith ; face to 
 face with civil and jpiritual liberty, Romanijm will be 
 deromanized — the Papal upas will wilt in a free Jbil. 
 
 May theJe crumbs thrown on the waters in the fpirit of 
 charity and peace, attra^l the candor and manhood of the 
 Roman laics with whom we mujl live, and would not clajs 
 imperium in imperio. 
 
 Your own records verify all our fads ; you are confcious of 
 the Papal chill at the Protejlant hearth, you cannot doubt 
 that loyalty to your Church is treajbn to your flag. 
 
 You know that both fexes and all ages kneel to cell- 
 
Tranjlators Preface, 
 
 bate foreign officials, not yet canonized, never republican, 
 in loco Dei ; who, in privacy of penitent and priejl ; Jecrecy, 
 guarded by the curje of Rome ; Jecrecy, above the law ; 
 ferret the unguarded thoughts we dare not confide to man, or 
 blujh to confejs in prayer. 
 
 You know your altars in our eyes, reek with Jefuit pejli- 
 lence ; with blood of Albigenjes. How my pen quivers with 
 the cry of the Vaudois, hounded to the flaming pen — the 
 wail of Jlrangling infancy — the Jlifled groans of blood- 
 fmeared hoary heads — the martyr's prayer— let not this be 
 laid to their charge — hark — that agonized Jhriek, courjing 
 the heart-throb of Jix hundred years — the mother in the 
 gorging holocaujt, appeals with charred hands to the God of 
 vengeance ; the frantic daughter, vainly Jlruggling from the 
 Catholic Satyr's clutch, to purge her Jhame in the embers of 
 her mother's breajl. 
 
 Maidens under vows to charity and mercy, transformed by 
 one tajle of blood from fojjiled fweetnejs to furies, with 
 gnajhing teeth, Jwell the Veni Creator of the army of the 
 Crofs, infpired by faints Dominic and Francis, led by mailed 
 priejls, fent and abfolved by Innocent III. now with Jurplus 
 
Tranjlator' s Preface, 
 
 righteoufneJ*s, mediators for your Jins before the throne of 
 Grace — Oh, God ! how weak are words to paint that carni- 
 val of hell ! 
 
 Is it a marvel that good men were Jlung to mad revenge ? 
 Is it a marvel that every Latin fpire, in our eyes, is a plague 
 Jpot to its vicinage, a beacon of craft and delujion, of blaf- 
 phemy, turpitude and tyranny, lurid with the problem of 
 the future ? 
 
 Is it a marvel that Bible Chrijlians, grateful to the wardens 
 of the oracles — albeit, living monuments of prophetic truth, 
 divine wrath and their ownjhame — can eajier condone the 
 honejl, unobtrujlve negation of I/rael, than the injblent 
 aggrejjion of profanity ? 
 
 Is it a marvel that the ban of focial leprofy goads the Jen- 
 Jitive Papijl to bigotry or infidelity ? 
 
 We fee, by faith, the meteor legate of free thought, linger 
 over the manger of Bethlehem ; the vail is rent ; it Jhoots 
 from Calvary in its path of empire. 
 
 By faith, it fpans the firmament with the arc of promije, 
 to its watch and ward, a fixed Jlar, over the cradle of human 
 rights. 
 
Tranjlators Preface. 
 
 Opprcjed of all lands, you are pilgrims to its /hrine, and 
 Herod aljb has come to worjhip ; will you be apojlles of that 
 holy Jymbol or puppets of a blind creed ? 
 
 You are moulding the fate of dijlant ages ; as the Jlern 
 minutes are chajing the Jhadows of time, invoke, not your 
 Jaints, but the nobler injlinds God has breathed into your 
 hearts ; go, not to the Bulls of your Leos and Borgias ; 
 go, kneel and watch at Gethjemane ; go, ajk the 
 oracle of Olivet, if the faith that forgot her majk in 
 the bloody revels of Bartholomew's night, till every Catholic 
 heart had beat Amen to the Gloria in Exceljis of the Vatican 
 — if the faith that left her majk at the farce of Trent with 
 the Jhout that Jhook the dome, CURSED, CURSED, 
 CURSED BE ALL HERETICS— Jhall be the faith of 
 your children ? 
 
 We have freely tajked the magnanimity of Jlrength, to 
 tone the ungracioufnefs of truth, almojl at her peril ; 
 gladly, with the Jandlion of duty, would we walk backward 
 with our Jijler's garments and cover our jijter's Jhame. 
 
 New York. 
 
preface 
 
 PREFIXED TO THE EDITION, FROM WHICH THE FOLLOWING 
 TRANSLATION IS MADE. 
 
 RIVATE judgment, the gijl of the Reforma- 
 tion, is denounced by the Church of Rome, as 
 the Jburce of error and fchijm : the highway of 
 atheijm and herejy. 
 
 In the blindnefs of zeal, Jhe forgets that convidion relates 
 to faith, as the jblar rays to vijion, or as digejlion to ajQimi- 
 lation. 
 
 Bojjuet's raid on Protejlant variances, the eloquent ejjays 
 of Bellarmin, Duperron and Baronius all challenge our 
 reafon. Is Rome the rule of faith, the touchjlone of truth, 
 becauje jhe claims the proxy of omnipotence? does Jhe 
 ajjiime the baton of infallibility ? we examine her crcden- 
 
26 
 
 Preface. 
 
 tials ; we collate the Fathers with the decretals and 
 councils. 
 
 If Jhe exults in unity : to find that one true united 
 Church ; we jean her records, which rebuke her idle boajl 
 with the quarrels of Janjenijls, of Molinijls, of Quietijls, of 
 the Church of Abbe Chatel, of Ultramontanijls, and of 
 Galileans with their endlejs contejls. 
 
 To unravel her fuccejfion : we trace her bickerings 
 through centuries, and encounter a dilemma, too jubtle for 
 the Council of Conjlance, which votes It f elf above the Papacy 
 and depofes in a breath three fovereign Pontiffs.^ 
 
 Should a Protejlant, Jew or Heathen feek ghojlly counfel, 
 a priejl will arrogate the courje he denies to them ; whenever 
 Rome warns us, that there is no Jafety beyond her pale, Jhe 
 exhorts with Paul; prove all things^ holdfaji that which is good. 
 
 If rejearch is delujive, if truth may be fought only in the 
 ruts of authority : our mijjions are vicious : all Jhould 
 
 * This fchifm began in i 378 : was fufpended in 1414. by the Council 
 of Conftance, and forthwith renewed ; furvived to the Council of Bale 
 in 1431, and ended in 1477 by the abdication of Felix V. who con- 
 fented to refume his cardinalate, though elected Pope by the Council of 
 Bale. 
 
Preface, 
 
 cling to the faith of their Fathers ; there live, and 
 there die. 
 
 IJlam has her vouchers : Jhe dooms the pervert to death, 
 and threatens him with the pains and gates of hell. 
 
 Let us imagine a coUiJion between Turks and Papijls. 
 
 The locum tenens of God cannot err in faith : the language 
 of our Dolors rejoins the Mojlem. 
 
 The Popes have an unbroken Juccejjion : Jo aljb have our 
 Imams : and CdXi^ihs fuperadd temporal to fpiritual power. 
 
 Rome may glory in the pomp of her temples, in her 
 Jblemn ritual, in her diJcipHne, in her fajls : IJlam alfo has 
 her Jlately mofques, prejcribed prayers, and her vigils, more 
 rigid than thofe of Rome. 
 
 Does Rome ban with herejy all who rejeft her rule ? the 
 dijciples of Ali and Omar mutually curfe : they have their 
 Jaints, pilgrims and legends : 'tis true, they lack a holy office, 
 armed with the terrors of the Jlake and rack to awe the 
 froward, and win Jhecp to the Prophet's fold : but in con- 
 quejl, heretics mujl cleS between the Koran and the bow- 
 Jtring. 
 
 Or fuppoje an infidel, convinced of injpired truth, and the 
 
28 
 
 Preface, 
 
 completion of prophejy, perplexed by jarring creeds : you 
 quote your councils, your divines, your decrees of Juccejjion. 
 
 He learns that the Greek Church, the Arminian, Nejlo- 
 rian, Ethiopian has each her divines, her councils and her 
 fuccejjion : he Jlfts their Jlandards ; how can he elfe decide 
 between a breaker and worjhipper of images, who both 
 appeal to Ecumenical Councils ? 
 
 The cyclic logic, " Rome has Scripture authority, and 
 Rome is the exponent of Scripture," ignores the wholejbme 
 checks of judge and party. 
 
 To enjure our obedience, a Church mujl hold God's 
 warrant: his word is our Jlay and Jtaff: fearch the Scrip- 
 tures^ for in them ye think ye 4jave eternal life^ and they are 
 they which tejiify of me : Believe not every Spirit ^ but try the 
 SpiritSy whether they are of God: hlejfed is he that readethy 
 and they that hear the words of this prophejy. 
 
 The youth of Timothy was devoted to facred Jludy, and 
 the Bereans were applauded for fearching the Scriptures 
 daily y whether thofe things were fo» 
 
 Cheered by Chrijl's promi/e of his Holy Spirit to guide 
 him into all truth, the Chrijlian bears in mind, that the 
 
Preface, 
 
 Heavens and the Earth Jhall pafs aivay^ but the words of 
 Chr'iji pafs not away; that all Scripture is given by infpiration 
 of God, and is profitable for do£frine,for reproof, for corre£lion^ 
 for inflruffion in righteoufnefs , 
 
 SubmiJJion to God's word is the Shibboleth of the Re- 
 formation : the Socinian, with whom the Romanijls wijh to 
 confound us, — neither Chrijlian nor infidel — exalts reajbn 
 above the Bible, and with the daring of criticijm, reJeSs any 
 faS, or any dodrine, that humbles his pride or pajjes his 
 wifdom. 
 
 Although the Scriptures may often affert^ yet I do not believe 
 that Chrifi is God: for I hold it to be abfurd to believe that 
 which is beyond the reach of my reafon : is the language of 
 Smalcius, their leading polemic. 
 
 The Bible, Jays Priejlly, chief of a kindred jchool : was 
 written with no particular infpiration,'^ 
 
 Such, are not the views of the Reformation : the word of 
 God is our Jble guide, our light and hope : crying with 
 Samuel ; fpeak. Lor d^ for thy fervants hear. 
 
 * Prieftly — Hiftoire des opinions primitives, vol. 4. p. 5. Belfham 
 fur Wilberforce, p. 19. Inveftigations calmes — pp. 451, 452. 
 
Preface, 
 
 Variance gives bolder relief to the unity of our faith : 
 hallelujahs rife above the din of difcord : Anglican and 
 Gallican : Helvetian and Lutheran ; all profejs the fall of 
 man; the incarnate word; falvation through the Atone- 
 ment ; a trinity in unity : knowing nothing fave J ejus Chrijiy 
 and the affluence of his grace and love. 
 
 Rome confines her Laity to her dida, lejl the Jludy of 
 Scripture might wreck them on the Scylla or Charybdis of 
 herejy or infidelity. 
 
 Experience Jhows, how ill-fujlained are they in the hour of 
 death, who rely on human faith : the Priejl pronounces the 
 words of absolution : the conjcience anjwers ; there is no 
 peace. 
 
 We humbly confide the weal of Chrijl*s Church, to the 
 broadcajl of his Holy word : that man may quench his thirjl 
 at the fountain of living waters. 
 
 God grant that theje letters may rejcue many /rom Baby- 
 lon^ that they receive not of her plagues. 
 
(apwr--^^;^-^ 
 
 
 Sii^ 
 
 
 f CH 
 
 ^(H 
 
 m 
 
 ^^^ 
 
 mM 
 
 
 
 W 
 
 ^ 
 
 1 
 
 l^^i 
 
 
 ^^(H!^^ 
 
 ^M 
 
 m 
 
 i^M 
 
 1 
 
 <^%!B3?^ ^ 
 
 
 1^ 
 
 ^^4= 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ^^\ 
 
 i!/ 
 
 ^Letter ifirtt. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVEliSITY OF 
 
 CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Y the tejl I gave you wHerT we lajl met, it is 
 eajy to determine, if the Fathers allowed the 
 fubjlantial prefence of Chrijl's body and blood 
 in the Eucharijl : their views are fubordinate only to Scrip- 
 ture, with which we now confront the Roman dogma. 
 Two points comprije the iJOfue. 
 Is the Bible our rule of faith ? 
 What are its teachings ? 
 
 You, a Chrijlian by grace, will not quejlion, if Holy Writ 
 announces to man the whole counjel of God, and invokes in 
 behalf of faving truths, even the aid of example and precept. 
 You will admit, that its injpired penmen would not ignore a 
 
22 Material Prefence, 
 
 grave myjlery; a covenant of mercy, involving faith and 
 practice, and that all Revelation mujt harmonize. 
 
 Lijlen with candor to the lejjbns of injpiration : I engage, 
 to tear the majk of Divine authority from this monkijh 
 fidion. 
 
 We fault the Church of Rome with 
 
 ^Ije oral mantiucatioix of tje ILorti'^ ftoti]? ; 
 
 %^z material prtCence ; 
 
 %^z clianp of futiflattce ; 
 
 W^z tDorC!)fp of t!)e »)acrament •, 
 
 (ISli't!)!) old ing; tlje Cup -, and 
 
 W^z Cacrifice of t^e maC^. 
 
 This Church ajjumes a literal eating from the words of 
 the injlitution and the Jixth chapter of St. John : we rely on 
 Origen and Augujline, thoje great lights of the primitive 
 Church, and on J ejus Chrijl, as Jafe teachers of divine truth. 
 
 If we render literally thofe words ofjefus Chrijl : if you do 
 not eat my flejh and drink my blood : that letter kills ^ is the 
 emphatic di6!um of Origen. 
 
 ^ Homll. vii. in Leviticum. 
 
 i 
 
Material Prefence, 
 
 Augujline Jujlains him ; the language that prohibits a 
 wrongy or commands fomething ufeful or beneficent is not figura- 
 tive : but if it commands a crime ^ or forbids what is beneficent 
 or ufefuly it is metaphorical^ hence the mandate; to eat the 
 fefio of the fon of man^ and drink his blood-, enjoins a com- 
 munion with his pajfton^ in recalling profitably and fiueetly 
 that his flefi) was torn for our fins} 
 
 Our Lord, as if to forejlall all pojjible cavil, promptly de- 
 fines his ordinance : the words that I f peak unto you^ they are 
 fpirit, and they are life :^ and as Rome admits, that, Chrijl 
 here direds a Jpiritual and quickening conJlru6!ion of his 
 language, Jiich Jenje mujl warrant a Jlrid eating, or fails to 
 jujlify her theory. 
 
 This United Church writhing under his lajh, charges 
 Origen with myjlic tendencies ; and we reply ; could that 
 great divine, believing that he aftually fwallowed the flejh 
 and blood of his Redeemer, ajQTert, that the letter kills and 
 efcape conviction of faljehood and blajphemy? She con- 
 
 ^ Auguft. Lib. iii. cap. xvi. de doftrina chriftiana. 
 » John vi. S3, 63. 
 
34 
 
 Material Prefence. 
 
 tends, that Augujline in the above citation conformed to the 
 ruling of Rome, rejeding only, the fenje of the Caper- 
 naites ; a jlrange delujion indeed, as he clings to the 
 metaphor, lejl the letter might command a wrong or a crime. 
 
 Let us humor for a moment the caprice of our literal 
 friends. 
 
 With touching modejly, and in deference to revelation, 
 they exclude our fenjes — as falje witnejjes in matters of 
 faith: — we renounce our fenjes — are they now content? — 
 far from it — with Jlill more engaging naivete^ they demand 
 the Jurrender of our reafon — as a Jacrifice to God — and we 
 Jubmit, if God requires it. 
 
 But what is this long expeded Revelation, this full 
 equivalent to all the functions of body and jbul, and every 
 inJlinS of nature? a Jingle phraje — by the Son of God, 
 Origen and Augujline pronounced allegorical, b}'^ Rome, 
 literal : has fatuity a lower deep ? 
 
 To identify the language of John with that of Chrijt, you 
 will pleafe obferve that the words : take^ eat^ this is my 
 body ; and, he that does not eat my flejh and drink my bloody 
 though not Jpoken in connexion, are but varied terms : and 
 
Material Prefence. 
 
 that as both, if cither, are bound by a quickening and 
 fpiritual jenfe, the letter of both, if cither, muft feem to com- 
 mand a crime, 
 
 I now challenge a denial of any of theje points. 
 
 If the oral, has fcripturc authority, it is confined to the 
 above and parallel texts. 
 
 Thoje pajjages Jhould receive a figurative, fpiritual, and 
 quickening fenfe on the authority of Origen, Augujline and 
 of Chrijl himfelf. 
 
 That in Juch terms, we arc not bound to feck a grofs eating. 
 
 I further injijl, that if the letter is vague and inconjijlent, 
 or faljc and delujive, we are limited to the figure. 
 
 Our Lord was wont to illujlrate his le]]bns : he talks with 
 fijhermen; the preaching of the Gojpel is imaged by a 
 myjlical fijhing : near- a fountain — water, is the emblem of 
 his grace — he prcjjes the figure ; water, as gujhing up into 
 cndlefs life ; whofo drinks thereof Jhall never thirjl. 
 
 To Nicodemus, he Jays : except a man he horn again^ he 
 cannot fee the kingdom of God^^ and who fo jimple as Nicode- 
 
 ' John iii. 3. 
 
36 
 
 Material Prefence. 
 
 mus, and ajks : how can a man re-enter his mother's 
 womb? 
 
 To the hungry throng : labor not for the meat which 
 perijheth^ but for that meat which endureth to everlafting 
 life : ^ that it is his meat to do the will of his father. 
 
 Before Jpeaking of eating his flejh, and drinking his 
 blood : he declares — that he is the living hread^ which came 
 down from heaven and whofoever Jhall eat thereof Jhall never 
 hunger^ and all admit the bread to be an image, and the 
 hunger fpiritual. 
 
 Again, he Jays, he that eateth my fleJh and drinketh my 
 bloody dwelleth in me,^ and no one imagines that we can dwell 
 in Chrijl in a proper fenje : he then repeats : this is that 
 bread which came down from Heaven^ he that eateth of this 
 bread Jhall live for ever,^ 
 
 The Papal Church here makes a merit of necejOity, as 
 Chrijl cannot be properly bread, nor bread properly Chrijl, 
 and limits her letter to the terms eating and drinking. 
 
 * John vi. 27. 
 ^ John vi. ^d. 
 
 "" John vi. 35, 50, 51. 
 * John vi. 58. 
 
Material Prefence, 
 
 There then is the proper fenje, Jwarming with figures ; 
 the letter, engulfed in metaphor. 
 
 J ejus was rebuking the multitude which had Jaid : that 
 Mofes had given their fathers bread from heaven : but what 
 fign fheweji thou then^ that we may fee ^ and believe theef^ 
 
 He Jhews his gift to be greater than that of Mofes : the 
 j promijed bread, is living ; the true bread of Heaven ; he 
 I contrajls it with the manna. 
 
 He then calls that living bread himj*elf ; his flejh ; and 
 I thus exalts the living bread over the manna : they who 
 J cat the manna would hunger again, while whoever eat 
 j this bread would hunger no more ; they who eat the 
 J manna died, but whofo eat this bread would live for ever. 
 
 Such are the teachings of J ejus Chrijl, repeated and 
 « enforced by his own lips ; and in fuch fenJe, he requires us 
 3 to feed on his fleJh and blood. 
 
 Now, may I ajk our opponents when citing John's 
 ! Gofpel ; either, to deny that Juch are the lejfons of Chrijl, 
 or being Juch they favor an oral eating. 
 
 ' John vi. 30, 31. 
 
It feems to me, that Chrijl here oppofes the carnal to the 
 Jpiritual ; the manna, a fenjual bread to his flejh an emblem 
 of bread : the efFefi of the manna, a mortal life, to the 
 efficacy of his fleJh, eternal life : the manna feeds the body, 
 his fleJh feeds the heart : thus far no Chrijlian can dijjent. 
 
 If then, the fleJh of Chrijl be but the type of bread, meet 
 only to cherijh the foul and animate the fpirit ; does a Jlrid 
 conjiimption of his fleJh, or the nourijhment of our Jbuls by 
 a Jymbolic bread, anjwer to an eating in Jpirit and in faith ? 
 
 Now, if Chrijl, in figure, promifes bread from Heaven in 
 contrajl to the manna — in figure, declares his fleJh to be that 
 bread — in figure, affirms its Jufficiency to Jatisfy for ever, and 
 its all Jufficiency for jalvation : I injijl, that an exprejs apo- 
 calypfe only can clothe the words eating and drinking with a 
 proper and literal fenje. 
 
 We are told, that in the phraje : he who eats the bread 
 that I Jhall give him, Jh all never hunger : though the bread is 
 an image, and the hunger ideal : the eating, mujl be literal 
 to efcape the ban of herejy. 
 
 In our view, the ideas of hunger, bread, and eating Jeem 
 to bear Juch cloje and mutual relation, that when found 
 
Material Prefence, 
 
 united, and dependent, it is natural to refer them all, either 
 to the letter or the metaphor. 
 
 And when our Lord Jubjoins, except ye eat the Jiejh of the 
 ! Son of Mariy^ he implies the flejh which he calls bread : a 
 I bread capable of jatisfying. 
 
 This is no illujion of fancy, it is the emphatic language of 
 our Lord ; the ^read that I will give is ?ny flejh/^ 
 
 With what conjcience can they claim, that a fleJh which 
 i they admit to be mere bread, and can fatisfy, but in figure, 
 I ^(hould be eaten properly ? 
 
 I aljb contend, that the letter mars, while the trope retains 
 the truth and force of Chrijl*s teachings. 
 
 The eating in St. John has two jalient traits. 
 
 It is a condition of falvation : verily I fay unto you ; 
 
 except ye eat the fiejh of the Son of Man^ and drink his bloody 
 
 ) ye have no life in you :^ It is all Jufficient : whofo eateth my 
 
 ifejh and drinketh my bloody hath eternal life, and I will raife 
 
 him up at the laft day,^ 
 
 > John VI. 53. 
 ^ John vl. 53. 
 
 ' John vi. 51. 
 * John vi. 54.. 
 
40 Material Prefence, 
 
 Nor do I Jtand on debateable ground in alleging, that 
 there is a Jpiritual eating of Chrijl's body by faith. 
 
 The oral eating, is not ejfential, as the converted thief, the 
 catechumen or newly baptijed, barred by death or jujl hind- 
 rance from taking Chrijl in his Jiomach, does not forfeit grace. 
 
 It is not conclujive, as the jlandards of Rome dcr ounce 
 the mockery of an eating, without the concurrence of the 
 heart ;^ whereas the Jpiritual eating, is both a rule of faith, 
 and all Jufficient, the true partaker in ad, or will having 
 already pajjed from death to life. 
 
 Is then the carnal, void of every feature required by John's 
 Gofpel, or the Jpiritual eating which embraces all thoje fea- 
 tures, to be learned from the lejjbns of Chrijl ? 
 
 The Latin Church now feeks to evade the ijjue by garb- 
 ling Chrijl's ordinance, Jhe limits his promijes to worthy 
 eaters of his flejh. 
 
 Before adopting this view, I demand its authority : 
 reliance on St. Paul is hopelejs: he applies the terms, 
 worthy and unworthy, only to the reception of the bread : 
 whojb eateth the fleJh of Chrijl, eats it worthily ; becaufe it 
 is eaten in fpirit and in faith. 
 
 II 
 
Material Prefence. 
 
 Judas ate the bread of our Saviour, fays Augujline, but he 
 did not eat the bread, which is the Saviour, being an un- 
 worthy recipient. 
 
 However that may be, can we reconcile this rejlridion 
 with the tenor of Chrijl's preaching to the Jews ? that his 
 flejh, not the manna, is the true celejlial bread ; as the man- 
 na could not Jave their fathers from death ; but, his fleJh 
 fecures eternal life to thofe who eat it. 
 
 He Jimply compares the eating of his fleJh, with the 
 eating of the manna, irrefpedive of perjbnal merit. 
 
 Mark, Sir, how it enervates his language ; who can doubt, 
 if the fleJh of Jefus Chrijl, rent for our Jins, the obje6{ of our 
 faith and trujl, is more precious to us, than was the manna 
 to the IJraelites ? but why (hould the Jlrid eating of that 
 fleJh, by the faithful or faithlejs, have more efficacy than the 
 bread of Mofes ? 
 
 The manna could not fave the Jews from temporal or 
 eternal death, Jo, the grofs reception of Chrijl's fleJh, 
 exempts men, neither from the death of the body, as they 
 remain mortal ; nor from the death of the foul, as they are 
 fmners Jlill : by faith only are we faved. 
 
42 Material Prefence, 
 
 If then, a feeding on Chrijl by faith has all the poflible 
 efficacy of the manna, and its adual deglutition has no more 
 efficacy than the manna : the fpiritual, not the oral, fujlains 
 the truth and force of his teachings. 
 
 Do we live and dwell in Chrijl, by his entrance into our 
 throats, or into our hearts? by taking his flejh into our 
 mouths, or through the exercije of faith in the merits of that 
 fleJh, mangled for our Jins ? 
 
 Would not a Chrijlian in a Pagan land, v/ithout accejs to 
 the holy table lead a fpiritual life ? Will not Rome allow 
 that after the bread and wine have pajjed from the vijcera 
 in the courje of nature, the elements of life remain in the 
 heart? Are not faith and repentance the conjl'tuents of 
 fpiritual life ? how then can that eating be fenfual, which in 
 contrajl to the manna, is lifegiving ; life to the foul ; life 
 eternal ? 
 
 Other pajjages in John fortify our cafe : / a?n the bread of 
 life ; he that cometh to me, Jhall never hunger ; and he that 
 believe th on me Jhall never thirji^ 
 
 ' John vi. 35. 
 
 —I 
 
The claujes; he that cometh to me, and he that eateth 
 my Jiejh : he that believeth on me^ and, he that drinketh my 
 blood, arc obvious equipollents in the di6!ion of our Lord. 
 
 In the fame chapter, we aljb read, of a lifegiving eating ; 
 the negled of which is death: this eating, mujl be oral 
 jblely, or folely fpiritual, or fpiritual and oral ; in which lajl 
 fenfe, whojb eateth not Chrijl*s flejh, and drinketh not his 
 blood, both by mouth and faith, hath no life in him. 
 
 Our Lord did not command the oral folely, as the un- 
 holy derive no benefit therefrom : nor the joint reception, as 
 many can commune only in the dejire of the heart : ergo : 
 thofe texts enjoin a fpiritual eating of his body. 
 
 Again, Sir, Scripture is either metaphorical, or literal : if 
 thofe words in John are figurative, Rome admits a fymbolic 
 eating ; if literal, conjijlency demands a proper drinking of 
 the blood. 
 
 A natural drinking differs from a natural eating, unlefs 
 eating and drinking arc fynonyms : now the blood of 
 Chrijl, by the ufage of Rome, is no more drunk than eaten, 
 nor eaten than drunk ; as the blood, not parted from his 
 veins is received in the guife of bread and wine. 
 
 k 
 
44 
 
 Material Prefence. 
 
 There being no mean between real and typical Jleep, we 
 arc bound to believe that the dijciples knew no mean, 
 between drinking Chrijl's blood figuratively, and literally. 
 
 Thoje Jimple, earnejl men, unjchooled in metaphyjics, 
 who had never read Aquinas nor Scotus, would have in- 
 ferred, that their majler fpoke of drinking his blood either 
 Jpiritually or carnally : dwell in me : I am the vine; I am the 
 way; I am the door; I am the bread of life ; whofoever believeth 
 in me^ out of his belly Jhall flow rivers of living waters ; with 
 like tropes ringing in their ears, and training their minds to 
 recognize in figures, the veiling of jpiritual precepts under 
 Jcnjible images. 
 
 We now fubmit, that we are not chargeable with verbal 
 criticifm and wild theory in affirming, that Chrijl's literal 
 prejcript, to drink his bloody implies a literal drinking 
 
 That the reception of Chrijl's body, with blood in his 
 veins, under the forms of bread and wine, being no Icjs an 
 eating than a drinking, is not a proper drinking of his blood. 
 
 That, as an injunflion to eat his flejh, and drink his 
 blood, literally, cannot be obeyed in the Supper, nor el]e- 
 where, we are confined to the metaphor. 
 
 I 
 
Material Prefence, 
 
 Verily, Sir, that is a falfe pojition, which rejeSs the figure, 
 ! but dares not claim the letter : which culls from an alle- 
 j gorical chapter, two lone phrajes, for which they cxafl a 
 [ rigid fenfe, yet curjes thoje who do not drink our Lord's 
 i blood in a manner, not happily defined, but neither typical 
 I nor proper. 
 
 Carelejs, if the language of the Son of God is incoherent, 
 ! unconcerned, if its beauty, truth, and power are marred ; 
 \ the abortive letter mujl refute itjelf. 
 
 At war with Scripture, with fenfe, and with reafon, we 
 i leave them at variance with themfelves : fo much for the 
 j jixth chapter of John. 
 
 I am, &c, &c. 
 
^Letter Second 
 
 UNIVE^VSITY OF 
 
 CALlFOUNiA. 
 
 S we approach the words of the ordinance,^ call 
 
 to mind that St. Paul conjlantly Jlyles the Eu- 
 
 charijl, Bread: 2 that the difciples continued 
 
 Jleadfajlly in prayer and in breaking of bread r^ that Jefus 
 
 Chrijl vanijhed from their Jight, after breaking bread : * all 
 
 which, and like pajjages are allowed allujions to actual 
 Sacraments. 
 
 Were Paul and Luke at variance with Chrijl, we Jhould 
 be bound by the higher law, but as they fpake with his 
 Spirit, we mujl feek to harmonize their teachings. 
 
 The Church of Rome contends, that Paul applies the 
 
 * Matt. xxvi. 26. Mark xiv. 22. Luke xxii. 19. 
 » I Cor. xi. 23, 24, 25, &c. 3 Aas ii. 42. * Luke xxiv. 30, 31. 
 
48 
 
 Senfes and Reafon, 
 
 term bread to the body of Chrijl, bccauje his body is veiled 
 under the accidents of bread : we hold, that our Lord 
 honored the bread with the name of his body, in view, only, 
 of that body's myjlic prefence : hence, our ijjue with Rome, 
 is not, whether Scripture refers in figure to the Eucharijl ; 
 but whether, it employs the figure, in calling the Eucharijl, 
 the body of Chrijl. 
 
 I claim that we are free to conjult : 
 
 . <Dur CeitCe^ : 
 iDur reaCon : 
 %^z !)ol^ Scriptures? : 
 And tlje analoff^ of fait^* 
 
 Senfe. We rely on the fenjes, becauje the Son of God 
 calls them as witnejjes to his rejurredion, faying to his dif- 
 ciples. Handle me and fee ^ and who will doubt, that the 
 proof tendered by Chrijl, as a voucher for his truth, is com- 
 petent to decide the fpirit of his language ? 
 
 The fenfes aver that the Eucharijl is bread, and that 
 Chrijl Jpeaks in figure, not Paul and Luke. 
 
 f 
 
 * Luke xxiv. 39. 
 
Senfes and Heafon. 
 
 49 
 
 Reafon ajjures us, that as the Jimple body of Chrijl cannot 
 be in each atom of the bread, in full volume, and proportion: 
 a fynchronous tenant of divers places, it is more rational to 
 adopt the clearer phrafe of St. Paul than the objcurer term 
 employed by our Lord. 
 
 The reJeSion of reajbn as witnejs againjl faith, ajjumes the 
 Jlandards of Rome to be the arbiter of Chrijl' s language : 
 when Jhe Jhews her doctrine to be the doSrine of infpira- 
 tion, I jilence my reajbn ; until then, Jhe mujl not forbid me 
 Its aid, when perplexed between the lejjbns of Chrijl and 
 his apojlles. 
 
 And who are they that Jcorn the evidence of reajbn and 
 Jenje ? even they, whoje Jenjes reveal the exijlence of the 
 bread, and whoJe reajbn confirms their faith in Chrijl's 
 facramental prejence ; which if unjcen, muJl be in the nature 
 of fpirit, unlejs fenje and reafon, like the cloud-guide of 
 Ifrael, are light to them, but darknefs to us. 
 
 The Latin theory would be more plaujible, were we 
 arrayed againjl the Jacred Canon— lijlen — Jefus Chriji is 
 gone — he has left the earth — we Jhall have him no more with 
 us — we muji raife our hearts on high^ where Jefus is feated at 
 
50 
 
 Chemical Change in the Euchariji, 
 
 the right hand of God the Father — if he were on earthy he 
 would not even be Prieji — we muji wait until he Jhall come as 
 the lightnings which Jhineth from the Eaji even unto the Weft ; 
 and the Heavens Jhall be his habitation until the re-ejiablijh- 
 ment of all things. 
 
 Such is the tenor of Scripture, which never alludes to pre- 
 fence vijible, natural nor latent. 
 
 Scripture. This tenet jars with facred hijlory : our Lord, 
 before quitting the earth, often declares that he leaves the 
 Earth and goes to the Father. 
 
 The Church of Rome, here, draws her lines of viJible, and 
 invifible prefence, forgetting, that if Chrijl intended, that his 
 cloaked humanity Jhould dwell on the earth, and enter the 
 mouths and Jlomachs of his dijciples, he would furely have 
 noticed ^o conjbling a fa6i, when in the Jadnejs of their 
 hearts, he calls them his friends ; his little children ; ajjures 
 them tenderly of his love, and promijes not to leave them com- 
 fortlefs ; and that he would fend a Comforter who would guide 
 them into all truth. 
 
 The Son of God bars all prefence, warranting outlay in 
 behalf of his humanity : for ye have the poor with you always. 
 
Analogy, 5 1 
 
 and whenfoever ye will, ye may do them good^ hut me^ ye have 
 not always} 
 
 He here excludes, not merely that phyfical prefence, 
 admitting alms or expenfe, like Mary's honorary undion, 
 whofe value, provoked the cenfurc of Judas ; but, alfo, that 
 occult pre/ence, which prompts the cojlly pageants of Rome. 
 
 Analogy, Perhaps, the letter may elicit light from the 
 harmony of inspired truth. 
 
 The aJOfumption of the flejh is a Jblemn myjlery, pajjing 
 human reafon ; a mean of man's falvation, and of God's 
 
 glory- 
 
 This Roman dogma trenches on the laws of nature, 
 cxpofes the MeJJiah to ufelefs Jhame and countlefs hazards 
 in the facrificial hands of a thoujand priejls. 
 
 The Bible teaches no more plainly that Redemption is the 
 objefl of the Incarnation, than that the Eucharijl is a token 
 of Chrijl's death : this do ye^for as often as ye eat this bread, 
 ^Cy ye dojhew the Lord's death till he come,^ 
 
 It is clear, that the Incarnation mujl precede Redemption, 
 
 * Johnxli. 8. Mark xiv. 7. ^1 Cor. xi. 26. 
 
Chemical Change in the Euchariji, 
 
 as the atonement is a decree of God, and a demand of the 
 law : but it is not clear, that Chrijl's natural flejh and blood 
 Jhould be Jwallowed by us, in memory of his death ; while a 
 type, confecrated with the name of his body, as a fixed fym- 
 bol of that body broken for us, Jatisfies his manifejl purpoje. 
 
 Rome urges the letter of a Jingle pajjage ; we produce 
 many, with like claims — we confliS — the fenj*es, reajbn. 
 Scripture and analogy Jujlain us and condemn her. 
 
 If you bear in mind that Paul is the exponent of Chrijl, 
 not Chrijl of Paul, and that Jcholia are more literal than 
 the text, I will not fear your verdid. 
 
 I now offer, to abandon the ijjiie, or prove the words of 
 Paul to be jufceptive only of the letter, and thofe of Chrijl, 
 only of the figure. 
 
 We will Jift the dejign of St. Paul, in the eleventh chap- 
 ter of the firjl Corinthians. 
 
 It is well known, that the early Chrijlians held their 
 agapae after public worjhip, which love feajls dojed with the 
 communion ; and that the Corinthians at Jiich times, were 
 prone to excejs. 
 
 Now let Paul Jpeak — JVhen ye come together into one 
 
Analogy. 
 
 place^ this is not to eat the Lord's /upper. For in eating, 
 every one taketh before other his own /upper; and one is 
 hungry and another is drunken. What ! have ye not hou/es to 
 eat and to drink in ? or de/pi/e ye the Church 0/ God^ andjhame 
 them that have not? What Jh all I /ay to you ? Shall I prai/e 
 you in this? I prai/e you not. 
 
 For I have received of the Lord^ that which I delivered 
 unto youy that the Lord Je/us^ the/ame night in which he was 
 betrayed, took bread: and when he had given thanks ^ he brake 
 ity and faidy take^ eat : this is my body, which is broken for you : 
 this do in remembrance of me. After the/ame manner y he al/o 
 took the cupy when he had /uppedy /aying, this cup is the New 
 Te/iament in my blood : this do yCy as oft as ye drink ity in re- 
 membrance of me. 
 
 For as often as ye eat this bready and drink this cupy ye do 
 /hew the Lord's death till he come. 
 
 Whereforcy who/oever Jhall eat this bready and drink this 
 cup of the Lordy unworthily Jhall be guilty of the body and 
 blood of the Lord. 
 
 But let a man examine him/elf y and /o let him eat of that 
 bread and drink of that cup* 
 
54 
 
 Chemical Change in the Euchariji, 
 
 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily^ eateth and 
 drinketh damnation to himfelf^ not difcerning the Lord's body. 
 
 This extrad, in extenjb ; a variance from the ujage of 
 Rome, which adroitly culls the text, in defiance of the con- 
 text, is due to the argument. 
 
 It is obvious that the Corinthians ate the bread with a 
 licenje, that provoked the reproof of the apojlle, who prejQfed 
 the Jandity of the fupper. 
 
 With theje Jimple truths, we thwart the ruling of Rome, 
 and prove our view to be jujl and natural. 
 
 The apojlle charges them with greedinejs and drunken- 
 nefs, they do not eat the fupper of the Lord^ they defpife the 
 Church of God: he had not injiituted the Eucharifi^ but was 
 commanded by his Mafier to celebrate it. 
 
 Paul Jhews that the ordinance was dejigned, to recall 
 Chrijl's death, and thus points a climax: he who eats or 
 drinks unworthily^ eats and drinks damnation to himfelf. 
 
 Is it debateable, if thoje pledges and fymbols which our 
 Lord ordained and hallowed with the name of his body and 
 blood, are defiled by irreverence ? 
 
 Imagine, St. Paul, in communion with the Vatican, and 
 
Analogy, 
 
 his hearers guilty of taking Chrijl's flejh and blood into 
 jlomachs gorged with meat and wine. 
 
 In what Jcathing terms would he brand Jlich mockery of 
 the elements ; in what tones of thunder, would he hurl the 
 curfe of Rome at fuch loathfome Jacrilege ? 
 
 Lijlen — The Corinthians defpife the Church of God : Jcorch- 
 ing rebuke, forfooth, to men who jlain the mafs with the 
 ! revels of the Bacchanal : its objeSf is to revive in memory the 
 death of Chrijl till he come, a gentle demur, to the pollution 
 [ of their Saviour's real flejh and blood. 
 
 But hark ; the apojlle referves his cenfure ? 
 
 No Jir ; he then terms the Eucharijl bread, in three dif- 
 l tind pajjages : for, as often as ye eat this bread, and drink 
 this cup, ye do Jhew, &c. Wherefore, whojbever Jhall eat 
 this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, Jhall be guilty, 
 &c. let each one examine himfelf, and fo let him eat of that 
 bread, &c. 
 
 Then, if ever, would and Jhould he have urged the jignifi- 
 cance and dignity of that holy myjlery, and clothed it with 
 awe : but mark; he calls it bread, not the body of the Lord; 
 why fo lukewarm ? Marvellous indeed, if Paul was Papijlic. 
 
r6 Chemical Change in the Eucharijl, 
 
 Shall I yield even this point ? is Jo much deference due 
 to our biajQTed friends ? be it Jo — all is erajed. 
 
 I now fcale their ramparts, and difmijs all I have faid, un- 
 lejs I prove : — 
 
 ^f)at tlje trope 10 neitSec arange nor ffraineti : 
 
 gitJaD aa0:nalfi[tnef0: 
 
 %^z tiiTciple^ atioptetJ it : 
 
 laome cannot eCcape it : 
 
 %^z letter 10 forced and aftCurtr t 
 
 Firji — Imagery was habitual to our Lord; to Peter, he 
 fays ; if Iwajh thee not^ thou haft no part with me :^ hear him, 
 in the agony of the crofs, confiding the blejjed virgin to St. 
 John — woman, behold thy Jon ; then faith he to the difciple — 
 behold thy mother.^ 
 
 Are Sacraments excepted ? the Pafchal Lamb a mere token 
 of the angel's pajjing over the houfes of Ifrael, was Jlyled 
 the PaJJover or PaJJage : does the prejcript of a Rite call 
 for proper terms ? No Sir, I hold that the Saviour in ordain- 
 ing the bread and wine, Jigns of his bruijed body, and Jpilled 
 
 ^ John xiii. 8. ^ John xix. 26, 27. 
 
Occajion fuggejis the Metaphor, 
 
 blood, jhould have challenged reverence for the fymbols, by 
 hallowing them with the names of the things Jignifled. 
 
 In the new covenant, Baptifm is the wajhing of Regene- 
 ration, and in tHe language of Paul, we are buried with 
 Jefus Chriji by baptifm unto death ,^ 
 
 Thus, in every ajpefi, be it jpeaker, or hearer, fubjeS or 
 incidents, there is no Jlrain in the figure. 
 
 Second, The occajion fuggejled the metaphor. It is 
 familiar hijlory, that the epoch of the advent was prone 
 to allegory, and myjlery : the day, as well as the Lamb bore 
 the name of the Angel's pajjage. 
 
 A cujlom, however, at the fupper of the PaJJbver, is em- 
 phatic : the father of the family took a piece of bread, and 
 ate it with bitter herbs : reciting the formula — This is the 
 bread of mifery and affliSfion^ that our fathers ate in Egypt : 
 let him that is an hungered come and eat ; a form Jurely not 
 adopted by the Jews from courtejy to us, but derived from 
 the Jixteenth chapter of Deuteronomy ; feven days Jhalt thou 
 eat unleavened bread therewith^ even the bread of ajffiiSf ion. 
 
 * Romans vi. 4. 
 
58 
 
 Chemical Change in the Eucharijl. 
 
 Moderate wit may here dijcern the exemplar of the Sacra- 
 ment : our Lord choje the immerjion of Jewijh Neo- 
 phytes as a model for Baptijm ; in like manner, he adapted a 
 Jewijh rite to the Eucharijl. 
 
 As the bread, Jleeped in bitter fauce, jerved to recall the 
 affliction of their fathers ; Jo, would the broken bread be an 
 emblem of Chrijl*s body, bruifed on the crofs. 
 
 Thus runs the ritual of the Pajfover : this is the bread 
 of mifery and ajffiiSiion^ which our fathers ate in Egypt : 
 let him that is an hungered come and eat. 
 
 Take^ eaty this is my body, broken for you, is the language of 
 the lajl fupper : their affinity is obvious. 
 
 We pauje, to meet the plea that the dijciples who had not 
 yet regarded the bread, as a type, would have found equal 
 obfcurity in the phrajes : this is my body : this tree is 
 Alexander, 
 
 Strange as it may Jeem, this forry conceit brandijhed in 
 triumph twenty- five times in two hundred pages, is the gijl 
 of M. Arnauld's pojition : his armor ofFenJive and de- 
 fenjive. 
 
 It is untrue, that our Lord always announced a metaphor. 
 
Occajion fuggejls the Metaphor. 
 
 To Nicodemus, who had faid, Rabbi^ we know that thou 
 art a teacher come from God^ for no man can do thofe miracles 
 that thou doeji^ except God he with him : Jefus anfwers, verily ; 
 verily ; I jay unto thee ; except a man be born again he cannot 
 fee the Kingdom of God?- 
 
 The notion of Nicodemus was coarfe and literal ; the 
 figure was patent from the conflift of the letter, as the 
 phrafe : this that I have taken is my body broken for you^ was 
 due caution to the difciples. 
 
 If you call to mind, that notice with, or following a meta- 
 phor, derives force from tranfient doubt, the Jbphijm is 
 patent. 
 
 If talking with a friend of the battles of Alexander, I fay, 
 pointing to a tree ; That tree is Alexander^ however low, he 
 may rate my judgment, he will not imagine that I mijlake a 
 plant for the vidor at Arbela ; but when I add, fancy his 
 army here ; the Perftan there ; his Jufpenfe ceafes. 
 
 I further fay that even without notice, the idea of an 
 
 ' John iii. 2, 3. 
 
6o 
 
 Chemical Change in the Euchari/l. 
 
 objeft in the hand of Chrijl, being the body of Chrijl, con- 
 demns the letter. 
 
 The mental Jhock would furely have fecured an injlant's 
 pauje, until hearing their majler injlitute a memorial of his 
 death, the difciples could not doubt his meaning ; this will 
 reprefent to you my broken body till I come ; irrejpeftive even, 
 of the equivalence of the verbs is and ftgnify in the language 
 in which they were jpoken. 
 
 We thank the Author for raijing the quejtion of proba- 
 bility. 
 
 Were the difciples ready to rejed their fenjes, till then 
 never doubted ; thoje fenfes, which had witnejjed the mira- 
 cles of our Lord; thoJe channels of every truth that underlies 
 our faith ? 
 
 Were they free to concede, that a body can at once, fill 
 divers places, and that they took their majter's body from 
 their majler' s hand, in fpite of their life tried reajbn ? 
 
 Had they leijure to ponder on efFeds without cauje, or on 
 the import of the verb is (in the Syrian dialed of the period, 
 I repeat, a term convertible with fignify^^ had they the 
 
 Hebr^o Aram^an. 
 
Occajion fuggefis the Metaphor, 
 
 acutencfs at fuch a time, to difcern Chrijl's body in the 
 bread, and a change initial and in abeyance till the words of 
 conjecration were fully uttered ? 
 
 Subtlety, Jharpened by centuries of wrangling, may difcover 
 that Chrijl did not intend the bread, when he Jaid ; giving, 
 what he had taken, and broken ; this is, or, if the pronoun 
 applies to the bread, that the bread is his actual body ; but 
 men, who in their Jimplicity would quejlion, one with 
 another ; what the r'lftng of the dead Jhould mean ? could 
 fcarcely be equal to fuch Jcholajlic nicety. 
 
 Prefumption favors us ; The myjleries of the day ; the 
 ' bread of mijery and alfli6lion ; fenje, reajbn ; the dimnejs of 
 the letter ; the dijciples' artlejjhejs ; the a6l of Chrijl who 
 \ took, brake and gave the bread ; its prompt expojition in 
 ! thoje pregnant words ; do this in remembrance of me -, his 
 ' habitual imagery, were each, full notice of the figure ; and I 
 I marvel much, that fo adroit a dijputant, in framing laws of 
 i language for us, rejerves none for himjelf. 
 
 Third, You may arrive at the imprejjions of the dijciples, 
 by noting the abfence of any ad of worjhip ; there was no 
 clamor for the Jblution of a myjlery ; not even a change of 
 
pojlure ; Jo palpable was the figure, not a quejlion was 
 ajked ; not a comment made ; not a word fpoken. 
 
 Was this apathy the fruit of private teachings? their 
 majler had foretold his rijing from the grave : Jlrange 
 indeed, that after waiving their Jight, and all their fenjes 
 to ajjume his entrance into their Jlomachs, they would 
 not trujl their eyes in proof of his refurredion ; fuppojing it 
 a dream. 
 
 Could thoje men, on the warrant of a few words, and in 
 defiance of their fenjes, have credited miracles, unparalleled, 
 latent, and awful : thoJe very men, who rejeded a public 
 faS, often predided ; with its type and proof before their 
 eyes, in the pcrjbn of Lazarus, in the fon of the widow of 
 Nain, and in the daughter of Jairus ? 
 
 They fancied, they had Jeen a Jpirit; Thomas will not 
 believe^ unlefs he put his fingers in the print of the nails^ and 
 Jefus appeals to their fenjes ; Behold my hands and my feet, 
 handle me and fee, ^ 
 
 Shall we now be told that he was forced to invoke the 
 
 John XX. 25. 
 
 Luke xxiv. 39. 
 
Literal Senfe forced. 
 
 witnefs he impugned ? I will not charge my adverfary with 
 folly. 
 
 Read our Lord's language after the fupper : / will not 
 drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine ^ until that day when I 
 drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom:'^ it was the 
 fruit of the vine, not his blood : again, he Jays ; this cup is 
 the New Tejiament in my blood :- is the cup properly a New 
 Tejlament ? and if not, is it an image ? 
 
 Moreover, Chrijl ujed a figure, not only in giving the 
 cup, but in giving the bread ; This is my body broken for you : 
 his body was then broken, either literally or not ; fo Sir, he 
 jaid JlriSly; this is my body; and abruptly attached the 
 figure to the letter : my body^ broken for you — verily ; ajlute- 
 nefs is a great blejOing, but we Jimple fouls believe, that the 
 bread is Chrijl* s body, in the Jame fenfe that his body was 
 broken. 
 
 Fourth, It IS paJOiing Jlrange, that thefe literalijls rejeS 
 the natural, and exaS our concejjion of forced figures : a 
 figure in the words ; he broke the bread and gave it, Jince he 
 
 * Matt. xxvi. 29. 
 
 * Luke xxii. 20. 
 
gave his body under the Jemblance of bread ; a figure in theje 
 words ; this is my body, as the bread was not his body, until 
 he had uttered thoje words ; a figure in this ; my body, my 
 body broken for youy as his body was not broken on the eve of 
 his pajjion; a figure, in the injunction, do this in remem- 
 brance ofme, from which no Jane man can infer a jacrifice of 
 the Lord's body. 
 
 We meet a figure in the term cup^ as applied to its con- 
 tents ; a figure, when he calls it the New Tejiament : a. 
 figure, in Jlyling it, the New TeJIament in his blood; a 
 figure ; that his blood was poured out for the remijfion offtns^ 
 before it was Jhed ; a figure, in giving the cup ; / will not 
 drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine ; and a figure, when 
 he adds : when he jhould drink it new in his father's 
 kingdom. 
 
 Gracious God— are theJe the men, who fpurn a figure in 
 the words of the injlitution ? 
 
 SpeSfatum admijjiy rifum teneatis amici? 
 
 Fifth. No lejs fore to this unerring Church, may be the 
 proof, that her letter is violent and jlrained. 
 
 The tajk is eajy, by Jimply Juppojing the word this^ ]b to 
 
jpeak, a prefix of the bread, ujed by our Lord, when 
 holding that, which he had taken, and broken, and faying, 
 this bready to refer to the bread. 
 
 Who will fay that the phrafe, this is my body, is JlriSly 
 true ? that bread, a lump of grains, is properly a Jlru6iure 
 of blood, bones and nerves ? 
 
 Let us hear in behalf of the letter, the claims of the pro- 
 noun to a divorce from the noun. 
 
 However jarring may be the views of our Latin brethren : 
 fome, holding with Bellarmin, that our Lord intended, this, 
 to imply, under this femblance, here is my body : others, this 
 bread is i. e. will be my body : all are Jhocked at the 
 quibbling which perverts its obvious, natural and literal 
 fenfe, to a notion, figurative, obfcure and fanciful. 
 
 With effrontery no lefs offenjive, than the ojlracifm of 
 fenfe, and reafon, they clofe the facred canon, abounding 
 in metaphor, and lacking a fmgle term ferving their 
 theory. 
 
 A falfe pofition now drives them both from image, and 
 letter to fenfelefs jargon. 
 
 To your candor we fubmit the ijfue. 
 
66 Chemical Change in the Euchariji. 
 
 Thus runs the figure — this bread, a type of my death till 
 my coming is my body, myjlically and virtually. 
 
 The letter ; this bread is my body, properly, and literally. 
 
 The Jubtlety or logic, if any, thus far, is confined to the 
 Jaid pronoun, which I ajjiime, covers the bread. 
 
 It is the logic of the eyes, and common fenje, the logic of 
 the difciples, and of every donee of bread, whofe donor, in 
 the aft of Jimple transfer, fo joins that pronoun with that 
 noun. 
 
 The letter, now involves utter confujion : we mujl admit 
 the bread, in a Jlrift fenfe, to be body of Jejus Chrijl ; while 
 conjcious that the bread is not his carnal body. 
 
 Who now needs the juccor of Jubtlety? let him Jay, 
 who claims two dijitn£f fenfes for that pronoun^ one^ tranfienty 
 allied to the fubjeSf before the change^ i, e. to the bread : the 
 othery fixedy qualifying the attribute after its utterance^ but 
 that the two this-es do not differ y becaufe both exprefs the fame 
 idea. ^ 
 
 Verily Sir, are not theje Jheerers at our Jhelter of meta- 
 
 ' Perp. de la foi, torn. ii. lib. il. chap- ii. 
 
Chemical Change in the Euchariji, 
 
 phyjics the firjl to feck, and mojl in need of it ? do they 
 realize that unlejs our complaijance invejts this pronoun with 
 a novel fundion, favoring much of being got up for the nonce j 
 they mujl admit the metaphor, or charge Chrijl with du- 
 plicity ? 
 
 Our Author argues, that the ordinance has two afpefts ; 
 this, which is bread, at the prefent injlant, is, my body, at 
 the next. 
 
 In the abfence of precedent, he fancies what our Saviour 
 might have faid, in turning the water of Cana into wine. 
 
 The phrafe, this is wine^ pending a change, he thinks may 
 intend, this which is now water y is wine at the next injiant ; 
 the argument, which he terms executory^ forces the prefent, 
 to embrace two tenfes : he applies it to Aaron's rod, which 
 became a ferpent, and to Lot's wife, transformed to a 
 pillar of fait. 
 
 No one doubts, that had Mofes faid, pointing to his rod : 
 this is a ferpent : the words would fairly imply : this will be 
 a ferpent ; or that at the doom of Sodom, this is a fea of 
 Sulphur^ might fairly exprefs, this will be forthwith a fea^ 
 which he is pleafed to call a virtual^ and operative propofition. 
 
68 
 
 Chemical Change in the Euchariji, 
 
 Whence it Jeems, that all his logic rcfolves in the diSum 
 of his Church, that the verb is unites the prejent and the 
 future. 
 
 Should he abandon the letter for the figure, we claim a 
 hearing for our figure ; and though he may tangle fubtlety 
 with Jubtlety, and Jlill more grojQly, add injult to injiilt, this, 
 that I give you and have broken, this bread is my body pro- 
 perly and literally^ is the only literal fenfe, that can attach to 
 the words of the Jupper. 
 
 We hold, that the claujes, this is wine ; this is a ferpent ; 
 this is a fea of fulphur ; if found in Scripture, Jhould be 
 governed by the context : as in the phrafe a tree is a man^ 
 we fee no change, but a Jimple trope, imaging the tree as a 
 warrior, or an element of power. 
 
 A charge of undue notice, againjl the figure, recoils 
 againjl the letter, for which no warning is claimed. 
 
 The cafes are parallel ; we will not grapple with 
 Jhadows ; we injijl, that it is more natural to believe, that 
 
 • Deut. XX. 19. 
 
 i 
 
Chemical Change in the Euchariji. 
 
 our Lord ordained an emblem of his broken body, under the 
 name of his body ; than that he changed the loaf into his 
 flejh : that it is lefs natural, to conjlrue his words, as opera- 
 tive, than as typical, even as the difciples viewed the bread 
 of afflidion, the pajjbver and the chalice. 
 
 To this ijjue, I challenge all my opponents' acumen, but 
 not his cant, and verbiage. 
 
 Will this champion of the faith deny that the Eucharijl is 
 a holy Jign ? it is the ruling of his Church — will he deny 
 that the Eucharijl Jhadows Chrijl*s body, dying, and nailed 
 to the Crofs ? let Rome anfwer ; efcape is vain, at every 
 turn, metaphors fwarm his path. 
 
 Can his labored rules of language, his operative propofi- 
 tionsy his unreal Jhapes, his double duty of the pronoun, or 
 his defperate thejes avail him ? 
 
 He makes but three points — 
 
 W^z incititntjs? of t^z Slnftitution— 
 3|t0 natural intent— 
 prejudice- 
 He gains nothing by thoje incidents, plunged in trope and 
 myjlery ; nor yet, from the natural force of the words, be- 
 
 I 
 
Chemical Change in the Euchariji. 
 
 cauje to the dijciples, unwarned of a latent change, the dark- 
 nejs of the letter, was ample notice of the figure : to preju- 
 dice^ only, can we refer the letter with its endlejs Jhifts. 
 
 We fault Rome, with treajbn to her intelleS; to the 
 analogy of the faith ; to the word of God : we Jhow that 
 Jubtlety is confined to her fchool, that Our Lord taught his 
 difciples, that he Jhould be no longer with them as an objeiS 
 of expenje ; but never even in the pangs of parting, pro- 
 mised his veiled humanity on earth. 
 
 We Jhew that Paul conjlantly calls the Eucharijl bread ; 
 nay, while urging its claims to reverence : that the dijciples 
 adopted, and every incident implied the metaphor, which the 
 Papal Church admits in the Cup. 
 
 We define ten bold figures in the words of the ordinance : 
 we Jhew that its uje was enjoined, as a token of Chrijl's 
 broken body, an obvious image ; and its letter, to be Jenje- 
 lejs, revolting and monjlrous. 
 
 Sir, with wifdom, and learning, you have common Jenjc ; 
 the Jafejl guide to truth and duty. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 \ 
 
3Letter Cl)irtJ« 
 
 ULL of Jblemn emphajis is the language of 
 Cardinal Richelieu ; " protejlants are impious, 
 if they do not adore what they Jhould, and we 
 are idolatrous if we adore what we Jhould not." The 
 worjhip of the Elements, prefcribed by Rome, is a yawning 
 chafm to the hope of fufion : we charge it with 
 
 ^emerit^ : 
 
 2DiCob0tiience: 
 
 ^bCurtiitp: 
 
 gimpietg: and 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 GALlFOR'NiA. 
 
 ^tipecttition* 
 
 Temerity, — This is not the cant of controversy ; God is 
 my witnefs, that the Jeverity of truth forbids milder terms. 
 
 The Bible reveals the ejjentials of Salvation, with divers 
 matters of minor moment, but neither Prophet, Evangelijl, 
 
Adoration of Sacrament, 
 
 nor Apojlle has even alluded to Eucharijlic homage ; a 
 Jilence, that would alarm me if in fellowjhip with Rome. 
 
 Would God thus prove our faith, and humble our hearts ? 
 I am willing to furtender my reajbn, if he requires the 
 Jacrifice : I will adopt any doSrine he teaches, but I am not 
 chargeable with contumacy until Jhewn his precept. 
 
 You will find that Jacred truths are prejjed, in the ratio 
 they bear to the needs of faith and pradice. 
 
 Chrijl's glory is magnified; he is our mediatory the light 
 of the world ; the life; the truth; the hrightnefs of his father* s 
 glory I he was from the beginning; he was God; he thought 
 it not robbery to be equal with God; he made the world ; the 
 periods of time ; creatures viftble and invifible — he fuftains and 
 governs all things^ and his years Jhall not fail. 
 
 Hence it is, that all the Angels of God adore the divine 
 Saviour ; and that every knee Jhould bend at the name of 
 J ejus, the only name by which we can be Javed. 
 
 OmiJJion in the narrative of the fupper finds no apology in 
 its brevity ; they who Jtate that Jejus ate the PaJJbver with 
 his dijciples, in a large upper chamber, fwept, and made 
 ready, would not Jlur a vital fa6t. 
 
Adoration of Sacrament. 
 
 73 
 
 Mark the precijion and harmony of the Evangelijls ; 
 yefus Chriji broke the bread', when he had given thanks^ he 
 gave the bread to his difciples, he charged them to do this in 
 memory of his pajfton ; after this, they fun g a hymn ; and then 
 they went to the mount of Olives ; ^ a racy minutenejs for a 
 church, conceding the mutenejs of Scripture in ^o grave a 
 matter. 
 
 It is noteworthy, that the hijlory of the Injlitution is both 
 our model and rule; the intent being clear from the man- 
 date, do this in remembrance ofme; and from the text of the 
 Gojpels, quoted, totidem verbis^ by St. Paul. 
 
 Difobedience, If this recital is a Chrijlian manual, he who 
 deviates from the lejjbns of our Lord on the eve of his death, 
 is guilty of temerity, and contumacy. 
 
 How do you know, ajks Rome, that Chriji was not 
 adored at the fupper ? 
 
 We reply, that every incident repels the fad : the dif- 
 ciples neither recognize a myjlery, nor his entry into their 
 Jlomachs, nor vary their recumbent pojlure, a cujlom of the 
 
 * Matt. xxvi. Mark, xiv. Luke, xxii. 
 
74 
 
 Adoration of Sacrament. 
 
 period, and inapt for the aft of worjhip : they rife only, to 
 go to the Mount of Olives ; and they Jlyle the Sacrament, 
 the breaking of bread ; that the early Chrijlians not only 
 broke the loaf with marked Jimplicity, but gave it to the 
 laity, to carry to the Jick and abfent.^ 
 
 In view of thefe fads, it will appear not only incredible, 
 but impojjible, that either the dijciples of Chrijl, or of the 
 Apojlles, could have fo adored the body of our Lord ; and 
 moreover, there being no record of the faS in that hijlory, 
 which has all the force of law, or eljewhere, and as Chrijl 
 direSs us to do in his memory, as he did with his difciples, 
 and St. Paul enjoins it — we hold that Juch homage tran- 
 Jcends his teachings. 
 
 Ahfurdity. Our opponents brave both the facred Canon, 
 and common fenje ; their loyalty to either, would be a 
 Jburce of conjblation : we difmijs their vague maxims, 
 claiming precedence for myjlery over the lights of reafon, 
 with the quejlion ; if the human reajbn which condemns ^H 
 their dogma, is fanftioned by the Holy Spirit ; Jhall we try 
 conclujions with God ? 
 
 Juftin Martyr, Narrative of. 
 
Adoration of Sacrament , 
 
 Read Sir, the Prophets on the vanity of idolatry : hear 
 Ijaiah — they lavijh gold out of the bag^ and weigh Jiher in the 
 balance and hire a goldfmith ; and he maketh it a God ; they 
 fall down^ yea^ they worjhip. 
 
 They bear him upon the Jhoulder^ they carry him and fet him 
 in his place, and he fiandeth ; from his place Jhall he not re- 
 move i yea^ one Jhall cry unto him, yet can he not anfwer^ nor 
 fave him out of his troubled 
 
 Again, in the xliv Chapter : he heweth him down cedars^ 
 and taketh the cyprefs and the oaky he planteth an ajh^ and the 
 rain doth nourijh it. 
 
 Then Jhall it be for a ?nan to burn, for he will take thereof 
 and warm himfelf; yea, he kindleth it, and haketh bread; yea, 
 he maketh a God, and worjhippeth it, he prayeth unto it, and 
 Jaith, deliver me ; for thou art my God. 
 
 They have not known nor underjiood for he hath Jhut their 
 eyes, that they cannot fee, and their hearts, that they cannot 
 underfland. 
 
 And none conftdereth in his heart, neither is there knowledge 
 nor underjianding to Jay, I have burned part of it in the fire ; 
 
 ' Ifaiah, xlvi. 6, 7. 
 
76 
 
 Adoration of Sacrament. 
 
 yea alfo^ I have baked bread upon the coals thereof; I 
 have roajled fiejh and eaten it ; Jhall I make the refidue 
 thereof an abomination ? Jhall I fall down to the Jlock of 
 a tree? 
 
 Thus Jpake the Prophet of idols ; and what think you of 
 the apotheojis of pajle ; made of grains, ripened by the Jun 
 and rain, and cooked in an oven or between two plates of 
 iron ; part of which, not from the hands of a gold/mith, but 
 from thoje of a baker, is their daily meat ? 
 
 Can a priejl tranjmute this baked dough into a God, 
 which they carry, becauje he cannot walk ; which they lock 
 up ; which they do not carry on their Jhoulders, but in their 
 hands ; which they put in his place, from which he cannot 
 jlir ; which does not anjwer thofe who cry unto it ; part of 
 which is ujeful to man, not to cook his food but as food; 
 which has eyes, but fees not ; ears, but cannot hear ; before 
 which they kneel and pray, deliver me ; for thou art my God ? 
 
 Who will forbid us the indignant rebuke of the Spirit, 
 and none conjidereth in his heart ; neither is there know- 
 ledge nor underjlanding to Jay ; I have made the half 
 of this my bread, which I have cooked in an oven ; of the 
 
Adoration of Sacrament > 
 
 refidue thereof, Jhall I make an abomination ? Jhall I adore 
 a cake ? 
 
 Can the Holy Spirit be fo foolijh, and falfe ?— I /hudder as 
 I pen thofe words — would he pander to the mockery of Pagans ? 
 
 Credat Judam Jpella, non ego. 
 
 If even the Jews, who ajcribed God's presence in their 
 groves and Jlatues, Jblely, to the efficacy of their ritual, 
 fcorning the worjhip of mere wood and Jlone, were branded 
 with idolatry, as faithlejs to injlind, will Rome exclude the 
 exercife of common Jenfe, which Scripture exacts ? or if the 
 word of God denounces the fuperjlition, that a tree the fruit 
 of Jhowers, becomes a God; may we not judge the devotees 
 of Jimple bread : which we have jeen made of cereals by the 
 hands of a workman ; do we err in reajbning like the Holy 
 Ghojl? 
 
 Impiety and Superftition. 
 
 Iffuch homage is offenjive to God's Jpirit ; it is impious 
 and Juperjlitious. 
 
 Many maintain, Jir, and with much force, that if the 
 Eucharijl is material, Chrijl's body Jhould not there be wor- 
 Jhipped ; unlejs vijible and glorious. 
 
78 Adoration of Sacrament, 
 
 They dijlinguijh between Deity, refulgent, and Deity, 
 unjeen and ubiquitous : Rome attributes to Chrijl's humanity 
 a dual fynchronous prefence ; as majejlic ; likened to the 
 Jplendor of the firmament : and as veiled, in the guife 
 of bread and wine. 
 
 Now, all Chrijlians concede that he who fiUcth immenjity 
 Jhould not be adored in the trite obJeSs of nature, he is in a 
 Jhrub, a rock ; but the reverence allied with either is profane. 
 
 Chrijl teaches us to extol God in the Jlarlit depths of 
 Jpace ; as our Father who art in Heaven ; becauje, there, his 
 ejjence is glorious : in paying divine honors to a tree, we 
 might be Jujpe6led of deifying the tree, but who would 
 imagine me worjhipping a Jlrange God ; lifting my eyes 
 to the golden garniture of the jkics, which is the throne of 
 God? 
 
 Be that as it may; they ajjiime a truth which neither 
 creed will quejlion ; that Deity Jhould not be glorified in the 
 frequent forms of matter, but in the grandeur of power. 
 
 Imagine the contempt. Sir; even of infidels, who watch 
 you cold and tranquil, kneading and toajling your wafer; 
 and, prejioy bowing to your wafer God ; and as you kneel in 
 
Adoration of Sacrament, 
 
 the mire before the Hojl, will they not Jay, that you value 
 Chrijl*s cloaked humanity more than his Divinity ; his body, 
 more than his Spirit ? 
 
 Jejus Chrijl was adored, whiljl Deity Jhone in the incar- 
 nate God ; when he hujhed the tempcjl ; healed the Jick, and 
 raijed the dead ; let us adore him, when vijible in his wife 
 Providence, let us adore the Father, as throned in power ; 
 but do not injult the majejly of Jehovah ; heap not blas- 
 phemy on Juperjlition, in adoring Chrijl's veiled body, 
 ignoring his divine local and latent prefence. 
 
 If Rome changes the ijjue to a corporal prejence, in the 
 nature of fpirit ; we repeat ; why does Jhe honor Chrijl's 
 body more than his Divinity ? 
 
 If jhe abandons the Jimple prejence, for that of grace ; we 
 reply, that in fuch fenje, the Holy Spirit quickened the 
 apojlles, the cloven tongues at Pentecojl, the hearts of 
 Chrijlian converts, and in Juch Jenje animated the rite of 
 baptifm, without claim to objedive worjhip. 
 
 The ark of the Covenant is not a caje in point ; before it, 
 the walls of Jericho fell, before it the floods of the Jordan 
 divided and clofed behind it ; there, God dijpenjed his living 
 
8o Adoration of Sacrament, 
 
 oracles to mortal ears; there was the Shekinah vivid between 
 the Cherubim, thence called the Cherubim of Glory. 
 
 The ark was a lejjer heaven, evoking like emotions ; 
 verily, eyes have they, but they fee not ; ears, but they hear 
 not ; mean, and prejent in an atom : only prejent, at the 
 pleajure of a Priejl ; and not prejent, when the voided 
 elements are dead and loathjbme : all which we are told is 
 the crucial teft of faith. 
 
 That God's prefence in the ark was glorious, all admit: 
 and Rome admits a glorious prejence of Chrijl only in 
 heaven ; in heaven, at the right hand of God, let us adore 
 him, as he was adored in the ark. 
 
 And now. Sir, with all pojjible refped for my opponents, 
 I ajk with Theodoret^ if it is not fuperjiitiousy and the chief 
 of fuperjiitions^ to adore what we eat^ or to eat what we adore P 
 
 Is it not impious to worjhip that which the dijciples eat 
 without change of pojlure ; which Jight, tajle and reajbn pro- 
 nounce bread ; which the Gojpel calls broken bread ; and of 
 which, Chrijl enjoins no homage when teaching us to do, as 
 
 ' Theodoret in Genes.— Ques. 55. 
 
Adoration of Sacrament, 
 
 he then did : that which was eaten at the clofe of a common 
 feajl ; which was freely fent to the Jick and abfent by any 
 applicant, and which, being a germ of the Jbil, cannot be 
 God, fave in defiance of his Holy Spirit. 
 
 Rajhnefs, folly, contumacy, blafphemy and fuperjlition are 
 harjh terms for Roman ears ; I am loth to utter them. 
 
 Believe me, &c. 
 
JLttttx fomt% 
 
 Sir, 
 
 BRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF 
 
 CALIFORNIA. 
 
 GLADLY accept the iQue, whether the difciples 
 could have regarded the bread as a type, with- 
 out previous teaching. 
 It Jeems to me, that jeeing our Lord take, break, blejs and 
 give the bread, they could have held many views more 
 natural than the aflual prejence or the change of Jubjlance. 
 
 I. The words, this is my body^ would have recalled 
 the pajjage of Deuteronomy, to which they are the key ; 
 this is the bread of mifery that our fathers ate in Egypt. 
 
 The Jenjes of the difciples, their reajbn, the dijjbnance of 
 the bread and body ; the nature of things ; common fenfe, 
 
84 
 
 Change of Subjiance, 
 
 all forbad the letter ; but conceding the letter and the 
 abjurdity of the figure ; it is incredible, that they could or 
 would have inferred a change of Jubjlance. 
 
 II. Had they wavered between what they Jaw, or Jup- 
 pojed they faw, and heard, or thought they heard ; it would 
 have been more natural to mijlrujl their fenje of hearing, as 
 we rely more on our eyes than our ears. 
 
 They knew by the Jight that the jubjlance they received 
 was bread ; and they could only know by the hearing, that 
 it was the body of their majler. 
 
 Again, allowing equal weight to eye and ear, the percep- 
 tions of our dire6l vijion are more certain than the imprejjions 
 we gather from the Jbunds we hear ; the difciples Jaw the 
 bread, but could only infer from the language of Chrijl, that 
 the Eucharijl is his body. 
 
 Nor can it be Juppojed that the ear was Jpecially con- 
 trolled by divine influence : its fundions are free ; by that 
 channel only, I know that it is our Lord who fpeaks ; if the 
 medium is falje, it is untrue that he Jpeaks ; if faithful, it is 
 true ; if doubtful, I may doubt if the Son of God Jpeaks. 
 
 The dijciples were more certain that they heard the words 
 
 I 
 
Change of Subjlance, 
 
 of the injlitution, than that the Eucharijl is Chrijl's body ; 
 becaufe they believed it to be Chrijl's body on the credit of 
 the hearing. 
 
 If they were equally fure that they Jaw a real bread, and 
 truly heard thofe words ; they had a higher certainty that 
 they Jaw a real bread, than that the Eucharijl is the body of 
 Chrijt. 
 
 No one will deny that the difciples had greater doubt that 
 the Eucharijl is Chrijl*s body, than that they heard his lan- 
 guage : I hear Chrijl who tells me that the Eucharijl is his 
 body, then the Eucharijl is the body of Chrijl, provided, the 
 fad proved is more certain than the proof of the fad. 
 
 Nor will a certainty be denied to the Jight, at leajl equal 
 to that of the hearing, for if it is pojjible, that an objed of 
 our vijion is a mere Jemblance, it is more pojOlble, that the 
 fpeech which we think we hear, may be delujive Jbund. 
 
 III. To the dijciples, lacking the training of the Propa- 
 ganda, Jelf-dijlrujl was more natural, than abnegation of 
 Jenje, which their majler had not impojed. 
 
 A change of fubjlance implies either, that the color, tajle 
 and form before our eyes are not the color, tajle and form of 
 
8 6 Change of Subjiance. 
 
 bread, which is not pretended, or that all the accidents of 
 bread remain after the bread has ceajed to exijl. 
 
 The ideas of jpecies without matter ; color without Jub- 
 jlance ; bulk without body, are not eajily grajped by men, 
 who have not yet learned that what they fee, is not what 
 they fee. 
 
 Could then the difciples, like ourfelves fubjefl to error — 
 they who often mijlook their majler's purpofe and never when 
 doubtful, fcrupled to quejlion him — have adopted fuch an 
 anomaly in Jilence ? and had they majlered all his lejfons, 
 could they without temerity and prefumption, have brooked a 
 dogma, ^0 monjlrous, even to conception ? 
 
 IV. Be that as it may, folly only would deny a truce to 
 Judgment, when the letter is offenjive to fenfe and reafon. 
 
 We read of the feet, hands, arms and eyes of God ; of his 
 approach ; his prefence is manifejl ; he kindles the clouds 
 with the fire of his breath, &c. — common prophetic images, 
 fuggejling the fundions of a human frame. 
 
 Now, as reafon rejefts the attributes of God to a body 
 like Chrijl's, equally with corporeal faculties to Jehovah, and, 
 as on no occajion had the fenfes and judgment of the difciples 
 
 1 
 
Change of Subjlance. 
 
 87 
 
 been more jlartled ; they could not have fuppofed, that their 
 majler's body, had, like God, a plural prejence, Synchronous 
 and latent. 
 
 But another view, and not without its force ; a plural pre- 
 jence not claimed even for God, is afcribed to the body of our 
 Lord ; in heaven and on earth, but not in fpace ; and that 
 his own body, with its bulk, unity, and proportions, was 
 held in his own hand, and received into his own mouth and 
 Jlomach. 
 
 Do we err in faying, that reajbn and common fenje revolt 
 againjl the letter, and that then, if ever, Judgment would 
 have been arrejled, or the ear fufpeded, or firjl imprejjions 
 reje6led ? 
 
 V. The dijciples would rather have quejlioned the normal 
 condition of their fight, fmell and tajle, a common event, 
 than credit a difguifed change of the objed of thofe fenfes ; 
 and I infifl, that fuch mijlrujl was more natural than the 
 
 1 ajjumption, that the bread they faw was not bread. 
 
 VI. The words in quejlion, imply no lefs, that the bread 
 1 is changed to the body of Chrijl, than that Chrijl is changed 
 
 to the bread ; was it not then more credible, that injlead of 
 
88 
 
 Change of Subjiance, 
 
 the bread, ceajing to be bread, and becoming Chrijl's body, 
 under the form of bread ; that the body of Chrijl had ceafed 
 to be his body, and the objeft that fuffered death, was a 
 Jemblance, the bread being his body by conjecration ? This 
 Jenje more natural than the tenet of Rome, abjurd as it is, 
 would have Javed the Jcandal of the crofs, Jo appalling to 
 the difciples. 
 
 VII. M. Arnauld, who doubtlejs makes the mojl of his 
 caje, thus conjlrues the ordinance : This which is bread at 
 the prefent injiant^ is my body at the next ; in common par- 
 lance, this is about to become my body; the exa6i letter of 
 which will read. This bread which I Jhare and eat with you 
 is about changing to the fubjlance of my body, really, and 
 Jlri6!ly ; being my food ; and this wine will foon blend with 
 my blood, as it quenches my thirjl. 
 
 Had our Lord jaid to his difciples — eat this bread that I 
 am eating, and turning into my flejh, which mujl be broken 
 for you ; drink this cup, that I am drinking, a fluid combining 
 with my blood, that muJl be Jhed in ]an6!ion of the new cove- 
 nant ; he would have implied that it was their lajl meal to- 
 gether ; and that all was accomplijhed but the Jacrifice of his 
 
 4 
 
Change of Subjiance, 89 
 
 body, fed by that food, and the oblation of his blood, ajjimi- 
 lating with the wine ; as he Jeems to exprejs it ; / will drink 
 no more of this fruit of the vine, until I drink It new 
 with you, In the kingdom of God. 
 
 We might further infer, that Chrijl gave his difciples this 
 food, as a pledge, that his body Jhould be broken, and his 
 blood Jhed for their fakes, as a communion with the means of 
 life eternal. 
 
 Here, is a rigid fenje, not reafonable I admit, but lejs 
 jhocking, and more tenable than the letter of Rome. 
 
 VIII. If the difciples believed that Chrijl had but the 
 one body, which he Jlriflly promifed to give them ; they 
 would have concluded, either, that he was guilty of a breach 
 of truth, which would be impious; or that the body of Chrijl 
 they faw being a phantom, the bread Jhould take his 
 name : the only efcape from the concejjion that the body 
 before their eyes, was the fame that had entered their 
 Jlomachs. 
 
 IX. If the difciples thought that Chrijl had a body which 
 extended its hand, and gave an objed, and that Chrijl had a 
 body which they received from his hands, they could not 
 
 M 
 
90 
 
 Change of Subjiance, 
 
 Juppofe that the Giver of the objeS and the objefl given 
 were one. 
 
 To avoid the dilemma that one body was two bodies, or, 
 that two bodies were one body, they had a fourfold 
 choice. 
 
 That the body of Chrijl which extended the hand, had 
 ceajed to be his body, and had become bread. 
 
 That he, not the bread held out the hand, the fame body, 
 referred to in the injlitution, and in the pajjage : dejiroy this 
 temple, although the difciples underjlood him to fpeak of 
 the temple at Jerufalem. 
 
 That Chrijl had two bodies, the one giving ; the other 
 given. 
 
 That the body of Chrijl which had been one, was dupli- 
 cated. 
 
 They knew that two objefls, are two objeds ; they Jaw 
 the Jiibjlance given them by Chrijl, parting from his body, 
 and without the aid of metaphyjics, could not have divined 
 that the two were an unit. 
 
 X. The difciples, unjkilled in the fubtleties of the fchools, 
 and retaining their reafon, would be wronged by the fuppo- 
 
 I 
 
Change of Subjtance. 
 
 91 
 
 Jition that the language of the Ordinance, would convey the 
 fame ideas to them, and to the adroit logician : for, as no 
 one would Jay, here is the body of Peter ^ or here is his blood, 
 purpojing to indicate the human nature of Peter ; fo, the 
 dijciples, could not have inferred from the words, this is my 
 body, this is my bloody the humanity of Chrijl veiled in the 
 elements. 
 
 The literal fenfe mujl be natural, and obvious : if then, in 
 colloquial phrafe, this is my body, this is my blood, can only im- 
 ply a body without fpirit and blood without body ; the dif- 
 ciples mujl have Jo conjlrued the ordinance, if they adopted 
 its letter. 
 
 The dauje my broken body, was furely a metaphor, before 
 Chrijl was a6lually broken, or crucified. 
 
 To cover this tender point, Rome reforts to a Jubterfuge, 
 tranfpojing the pajl, and future, and even argues as if the 
 word broken, were omitted. 
 
 We contend, that in the phrafes : this is my body^ this is 
 my blood : body and blood correspond with broken body and Jhed 
 blood. As it may not be faid of a body, or rather of 
 humanity, this is bloody whiljl that humanity has a body, 
 
92 
 
 Change of Subjiance. 
 
 with blood courjing its veins, without braving every rule of 
 diSion. 
 
 The letter of the language ajcribed to Antony ; the blood 
 of the Roman Cafar /peaks to you, does not intend the perjbn 
 of Caefar /peaking, but his blood free from his body ; and 
 when Plutarch Jlates, that a Jlave found the body of Pompey 
 on the Jhore, a vivid fancy, only, would infer, that fuch body 
 was living. 
 
 Back and fill as they pleaje, this is my body, can never 
 mean, this is the living Chriji Jefus^ nor can this is my blood 
 ever be referred to his humanity; therefore, the body of 
 ChriJI was a body, fevered from its fpirit, and its blood, was 
 blood, parted from its body. 
 
 Now take the place of the dijciples, and ajk our Lord, 
 what he enjoins us to eat and drink ? 
 
 Take eat; drink ye all of it. 
 
 Are we required to eat the bread ? 
 
 Are we commanded to drink the wine ? if we mujl drink 
 his blood, how can we drink it properly while yet in his 
 veins ? 
 
 You reply, that ChriJI does not exaS an ab/olute eating 
 
 i 
 
Change of Subjiance, 
 
 and drinking, and why not ? If we adopt the letter of the 
 injlitution, why not the letter of the conjoined mandate, eaty 
 drink? Mojl marvellous indeed, whiljl the Saviour Jays, 
 this is my body, and Jlartled fenje and reajbn concede the 
 figure, you injijl on the primary fenfe, and when he naturally 
 adds, eaty drink ye all of it, and fenJe and reajbn demand a 
 Jlrid compliance, you take refuge in the metaphor. 
 
 How can you properly drink the blood of Chrijl's veins, 
 in the guije of wine ? the drinking of a Jeeming Jubjlance, is 
 but a Jeeming drinking ; and a feeming drinking is not a 
 proper drinking. 
 
 Pardon, Sir, this Jhort apojlrophe to the infallible 
 Church : and here let me ajk, what the difciples could 
 have underjlood, by a body broken, and by blood Jhed literally 
 and properly : could they have regarded the Eucharijl as a 
 bloodlejs Jacrifice, could they have conceived that Chrijl 
 fpake to them of aught Jave a dead body, and of blood from 
 his own veins ? 
 
 XI. Nor can I fee the virtue of a blind change which 
 
 annuls the bread ; is Chrijl' s body lefs free in Jubjlance, 
 
 : than in femblance ? if it can enter the form of bread, it can 
 
94 
 
 Change of Subjiance, 
 
 enter the bread itjelf ; and if no exception is taken to dif- 
 proportion of the body to the bread, why Jhould the Jub- 
 Jlance of one, be inconjijlent with the Jubjlance of the other ? 
 in the Jilence of revelation, would not the modejly of 
 ignorance, be the Jbundejl philojbphy ? 
 
 XII. We will offer two hypothefes ; both clearly 
 falje : 
 
 That the dijciples were bound by the letter; and, that 
 Chrijl's words, admit of no other literal jenje than that of 
 Rome, which I ajQfure you is a Jlretch of courtefy. 
 
 Had the dijciples been Jharply Jchooled at Port Royal, 
 the notions of prefence vifihle^ and latent; entities^ a£lual^ 
 and facramental i unreal forms i converjions, and occult 
 miracles might have occurred to them ; but they were poor 
 fijhermen, blejjed with common fenje, nothing more. 
 
 Had they been philojbphers ; they might not have 
 fathomed in a breath, all the Jubtleties that Rome has 
 needed centuries to devife ; and had they dijcerned all thofe 
 niceties, even by grace ; it Jlill is pojjible, they were not free 
 from doubt. 
 
 Tortured as they were by fear, and Jadnejs, a jujpicion of 
 
Change of Subjlance, 
 
 delujion, or delirium would have feemed more natural, than 
 the letter, Jubverjive of all their experience : it being more 
 Juppofable, that the minds of a few men may be dijlurbed, 
 than the abiding conviSions of all men are falje. 
 
 If the dijciples were fatisfied, that one and one, make two, 
 that the whole is greater than its part ; or a vejjel greater 
 than its contents ; that a human body, without lofs of bulk, 
 is greater than a point, or that a jubjlance, cannot properly 
 and literally fever from itjelf ; I contend, that a concejjion of 
 the marvels of Rome would belie every element of con- 
 Jcioufnejs. 
 
 Imagine them taught, that the body which they Jaw, was 
 
 the food they were eating, that Chrijl held his own body in 
 
 ^ his own mouth and hand, and gave himjelf from himfelf with 
 
 1 his own hands, Jlill keeping himjelf to himjelf, or that his 
 
 » entire body, was taken into its own Jlomach, and with its 
 
 full members, and proportions exijled in the bread, and in 
 
 each crumb of the bread, and was fevered from itfelf, when 
 
 they parted from their majler. 
 
 We are told, that thefe are feeming flaws — but feeming — 
 Gracious God — how far, is patience a virtue ? dare they tell 
 
96 
 
 Change of Subjiance, 
 
 me that the dijciples would not have fpurned an hypothejis 
 which outraged their life-long conviftions ? 
 
 There is no ejcape ; they mujl abide by the Jlern letter of 
 every pajjage of Scripture, without the exercife of reajbn, or 
 abandon their dogma. 
 
 And how may I ajk, do the Roman Scholiajls conjlrue the 
 pajjages — a tree is a man ;^ that rock was Chrtjif- "the 
 letter is barred by common Jenje." 
 
 Paufe, Sir, while I apply that anjwer to the words. This 
 is my body ; or this bread is my body ; if the pronoun is ajjign- 
 able to the bread ; is there more affinity between the bread, 
 and the body, than between the tree, and the man? pre- 
 judice apart; what could you charge againjl my Jerious 
 averment, that a tree is a man, that would not recoil againjl 
 your letter ? 
 
 Hence, I infer, that the difciples would rather have 
 doubted their conception, or wakefulnefs, nay, even their 
 rcajbn, than harbor a do6!rine involving abjurdity. 
 
 XIII. In fine Sir, I contend, that it is as natural, and 
 
 Deut. XX. 19. 
 
 I Cor. X. 4. 
 
I 
 
 Change of Subjiance, 
 
 rcajbnable, to Jink in Pyrrhonijm, as to accept a jenje, which 
 entails a doubt of our Jenjes. 
 
 Call to mind, Sir, that thofe fenjes fujlain the certainty of 
 all our convi6!ions ; if falje, our perceptions are falfe ; if 
 loyal ; our perceptions are true ; and our perceptions vague, 
 if our Jenjes are treacherous. 
 
 If then, it is pojjible that our healthy fenjes deceive us, in 
 mijlaking the elements for bread and wine, we mujl regard 
 their whole agency as fickle, if not as falfe ; we muJl doubt 
 the exijlence of a heaven, an earth, and of our fellow man. 
 
 The Apojlles could have fairly demurred to every procefs 
 of fenfe : they who heard the preaching of the Apojlles, 
 with greater reafon, Jhould have doubted their report of 
 what others had heard or that which others had feen with 
 their eyes, and which their hands had handled of the word of 
 life."- 
 
 Let us traverfe the fcale of confidence, accejfible to the 
 difciples. 
 
 It is more certain that they faw Chrijl, than that they 
 
 Epift. John, i. ift and 2nd. 
 
98 
 
 Change of Subjtance. 
 
 truly heard him ; more certain, that they ^o heard, than that 
 they underjlood him ; more certain, that they underjlood 
 him, than that they adopted the letter, and rejeded the 
 figure. 
 
 Again they were not lejs certain that they jaw a real 
 bread, than that they faw a real Chrijl ; Jince both fads 
 have a common bafe — Ergo — It is much more certain as 
 regards them, that the Eucharijl is bread, than that the 
 Eucharijl is the body of Chrijl : to this ijjue, I invite all the 
 fubtlety of all the jchools. 
 
 The reply, that the verdift of the fenjes is only true, 
 pari pajfu, with the fandions of faith, is fallacious: firjl ; 
 becauje, it is jenior of faith, and whether true, or untrue is 
 independent — it is older than faith, becaufe the dijciples Jaw 
 Chrijl, before they believed in him. 
 
 Secondly ; All our ideas of faith rely folely on fenfe ; and 
 their value to us, is meajured by its certainty ; and to faith, 
 which is a conviflion of Divine truth ; there are four ejjen- 
 tials : 
 
 1^0 10 tCUtSful ; 
 
Change of Subjlance. 
 
 ^0!)a0r£t)ealctiljfmrelf; 
 
 (Eac!) m^ltec^ of our fai't^ appear^ in fucj retela= 
 tioti. 
 
 Sir — it is noteworthy — that the /enjes are the Jble 
 channels of all thoje truths, and their Jble vouchers. 
 
 We are ajjured, that there is a Gody from the wonders 
 of the univerje, which Jlriking our Jenjes, prove in the 
 language of Paul, the divinity and power of its Author. 
 
 We believe, that he is truthful; being taught by the 
 vijible creation, that he is too wife, to deceive himjelf, and 
 too good, to deceive us : that he has revealed hi?nfelf, by 
 miracles, which have imprejjed our Jenjes, or the Jenjes of 
 thoJe who attejted them, with their blood and lives : that 
 each myjlery of our faith is found in Scripture^ becauje our 
 eyes have read, or our ears have heard it. 
 
 Thus the fenjes, are the media of all evidence : if they 
 cannot err, the grounds of your faith are firm — it is true, 
 that we gaze on objefls, whoje variety and grandeur pro- 
 claim the being of God : that we fee marks of his wifdom 
 and love : that the eyes of Jix hundred thoufand witnejjes of 
 the miracles of Mofes ; and the eyes of the difciples who 
 
 I 
 
Change of Subjiance. 
 
 certified the miracles of Chrijl, and the glory of his rejurrec- 
 tion ; and the eyes of Chrijlians who for ages have read the 
 myjleries of their faith, have not mocked them. 
 
 Could our fenjes delude us, all ideas of faith would be 
 unhinged : we loje St. Paul's proof from the marvels of 
 nature, of God's exijlence : Jufpicious of all reality, we have 
 no convi6lion of his truth : doubtful would be the miracles 
 dependent on the vijion of others ; doubtful would be the 
 m3'Jleries, nay the fa6l of the written word. 
 
 I now offer Jbme thoughts to the champions of Rome. 
 
 ijl. As no geometric truth can ignore the axiom, the 
 whole is greater than its part ; Jo, if faith relies on fenje, the 
 certainty of faith, being a conclujion, is Jubordinate to the 
 certainty of Jenfe; hence the certainty of faith cannot dijpute 
 the verdift of the Jenjes, that the Eucharijl is bread. 
 
 2nd. The evidence which proves is more clear, and con- 
 clujive to us, than the fad proved : now as the Jenjes under- 
 lie the truths of faith, our Jenjual ajfurance is more clear and 
 conclujive to ourjelves, than the truths of faith : conjequently, 
 the truths of faith cannot bind us to dijcard our Jenjes, which 
 affirm the Eucharijl to be bread. 
 
Change of Subjiance, 
 
 lOI 
 
 3rd. The convidions of our normal fenjes, are, either 
 always falje, or always true : or, Jbmetimes true, and fome- 
 times falfe. 
 
 If always falJe, we can never emerge from error : if Jome- 
 times true, and Jbmetimes falfe, their report is dubious, and 
 faith is unjlable, being a vajjal of fenje : Ergo : the report of 
 our Jane Jenjes is always true ; and that which my eyes pro- 
 nounce bread in the Eucharijl, is bread. 
 
 4th. Common fenJe demands the bejl evidence ; that of our 
 Jenjes, ranks all evidence recognized Jblely through the fenjes ; 
 by their agency only, we know either him, or his miracles, 
 his dodrine, or his mijjion— y^^«//«r ,• although the authority 
 of the fpeaker may feem to imply that the Eucharijl is his 
 body, the evidence of fenfe, pronounces it bread. 
 
 5th. This dogma Jlrikes at the root of faith, which rejls 
 on the tejlimony of the Prophets, of the Apojlles, of Evan- 
 gelijls, of Martyrs, of God the Father, fpeaking at the 
 Jordan, and of Chrijl himfelf : all fubjed to fenfe. 
 
 6th. If fufpicious of my fenfes, I have no proof of the 
 world's exijlence : if uncertain of the world's exijlence, I 
 have no ajfurance that there is a God, who has revealed his 
 
102 
 
 Change of Subjiance. 
 
 will : if not ajjlired that there is a God who has revealed his 
 will, I cannot trujl either the Jincerity of the narrator, or 
 even the faS of the injlitution : if not convinced of the truth, 
 or fa^l of the injlitution, I am not bound to abandon my 
 Jenjes, by adopting its letter. 
 
 Thus — a pri?no ad ultimum : I Jhould not Jlight my fenjes 
 in the matter of the Eucharijl, until Jure of their fidelity, 
 which is amazingly cheering. 
 
 yth. There is equal certainty in the two premijes — I fee 
 the Heavens^ the Eai'th^ the world: I fee bread and wine in 
 the Eucharifi. 
 
 Equally clear, are the two conclujions : the Heavens^ the 
 Earthy the world exiji : the bread and wine exiji. 
 
 Nay, I have a firmer faith in the exijlence of the bread 
 and wine, than in that of the Heavens, becauje, I only Jee 
 the latter, while eyes, tajle, touch and fmell, attejl the reality 
 of the former : however, ajfuming their equality", thoje data 
 afford a demonjlration. 
 
 I fee the Heavens ^ the Earthy a world really exijiing, is 
 clearer to me, than that there is a God who revealed himfelf. 
 
 The firjt being an axiom, the lajl, an inference ; now, the 
 
 I 
 
term, I fee the bread and wine aSiually exijfing, has the janie 
 clearnefs, force, and certainty, as the term ; I fee the Heavens^ 
 the Earthy a world really ex'ift'ing. 
 
 Therefore, we are more confident that v^zfee the bread and 
 wine really extfiingy than that, there is a God who revealed 
 himfelf. 
 
 Can then the authority of God who revealed himjelf, 
 require me, herein, to rule out the evidence of my eyes ? 
 
 8th. There is a greater certainty, that there was a perfon 
 Chrijl who made the fupper with his difciples, than that the 
 Euchariji is properly the body of Chrift^ and we have a higher 
 conviSion, that the Euchariji is breads than that, there was a 
 perfon Chrijl who made the fupper with his difciples ; in 
 logical Jequence, we are more fure, that the Euchariji is 
 hready than that the Euchariji is the body of Chrijl. 
 
 Surely, our conjcious certainty that, there ivas a perfon 
 Chrijl y who made a laji fupper with his difciples, is higher than 
 the certainty, that the words which Chrijl fpake at the fupper 
 Jhould be rendered literally. 
 
 That the Euchariji is bread, is more clear than, that there 
 , was a perfon Chrijl who made the fupper with his difciples. 
 
Jince we learn the latter truth, only from tejlimony, but the 
 former by vijion, our own eyes, being Jafer evidence, than the 
 eyejight of others, to ourjelves. 
 
 For Firjl — The difciples faw their majler difpenfmg the 
 Eucharijl, and all fee that the Eucharijl is bread. 
 
 Second — It cannot be denied, that at the jupper, the dif- 
 ciples were in fore affliftion, while we fee the bread with 
 tranquil minds. 
 
 Third — Our fenfes, have no contact with the Jlatements of 
 the difciples, but tejlify diredly, to the bread of the Eucharijl. 
 
 A truce to logic, as we track the fhifts of bigotry. 
 
 Let us fancy a mijjion, to fome Pagan race, to teach, the 
 being of God, and the myjlery of the Eucharijl. 
 
 Suppofe, they commune without comment, and after 
 frequent partakings of the facred elements, which thofe 
 Neophytes believe, to be real bread, and real wine, you wijh 
 to undeceive them. 
 
 It is certain, on Roman theory, that their deluded fenfes, 
 mijlake for fenfual food the body and blood of our Lord ; it 
 is Jlill more certain, that you cannot furmount their prejudice. 
 
 Would you urge Chrijl's miracles? As yet they know 
 
 I 
 
Change of Subjiance. 
 
 '°5 
 
 him not : appeal to authority ? they recognije none : talk 
 of faith ? — talk to the winds : prove God's exijlence and his 
 revealed will in the wonders of nature ? they will ajli you to 
 tajle, and Jmell the elements, and to prove them bread, and 
 wine, and your faith falje, will require you to open your eyes 
 without reajbning. 
 
 Would you prejs the lights of natural religion, and gently 
 lead to furrender of fenfe, on the di6!um of Chrijl ? You 
 are again at fault, as thoje men are void of common fenje, or 
 will refer your exactions to injanity. 
 
 Hence it Jeems, that with Jbund faculties ailing in healthy 
 concert and in their Jimplejl fundions, we are victims of felf- 
 delujion. 
 
 If fo — Adam could not and ought not to have been certain, 
 that he was eating forbidden fruit ; for if he was fure that it 
 was fruit, the Pagans, we imagine, unwittingly eating the 
 hallowed bread, have like certainty of its reality, and if they 
 are capable of fuch certainty, it is real bread, unlefs we may 
 be certain of that, which far from being certain is not even true. 
 
 If fo, our firjl Parents might jujlly have quejlioned all they 
 had Jecn and all they Jaw. 
 
io6 
 
 Change of Subjiance, 
 
 If Adam could have doubted his fenjes ; a fortiori^ could 
 Abraham have doubted, that he heard the voice of God, 
 calling him to quit his country and kinsfolk : a fortiori^ had 
 Mojes caufe of doubt, that God fpake to him in Horeb : a 
 fortioriy Jhould the Jews have defied their eyes when they 
 faw the Jim Jland Jlill to enjure the triumph of IJrael ; when 
 they Jaw rivers, changed to blood, and the terrors of the 
 Exodus, rivalled by Pharaoh's jugglers : a fortiori, Jhould 
 the Prophets have JuJpeSed thoje dim types, and parables, 
 Jhadowing the counfel of God, their dreams, and vijions, of 
 day, and night : their trances, their raptures, and thoJe mul- 
 tiform revelations, Jujtained by evidence, Jubordinate to Jenje : 
 a fortiori^ Jhould the Eajlern Magi have Jcouted their Jenjes 
 when their meteor guide Jlood over a child, whoje manger 
 cradle, chimed Jo ill with majejly: a fortiori, Jhould the 
 difciples, have ajjigned to illufion, thofe miracles of the 
 Saviour, which infringed nature's laws ; for, if ever inclined 
 to quejlion fenje, it is not in matters of bread, and wine ; 
 but in marvels, that awe the fenJe, and challenge the 
 reajbn. 
 
 The beacons of Rome Jlrand us on the quickjands of 
 
 II 
 
Change of Subjiance, 
 
 107 
 
 doubt ; in fancied Jacrifice to faith, Jhe hazards the bulwarks 
 of faith ; hazards, did I Jay ? Jhe rends the fortrefs, and up- 
 roots its baj*e ; injenjible to Jatire or Jhame, Jhe Jandions the 
 atheijl's feoff, nay, poifons the infidel's Jhaft, and Jlultifies 
 herfelf, in blajling the keyjlone of faith. 
 
 Our wayward mother mujl pardon our zeal for the fenjes, 
 which as witnejjes for the univerje, warn us to be jealous of 
 their rights. 
 
 I have now Jir, to apologize for the hajle of thej*e letters, 
 in behalf of their matter, which I claim to be conclujive. 
 
 I have expojed the hazards of truth, tampering with 
 duplicity, and of craft, and arrogance, being Jhared by their 
 own devices. 
 
 The partizans of Rome may boajl an able defence of a 
 bad cauje : God in his wiJHom, Juffering an era, brilliant 
 with eloquence and genius, to tajk its giant energies in 
 clouding truth, that attrition of intelled might Jhed frejh 
 lujlre on his holy faith. 
 
 I may feem bold, to enter the lijls with Juch Jlalwart foes ; 
 but while thofe proud Philijlines, are defying the armies of 
 the living God, may I not hope, though as feebly armed as 
 
io8 
 
 Change of Subjiance, 
 
 the Shepherd warrior of IJrael, to confound them with a 
 Jingle blow? 
 
 In my own cauje, I would dejpair ; but I am fearlefs in 
 thine, O God, who out of the mouths of babes and fucklings 
 haji perfe^ed praife. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 I 
 
#otes to Cranllator'jS i^refac 
 
 EeeD* 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVJEKSITY OF 
 
 Atteri et frangi fidelium dentihus. 
 
 Council of Rome, ijl SeJJion, aI^. 1^59. 
 
 CoUedio Regia : torn. 25, p. 592. 
 De latere effufus eji. 
 
 6, Council of Rome, a. d. 1079. 
 Colledio Regia : Rom. Coun. 
 4 Lateran 1215, capitula i. 
 Summa conciliorum, torn, i, p. 296 B. 
 Sub Jingults, feu particulis — una cum anima et divinitate. 
 
 Cone. Trid. 13th SeJJion, a. d. 1551. 
 
 Summa cone, de fide catholica, tom. i. p. 296. 
 The Church decrees that all who negle6l to receive the 
 
 FORNIA 
 
1 1 o Notes to Tranjlators Preface, 
 
 Eucharijl at Eajler Jhall be excluded from the houje of God 
 when living, and deprived of Chrijlian burial when dead. 
 
 Butler cites 21 Lateran — Cat. Lejjon 21. 
 
 S)empec, ^u 
 
 St. Vincent de Lerens, 5th century commonitorium 
 cap. 2. Milner, end of Con. p. 179. 
 
 appeal to Scripture, 
 
 Butler's Cat. Eucharijl Bellarmine, Arnauld, &c. &c. 
 
 lett. 
 
 Hocus pocus — hoc eji corpus — he. &c. 
 
 Sl?ent0 of fe)aint0. 
 
 St. Dominic did penance for others — the canons jlated the 
 terms — to wit : ten years for a homicide : a man guilty of 
 many murders, being precluded by death ; St. Dominic by 
 commutation, completed an hundred years with 20 chaplets 
 and flagellation in fix days : he thought that during Lent, 
 he could accomplijh one thoufand years. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1062, lib. 60, fee. 52. Paris, 1758. 
 
 1 
 
Purgatory, 
 
 This treajiiry entrujled to the Pope, conjijls of the merits 
 of Chrijt, Mary and the Saints. Pope's Bull, 1825. 
 
 Charlemagne was invoked as a Saint, miracles were per- 
 formed at his tomb 250 years before his canonization : he 
 had four queens and five morganatic wives in thirteen years. 
 Fleury takes much pains to Jhow a pojjibility that he had 
 not two at the fame time. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 814, lib. 46, jec. 9. 
 Charlemagne was canonized 29 Dec. 1165, by an Anti- 
 pope (Pafcal III.) ; the honor approved by the Pope. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 1165, lib. 71, fee. 22. 
 Pierre d'Abre — Inquifitor, jlain by the populace for cruelty; 
 was made a faint by Paul III. at requeji of Charles F. 
 
 Vol. 24th Fleury, a.d. 1485, lib. 106, fee. 16. 
 
 Purgatory* 
 
 The council of Trent enjoined found doSirine in the 
 matter of Purgatory without defining it. The Benedi6!ine 
 editors admit that the fathers not only differed from each 
 other on this fubjef?, but that each was not conjijlent with 
 himfelf : Cone. Trid. 25th Sejf. 
 
 Benedic. Ed. St. Ambrofe I. 385. 
 
112 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator 5 Preface, 
 
 It is the pious opinion of illujlrious men that fouls do not 
 JufFer in purgatory on Sunday, but return to their punijh- 
 ment on Monday. The mafs in honor of the angels is cele- 
 brated on Sunday to propitiate their mediation for the dead 
 and dying. Fleury, a.d. 1062, vol. 13, lib. 60, fee. 54. 
 
 Council of Florence — 
 Purgatorium ignem ejfe. 
 
 Souls are purged from venial Jin by fire and the prayers of 
 the priejls ; mortal Jins by eternal fire — (if not difpenfed ?) — 
 ^ejiio de igne purgatorio. 
 
 4th June, A.D. 1438. Collec. Regia, de Purgatorio, 
 
 Summa conciliorum, tom. i, p. 396. 
 Purgatory — confirmed at Trent — 25th Sejion, a.d. 
 1563, Summa cone. tom. i. p. 588. 
 
 Immaculate conception- 
 
 This dogma feems to have been broached in the 12th 
 century. John Duns (Scotus) formally introduced it in 
 1307 — he fujlained the pofition, that the conception of the 
 virgin by her mother, was immaculate, by 200 arguments 
 before the univerfity of Paris. 
 
Immaculate Conception. 
 
 "3 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1308, vol. 19, lib. 89, fee. 28. 
 Chal. Die. Duns. 
 
 St. Bernard eondemn^d it as a novity unjiijlained by au- 
 thority of Seripture, reajbn or tradition. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 1140, vol. 14, lib. 68, fee. 70. 
 
 In the liturgy of St. Bajil the virgin and jaints are prayed 
 for. St. BaJll, Op. 
 
 Anterior to a. d. 1307, both Francifcans and Dominicans 
 oppofed this dodrine — the Francifcans changing their faith 
 contejled the point with the Dominicans. The former 
 offered proof by miracles, the latter quoted Scripture and the 
 Fathers. F. Paul, Trent, a.d. 1676, p. 170. 
 
 The Council of Bajle recommends the obfervance of the 
 fejlival of the conception, not as an article of faith, but in 
 compliance with ufage. 36 Sejjion, a.d. 1439. 
 
 A.D. 1546, Paul III. direds the Council of Trent not 
 to meddle with it. F. Paul, 171, Trent. 
 
 About A. D. 1845, the Pope coUeSed by letter the views of 
 the bijhops, of whom 40 are known to have dijfented — and 
 made it a part of the Roman creed, and a condition of 
 falvation. 
 
114 Notes to Tranjlators Preface, 
 
 The Bijhop of Arras, France, in his Pajloral, a.d. 1867, 
 exprejjes himfelf forcibly, Satan howled in hell^ vjhen the 
 do£frine was proclaimed. 
 
 Pjalter of Bonaventura, Genoa, a.d. 1606. 
 
 Come to her all ye that are weary and heavy laden an4 /he 
 Jhall give you reft, 
 
 Chrijl fays, Come to me all ye^ &c. Matt. xi. 28. 
 
 There is but one mediator between God and man — the man^ 
 Chriji Jejus. 1 Tim. ii. 5. 
 
 Blejfed are the paps which thou haji fucked — yea^ jays 
 Chrijl, rather blejfed are they that hear the word of God and 
 keep it. Luke xi. 27, 28. 
 
 St. Paul ajks prayers for himjelf. 
 
 2 Thefs. iii. i. Hebrews xiii. 18. 
 
 I Thejs. V. 25. Romans xv. 30. 
 
 (Efficacy of tjc feupper^ 
 
 The views of the fathers, fchoolmen and Roman divines 
 are colleded by Archbijhop Tillotfon. Some of them are 
 noted below. Calixtus — publijhed at Helmjladt — is the 
 bejl authority, as the obje6l of his life was to effect 
 
Efficacy of the Supper. 
 
 "5 
 
 a comprehenjion of the Calvinijls, Lutherans and Romans. 
 
 2nd Century — TertuUian — The firjl Latin father whoje 
 works are extant. " The bread is his own body, that is, 
 the iigure and image." Ad Mardonem L 4, 571. 
 
 Edit. Paris, 1634. 
 
 " If we doubt our JenJ*es, we may doubt whether our 
 " Savior was deceived in what he heard, Jaw and touched : 
 " he might have been deceived in the voice from heaven, in 
 " the jmell of the ointment at his burial, and in the wine at 
 " the Jupper." Lib. de anima, p. 319. 
 
 3rd Century — Origen — The highejl name in Church 
 hijlory. 
 
 " The bread is Chrijl's typical or Jymbolical body." 
 
 Edit. Huetii, Commonit. on Matt. xv. 
 
 Cardinal Perron fays that " here Origen talks like a 
 heretic." 
 
 3rd Century — St, Cyprian^ to Cecilius, Ep. 63, " by 
 wine the blood of Chrijl is figured." 
 
 4th Century— iS^. Augujiin, 
 
 " The elements are the figure and Jign of Chrijl*s body 
 " and blood. Our Lord does not doubt to fay : this is my 
 
ii6 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator* s Preface. 
 
 " body when he gave the Jign of his body." 
 
 Tom. 6, p. 187. Edit. Bafil, 1596. 
 
 Speaking of Judas : he delivered to the difciples the 
 figure of his body. Enarat, 3rd PJalm. 
 
 Tom. 8, p. 16. 
 
 Commonitorium, 98 PJalm. Ye are not to eat this body 
 which you fee, &c. the Jacrament Jpiritually underjlood will 
 give you life. Tom. 9, p. 1105. 
 
 Speaking of his body : ye Jhall have me according to 
 grace but not to the flejh. Tra6l 50 in Joan. 
 
 The term, Sacrament, implies that from rejemblance, 
 things take the names of things they reprejent. 
 
 Tom. 2, p. 93, 23rd Epijile. 
 
 As we receive the Jimilitude of his death by baptijm Jo 
 may we aljb receive the likenejs of his fleJh and blood : that 
 neither truth may be wanting, &c. quoted by Gratian de 
 confecrat. dis. 2. Sec. utrum. 
 
 4th Century — Theodoret, 
 
 Chrijl honored the Jymbols with the name of his body and 
 blood, not changing nature, but adding grace to nature. 
 
 Dialog. I. 
 
 I 
 
Efficacy of the Supper. 
 
 117 
 
 They remain in their former Jubjlance. Dialog. 2. 
 
 5th Century — Gelafius — Pope. 
 
 The facrament ceajeth not to be the fubjlance or nature of 
 bread. Adv. Eutych. et Nejl. fee. v. pars 3. 
 
 Biblioth. Patrum, tom. 4. 
 
 6th Century — Facundm — African bi/hop. 
 
 Bread not properly his body, p. 144. Edit. Paris, 1676. 
 
 13th Century — Scotus Duns ; until the Council of Lateran, 
 12 15, it was not necejjary to believe the dodrine of Tran- 
 /iibjlantiation. In Sent, i, 4, dis. 11, 9, 3. 
 
 15th Century — Tonjiall; before the Lateran Council — the 
 manner of the Eucharijl was a matter of opinion. 
 
 De Eucharijl. i, p. 146. 
 
 1 6th Century — Erafmus. — It was late before the church 
 defined Tranjubjlantiation unknown to the ancients, both 
 in name and thing. In i Epis. ad Corin. c. 7. 
 
 16th Century — Cardinal Cajetan. Card, of Leo X. 
 
 There is nothing in the gofpel that requires the belief that 
 the words of Chrijl, this is my body, are to be taken in a 
 proper fenje. In Aquin. 3rd part, c. 75, art. i. 
 
 Mem. This pajfage is expunged in the Roman edition by 
 
I 1 8 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface, 
 
 order of Pius V. ^gid. — confid. Jacram. 21, 75, art. i, 
 n. 13. 
 
 1 6th Century — Fijher, Bijhop of Rochejler. 
 
 In the words of the injlitution, there is not one word from 
 which the true prejence of the flejh and blood in the majs 
 can be prov^ed. Contra Cap. Bab. c. 10, n. 2. 
 
 feetienti) (Ecumenical Council. 
 
 Great, holy and unherfal, held by Conjlantine V. with 338 
 Bijhops, including the mojl eminent prelates in the Church : 
 the mijOion church of Rome was not reprejented. 
 
 Col. Regia, torn. 17, p. 591. 
 At the 2nd Council of Nice, the Jeventh Council of Con- 
 Jlantinople was denounced as mendacious calumniators of 
 Chriji : the council of Iconoclajis, 
 
 The church claim 377 bijhops prejent — better opinion, 
 318. 6th SeJTion, 6 Oa. a.d. 787. 
 
 Vid. Colle^tio Regia. 
 Sacrofanda concilia, tom 8, p. 1046. 
 Images mujl be adored with relative affedion, rejerving to 
 
Seventh 'Ecumenical Council. 
 
 119 
 
 God the higher worjhip of Latria : unanimous. 2nd SeJJion 
 of 2nd Nice, 27th September. 
 
 God does not prohibit the worjhip of manufa^ures. 
 
 Sacrofanda concilia, tom. 8. p. 759. 
 
 The text of this decree in the Roman authorities is an 
 afterthought. Seven years after jecond Nice, the Council of 
 Frankfort, called by Adrian I. a.d. 794, charges that 
 Council by its Jecond canon de adorandis imaglnibus^ with 
 anathematizing all who do not worjhip images with the fame 
 adoration as the Holy Trinity. Eginhartus pretends that it is 
 not the Council of Nice that pajjed the canon that Frankfort 
 condemns, becaufe it is called by Frankfort the Council of 
 C. P. ; Fleury, more honejl, although his conjcience is galled 
 by Juperjlition, not only ajjerts the fa^, but leaves Adrian 
 with the Jlain of Jubterfuge. 
 
 It is well known that the Jeventh council of C. P. was not 
 held at Conjlantinople, but at Hieres in AJia Minor, and 
 only Jb called from its proximity to C. P. Nice, modern 
 Ifnick, is but feventy-five miles Jbuth-eajl of C. P. It is not 
 fuppojable that the fathers at Frankfort, many of whom no 
 doubt were at Jecond Nice — the matter public and recent — 
 
I20 Notes to Tranjlators Preface, 
 
 would have condemned that canon — dijregarding Adrian's 
 denial that Juch canon exijled — without an official know- 
 ledge of its text. 
 
 Cone. Francofordienje, Col. Reg. torn. 20, p. 149. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 794. 
 
 Pajc. ad Frudegardufn. Pajc. admits jubjlantially the 
 novelty of his do6!rine. 
 
 Ratram, i2mo. Latin and French, 1686 — he wrote this 
 treatije by order of Charles the Bald, and dedicated it to 
 him. 
 
 John Scotus — Erigena — his works were condemned at the 
 council of Verceil, but not until 200 years after they were 
 written. Fleury, a.d. 859, lib. 49, Jec. 51. 
 
 Scotus was a faint for many years — Baronius Jlruck his 
 name from the calendar — as unjbund on the Eucharijl. 
 
 Archhijhop of Mentz, better known as Rabanus Maurus, 
 Abbot of Fulda. Epis. ad Heribal, cap. 33. 
 
 Council of Rome, a.d. 1059. 
 
Berenger, 
 
 121 
 
 Ego Berengarius^ &c. non folum facramento^ fed in veritate 
 manlbus facerdotum^ tra£lari^frangt^ et fidelium dentibus atteri 
 — alfo relapfe of Berenger. Collec. Regia, torn. 25, p. 592. 
 
 6th Council of Rome, February, a.d. 1079. 
 
 De virgine natum — in cruce pependit — corpus in dextra 
 Patris fedens effe^ in proprietate naturae et veritate fubfiantiae. 
 
 3Iutiiciou0 iDmiOiong?. 
 
 TraSfari and frangi fidelium dentibus^ 2iXZ excluded from 
 Berengarius' Jecond confirmance of the faith. 
 
 Collec. Reg. torn. 26, p. 588. 
 
 The carnal theory of the Eucharijl has been a fource of 
 chronic agitation to the Church. The minorite Friars, a.d. 
 137 1, under the leaderjhip of John de Laune, raifed tejl 
 quejlions with fanatic zeal. 
 
 If the hojl falls in a foul place or is eaten by a beajl, is 
 Chrijl thereby elevated to Heaven ? or does he pafs into the 
 Jlomach, or does the bread refumc its nature ? 
 
 St. Thomas held that the bread, once changed to the 
 body and divinity of Chrijl, could not be rejlored to its cereal 
 nature. Viclefqui in England, contra ; Gregory XI. would 
 
122 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator's Preface, 
 
 not take the rejponfibility of deciding : at the juggejlion of 
 the grand Inquijitor, he declared all excommunicate who 
 jhould entertain the quejlions. 
 
 Fleury, A. d. 1371, lib. 97, fee. 21. 
 
 Q^anner of tje (Euc^anft* 
 
 Verona's fubjlitute " to accommodate the views of both 
 parties." F. Paul. C. of Trent, lib. 4, p. 309, 310. 
 
 Edit. Lon. 1676. 
 Sacros. cons. tom. 20, p. 611. 
 
 Hibect^ of Coixfcience, ^u 
 
 Encyclical Pius IX. a.d. 1864. 
 
 jam'ficfal %zmx^* 
 
 Pius IX. Jufpends this praSice during his reign : he is a 
 rare injlance of perjbnal purity in the papacy. Antonelli 
 has machiavellized the Pontiff, who commenced his career as a 
 Reformer. There are many exemplary prelates in America, 
 among whom Bijhop McCloJky is eminent for capacity and 
 
Baptifm of Bells. 
 
 123 
 
 private worth. The clergy of Cuba and Mexico have not 
 yet felt the efFeds of the Reformation. 
 
 ffiaptiTm of BellsJ. 
 
 Now Jo common, was forbid by the capitular of Charle- 
 magne. Fleury, a.d. 789, lib. 44, Jec. 46. 
 
 The Diet of Nuremberg, a.d. 1518, condemned the prac- 
 tice as Juperjtitious, its objed being to drive away tempejls 
 and devils. Recently at Montreal 2 bells were baptifed, 
 one named Marie, the other Edward Albert Louis, with 
 godfathers and godmothers. 
 
 Trent, 4th December, a.d. 1563, 35th SeJJion. 
 All are anathematized who deny this power to the Church. 
 
 Summa concil. torn. i. p. 598. 
 
 W^z tDorlti motiejsf. 
 
 Galileo. 
 
 13th Century. Roger Bacon the philojbpher was im- 
 prijbned Jix years by the General of his order (Francijcan) 
 on charges like to thoje againjl Galileo. 
 
124 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator* s Preface. 
 
 The monks of St. Medard had a milk tooth of Chrijl. 
 At Laon they had the milk of the Virgin. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1124, lib. 67, fee. 36. 
 At the recent dejlrudion of the convents of Mexico, Dr. 
 Navarro, now Conjiil General from Mexico at New York 
 took jbme of the relics, bones of jaints — to the family of 
 Prejident Juarez ; when broken they proved to be papier 
 mache, made of mufic paper, lines and notes Jlill dijlind. 
 Honor and veneration to relics. 
 
 Trent 35th Sejion. 
 Summa cone. tom. i. p. 588. 
 
 jftuitgf of feanctitp. 
 
 Miracles are Jb-called. Miracles were performed by falje 
 relics at Dijon. Fleury, a. d. 844, lib. 48, fee. 21. 
 
 Sacrifice— ioltia- 
 
 Hojl, — viSim or facrifice. The mafs continues the facri- 
 fice of Chrijl. But. cat. Eucharijl. 
 
Ultimatum, 
 
 I2C 
 
 Ultimatum. 
 
 More martyrs have been burnt for rejeding this dodrine 
 than for dijbelief in any other. 
 
 A. D. 597 — Gregory I. injlruSs St. Augujline to accom- 
 modate the ceremonies of the Church to heathen rites. 
 
 Chalmers Die. Aug. 
 
 Henry of Liege, nearly allied to the Duke of Brabant, 
 
 conjecrated Bijhop before he was Priejl, was guilty of crimes 
 
 not fit to repeat : he was advtfed by the Pope to be converted 
 
 and not to truji to his youth. 
 
 Fleury, A. D. 1273, lib. 86, fee. 27. 
 Benedift XII. promijed Petrarch a dijpenjation that he 
 might retain his benefices, if he married Laura. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 1374, lib. 97, fee. 33. 
 Alexander VI. grants a difpenfation to Ferdinand of 
 Naples, to marry his own aunt, a child of 13. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1495, lib. 118, fee. 75. 
 Clement XI. injlru6?s his mijjionaries to fuit Chrijlianity to 
 the liking of the Emperor, and incorporate Chinefe cere- 
 monies in the ritual, a.d. 1700. — Life of Claude. 
 
126 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator's Preface, 
 
 The Roman Church has a dijcriminating dijcipline (known 
 as the policy of imitation) for every country. She would 
 hejitate to trammel the Bible in the United States — as jhe 
 does among more Jubmijjive nations. 
 
 The Maronites — originally monothelites, proteSed by 
 Emperor Heraclius — are now incorporated in the Church of 
 Rome — their priejls marry— jervice in Arabic — majs in an- 
 cient Syriac. 
 
 The United Greeks ej^imated at two millions are united 
 to Rome with refervations : their Priejls marry— jacrament 
 in both kinds : Greek fajls, and liturgy in Greek. 
 
 The Patriarch of Antioch with advice of Patriarch of 
 Ccnjlantinople, excommunicates the Pope and the whole 
 Roman Church for perjijlent Jimony, ufury and many other 
 errors. Fleury, a. d. 1238, lib. 81, fee. 11. 
 
 The Reverend R. W. Morgan in his learned work — St. 
 Paul in Britain proves beyond doubt that the Anglican 
 
Ignored by the Britijh Church, 
 
 Church received her creed from the lips of the apojlles. 
 
 Catena authoritatum. 
 
 Clemens Romanus, co-laborer with St. Paul : TertuUian, 
 2nd century — Eujebius, 3rd century — Chryjbjlom, 4th cen- 
 tury — Theodoret, 5th century — &c. &c. &c. 
 
 St. Paul preached probably in both Greek and Latin. 
 Caefar Jlates that the Greek was known to the Druids. 
 
 Mr. Morgan makes a probable cafe from the underjigned 
 chronology of hijlorical fragmenta, that Chrijlianity was firjl 
 introduced into Britain by Jojeph of Arimathea, a. d. 36 — 
 quotes the admijjion of Cardinal Pole in Parliament a. d. 
 1555, that the Britons were the firjl to receive the Chrijlian 
 religion. At that date Rome was Pagan. 
 
 It is now generally admitted that Conjlantine, and his 
 mother Helena, were native Britons of the Royal blood, and 
 there can be little doubt that the Eajl was more indebted for 
 purity of faith to the Apojlolic Church of Britain, than 
 Britain to the Eajl. 
 
 None but a lunatic would doubt, fays Baronius, that Con- 
 jlantine and Helena were born in Britain. 
 
 Baronius ad. ann. 306. 
 
 127 
 
EeputJiated ftp ^bignon. 
 
 From A. D. 1305 to 1377, Jeven Popes at Avignon — called 
 by papal hijlorians the Babylonijh captivity of the Popes. 
 
 Their licentious lives provoked the Romans to expel 
 them : ad interim, the Germans elected rival Popes at 
 Rome. 
 
 Clement VII. at Avignon and Urban VI. at Rome excom- 
 municate each other. Fleury, a. d. 1379, lib. 97, fee. 61. 
 
 ^opeapinfti^ope* 
 
 Stephen VII. A. d. 896, condemns his predecejjbr Formo- 
 Jus — A.D. 89 1 — has his body exhumed and brought into council, 
 drejjes him in Pontifical robes, ajjigns him an advocate — 
 calls on him to anjwer for his crimes — has 3 fingers cut off ; 
 the body thrown into the Tiber. Col. Regia, tom. 24, 688. 
 
 Stephen is put in irons and Jlrangled. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 896, lib. 54, fee. 27. 
 
 Pope Sergius III. condemns Formofus. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 906, lib. 54, fee. 42. 
 
 a. d. 963, Pope John XII. drives Pope Leo VIII. from 
 Rome. 
 
 II 
 
Repudiated by Avignon. 
 
 129 
 
 A. D. 972, Benedict VI. and Boniface VII. are rival 
 popes. Benedift is jlrangled, Boniface ejeded. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 972, lib. 56, fee. 36. 
 
 A. D. 997, Gregory V. Pope. John XVI. Anti-pope. 
 
 A. D. 1 118, Gelajius II. Pope. Gregory VIII. Anti-pope. 
 
 A. D. 1 130, Innocent II. Pope. Anacletus II. Anti-pope. 
 
 A. D. 1 159, Alexander III. Pope. Vidor IV. Anti-pope. 
 
 A.D. 1 164, Alexander III. Pope. Pafcal III. Anti-pope. 
 
 A. D. 1 168, Alexander III. Pope. Calixtus. III. Anti-pope. 
 
 A. D. 1 1 75, Alexander III. Pope. Innocent III. Anti-pope. 
 
 A. D. 1295, Boniface VIII. confines Ex-pope Celejlin V. 
 in a cell about the Jize of his body lejl he may ele^l to re- 
 fume the Pontificate he has rejigned — guards him night 
 and day with 6 knights and 30 foldiers. Celejlin dies 
 of cruelty. Boniface celebrates a folemn mafs for him at 
 Rome. Fleury, a d. 1295, lib. 89, fee. 41. 
 
 A.D. 1389, Pope Clement VII. at Avignon, and 
 Pope Boniface IX. at Rome, interchange excommunica- 
 tion. Fleury, lib. 54, fee. 42. 
 
 A. D. 1463, Pius II. ijfues a bull condemning his own 
 books. Fleury, lib. 112, fee. 10 1. 
 
I30 
 
 Notes to Tranjlators Preface. 
 
 Council iDitlj CounciU 
 
 Second Ecumenical Council of Nice, repudiates Jeventh 
 Ecumenical Council of Conjlantinople. Col. Regia. 
 
 Council of Frankfort, called by the Pope, condemns the 
 idolatry canon of 2nd Nice. See ante, p. 119. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 794, lib. 44, Jec. 38. 
 The Council of Rome condemns the council held by Pope 
 Formojus Jame year. Stephen VII. Pope. 
 
 Col. Reg. tom. 24, p. 688. 
 Fleury, a. d. 896, lib. 54, fee. 28. 
 The Council of Rome condemns the Council of Stephen 
 VII. and Jujlains Formofus. 
 
 Col. Reg. tom. 24, 903, A. D. 896, Col. Reg. 
 Sergius III. a. d. 906 , condemns Formojus and honors 
 Stephen VII. 
 
 The Pope and Council of Ferrara excommunicate the 
 Council of Bajle as Jeditious and contumacious. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1438, lib. 107, fee. 79. 
 The Council of Bajle annuls the Council of Ferrara as 
 fchifmatics and fornicators. 2nd Sejjion. 
 
Councils with Popes, 
 
 131 
 
 Councils tDit!) i9opeg?> 
 
 Council of Rome depofes John XII. for incejl, murder, 
 blajphemy, and eleSs Leo VII I. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 963, lib. 56, fee. 6 and 7. 
 
 John XII. with mojl of the Jame council who depojed him- 
 jelf condemns Leo as adulterer and ujurper ; aljb condemns 
 the council. Fleury, a. d. 972 to 975, lib. 56, fee. 7. 
 
 Gregory VIL depofed by the Council of Worms. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1076, lib. 62, fee. 28. 
 
 The general Council of Pifa denounces Benedict XIII. 
 A. D. 1394, and Gregory XII. a. d. 1406, as perjured 
 heretics. 15th SeJJion. 
 
 The Council of Conjlance depofes Pope John XXIII. 
 for detejlable habits. Fleury, a. d. 1415, lib. 103, fee. 59. 
 
 Pope Eugenius IV. equips gallies to fight the gallies 
 of the Council of Bajle. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1437, lib. 107, fee. 44. 
 
 The Council of Bajle depofes Pope Eugenius IV. as a 
 
 perjured, incorrigible and dangerous heretic. 34th SejOion. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1439, lib. 108, fee. 74. 
 
 The Council of Milan fufpends Julius II. in the name of 
 
132 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface. 
 
 the Father, Son, and Holy Ghojl, as hardened, contu- 
 macious and incorrigible. 8th Sejjion. 
 Fleury, a. d. 15 12, lib. 122, Jec. 113. 
 
 Gregory I. — St. Gregory — dejcribes the prelates as con- 
 cealing wolves' teeth under the faces of Jheep. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 595, lib. 35, fee. 39. 
 The mojl holy bijhops engage in war like the laity. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 674, lib. 29, fee. 50. 
 Battle and bloodfhed — murder at St. Peter's ; quarrel 
 between Pope and Bijhop. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 864, lib. 50, fee. 33. 
 Bifhop Athanajius puts out the eyes of his brother, the 
 Duke of Naples, fends him prifoner to Rome and ufurps his 
 Government. Pope John VIII. praifes the bijhop as loving 
 God more than his brother and plucking out the eye that 
 offended according to the precepts of the fcripture. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 877, lib. 52, fee. 47. 
 Council of Mayence — Shocking incejl of bijhops. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 888, lib. 54, fee. 2. 
 
 I 
 
Prelacy. 
 
 133 
 
 Some of the clergy live in open liccntioufnejs. 
 
 Fleury, A. d. 956, lib. 55, fee. 55. 
 
 King Edgar's addrejs to the Council. 
 
 The clergy jejl and laugh at mafs, are drunkards, 
 gamblers, gluttons, wantons. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 969, lib. 56, fee. 30. 
 
 The Bijhops, bigamijls, drunkards, ufurers, perjured, &c. 
 — many of the clergy do not know the apojlles' creed — guilty 
 of every poffible crime. Fleury, A. d. 974, lib. 56, fee. 44. 
 
 Benedid VIII. forbids the clergy to have mijlrejjes — 
 orders their children to be Jlaves in the churches where their 
 fathers are priejls. Fleury, a. d. 1022, lib. 58, fee. 47. 
 
 The prelates dream of nothing but the gratification of 
 their brutal pajjions. Fleury, a. d. 1394, lib. 99, fee. i. 
 
 The bijhop of Prague caufes a bijhop to be beaten and a 
 priejl to be robbed and beaten. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 1074, lib. 62, fee. 10. 
 
 In convention at London, the archbifhop of York jits on 
 the knees of the archbijhop of Canterbury ; their partisans 
 then fight with fijls and clubs. King laughs : the legate ad- 
 journs the Co\mQ\\y fine die. Fleury, A. d. i I76,lib. 72,fec.58. 
 
134 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface, 
 
 The Council of Ravenna condemns the condufl of the 
 clergy as Jcandalous and contemptible — forbids the clergy to 
 enter houjes of debauchery or bear arms. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1317, lib. 92, fee. 37. 
 Debauchery the occupation of the clergy of Spain. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1473, lib. 114, jec. 8. 
 Clergy often appear in public with loofe women. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1537, lib. 138, fee. 31. 
 
 Bloody fights with fljls and clubs between the Greek and 
 
 Rom^n priejts were common at the Holy Sepulchre at Jeru- 
 
 Jalem until within a few years — the Turkijh authorities in- 
 
 terpojed with force to rejlore peace. 
 
 St. Cyprian at the Council of Carthage charges the See of 
 Rome with tyranny. Each bijhop is anjwerable only to 
 God. Fleury, a. d. 256, lib. 7, fee. 29. 
 
 Canon of John VIII. confirmed at the Council of Troyes : 
 no layman^ unlefs dejiredy muji dare to fit in the prefence of a 
 bi/hop. 4 Sefs. Council of Troyes, a. d. 878. 
 
 Fleury, A. d. 878, lib. 52, fee. 53. 
 
Hierarchs. 
 
 135 
 
 Gregory VII. threatens to anathematize all France unlejs 
 King Philip abandons Jimony — the authority of Zachary 
 who depofed the King of France, is given — Zachary aljb 
 abjblved the French from allegiance. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1073, lib. 62, fee. 6. 
 
 Gregory VII. depojes and excommunicates Henry, Roman 
 Emperor— abjblves his Jubjefts from allegiance — authorijes 
 the eledion of another Emperor. 
 
 Fleury, A. d. 1076, lib. 62, fee. 36. 
 
 Gregory VII. depofes and excommunicates the Emperor of 
 Germany — condemns him to be worjled in all combats — the 
 anathema is in form of a letter to St. Peter, his brother 
 Paul, and all the faints. Fleury, A. d. 1080, lib. 63, fee. i. 
 
 Gregory VII. claims the right to fubjed all the kingdoms 
 of Europe to the Papacy — he claims mojl of them as fiefs of 
 St. Peter. Fleury, a. d. ic8i, lib. 63, fee. 8. 
 
 Hildebrand — Gregory VII. was eleSed Pope by acclama- 
 tion of the lower orders of Rome, and called to his aid the 
 arm of fecular power — the aft of canonical election is ante- 
 dated to the day of his popular eleftion before Alexander 
 was buried, Dupin, Hildebrand. 
 
136 
 
 Notes to 'Tranjlator's Preface. 
 
 Celejlin III. when crowning Henry VI. — kicks the crown 
 which he holds in his hands, to the floor, to ajjert his claim to 
 dcpofe Emperors. Fleury, a. d. 1191, lib. 74, fee. 29. 
 
 Clement V. depofes John of England, and abjblves his 
 jubjefts from allegiance — no one may eat with him or fpeak 
 to him under pain of excommunication. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 121 i, lib. 77, fee. 5. 
 
 The Council of Lateran with approval of Innocent III. 
 orders large numbers of heretics to be delivered to the fecular 
 power for punijhment — their property confifcated. Secular 
 officers mujl fwear to chafe all heretics pointed out by the 
 Church from their lands — Thofe fufpe6ted of herefy, after 
 one year to be condemned as heretics. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 12 15, lib. 77, fee. 46. 
 
 Gregory IX. excommunicates the Emperor Frederick. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1215, lib. 79, fee. 38. 
 
 The Pope repeats the anathema and abfolves the fubjeds 
 of Frederick from allegiance. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1229, lib. 79, fee. 57. 
 
 Gregory IX. writes to St. Louis, King of France, that 
 God has confided to him imperial power over Earth and 
 
Hierarchs. 
 
 137 
 
 Heaven— threatens him with excommunication — St. Louis 
 pays no attention to the demands of the Pope. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1236, lib. 80, fee. 54. 
 
 The decrees of Councils where legates prejided prepared at 
 Rome — no one permitted to examine them. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1237, lib. 81, fee. 7. 
 
 The Emperor's manifejio Jlyles the Pope, the great 
 dragon that feduces the world, antichrijl, Balaam, the Prince 
 of darknefs — German prelates fupport the Emperor. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1239, lib. 81, fee. 24. 
 
 The Pope after depofmg the Emperor of Germany, offers 
 the Empire to Count Robert, brother of St. Louis, King of 
 France. Fleury, a. d. 1240, lib. 81, fee. 36- 
 
 Innocent IV. wijhes to efcape to England — the Englijh 
 fay — we will not permit the Pope in perfon to rob the Church 
 and Kingdom. Fleury, a. d. 1244, lib. 81, fee. 17. 
 
 The Pope abjlrads more money from England than comes 
 to the hands of the King. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 1245, lib. 82, fee. 28. 
 
 Innocent IV. by Encyclical, dated 25th June, 1251, in- 
 vites the heavens and earth to rejoice at the death of the 
 
138 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface, 
 
 Emperor Frederick. Fleury, a. d. 1251, lib. 83, fee. 25. 
 
 In proeejQion of the conjecration of Boniface VIII. the 
 King of Sicily holds the Pope's bridle, and waits on him at 
 table, wearing his crown. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1295, lib. 89, Jec. 35. 
 
 Julius II. excommunicates Louis XII. of France, and 
 offers his kingdom to the firjl who would Jeize it — he 
 marches at the head of his armies againjl the Duke of 
 Ferrara. Fleury, a. d. 1510, lib. 121, fee. 112. 
 
 Julius II. conducts the fiege of Mirandola, rides over the 
 field — night and day in the batteries — points the cannon — 
 harangues the troops. Fleury, a. d. 151 i, lib. 122, fee. i. 
 
 Leo X. creates a cardinal aged eight years, on condition 
 that he fhould not exercife his fundions until the age of 
 fourteen. Fleury, A. d. 151 7, lib. 125, fee. 7. 
 
 Paul III. creates his two nephews cardinals — ages fourteen 
 andfixteen. Fleury, a. d. 1534, lib. 134, fee. 162. 
 
 Pius V. excommunicates Queen Elizabeth as a rotten 
 member of the Church's body — ^Jlave of crime — monjlrous 
 ufurper — difpenfes her fubjeds from their oath of fidelity — : 
 all excommunicated who obeyed her orders — Felton pojls the 
 
 I 
 
Vicars of Chrijl. 
 
 139 
 
 bull on the houJ*e of the Bijhop of London. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1570, lib. 173, fee. 2 and 3. 
 Sixtus V. excommunicates the King of Navarre. 
 
 Fleury, A. D. 1585, lib. 177, fee. 33. 
 The King of Navarre pojls Monjieur Sixtus, the heretic, 
 antichrijl, felf-Jlyled Pope— as a liar, on the palaces of the 
 cardinals, on the houfes of Rome, and on the doors of the 
 Vatican. Fleury, a. d. 1585, lib. 177, fee. 35, 36. 
 
 Sixtus V. excommunicates Queen Elizabeth^^^ has not 
 rendered homage for England as a fief of Rome — offers a 
 reward for the feizure of her perjbn, that fhe may be punifhed 
 for her crimes — he opens the treafures of the Church to all 
 who execute his orders. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1588, lib. 178, fee. 32. 
 Sixtus V. excommunicates Henry III. King of France. 
 
 Fleury, A. d. 1589, lib. 178, fee. no. 
 
 fflJicargf of CJrift. 
 
 Impious and infamous. 
 
 At the eledion of Damafus — the two faftions fight — 137 
 
140 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface. 
 
 dead bodies of men, women, and children found in the 
 church bejieged by Damajiis. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 366, lib. 16, Jec. 8. 
 
 Sergius III. having been elected Pope, a. d. 891, and 
 
 exiled Jeven years, is recalled — he declares John IX. and 
 
 Benedid IV. Leo V. and Chrijlopher, the three Popes 
 
 following him, ufurpers. 
 
 Theodora, mijlrefs of Sergius III. abjblute in the Govern- 
 ment of Rome — her two daughters, Marojia and Theodora, 
 lejs circumfped than herjelf— Pope John XI. the fon of Ser- 
 gius and Marojia, a. d. 931. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 907, lib. 54, Jec. 42. 
 John X. is elected Pope by the interejl of Theodora, his 
 paramour. Fleury, a. d. 912, lib. 54, fee. 49. 
 
 John XII. eleSed Pope at the age of 18 — grandfon of 
 Marojia and her hujband Alberic — raifes troops and attacks 
 the Prince of Capua — ^John XII. changes his name from 
 Odavian : the firjl injlance of change of name in papal 
 hijlory. Fleury, a. d. 956, lib. 55, Jec. 50. 
 
 The Council of Rome condemns John XII. 
 I. He ordained a boy of 10 years a bijhop— Jimony. 
 
Vicars of Chriji. 
 
 141 
 
 2. He abufed jeveral women, one of them the mijlrejs of 
 
 his father — called incejl. 
 
 3. He had made the Jacred palace a place of debauchery 
 
 — aljb an incendiary. 
 
 4. He put out the eyes of his Jpiritual advijcr, rejulting 
 in death. 
 
 5. He killed a cardinal, ]ub-deacon, firjl mutilating him in 
 
 a manner not proper to repeat. 
 
 6. He drank for the love of the devil and invoked heathen 
 
 Gods. 
 
 7. He did not obferve matins — negleded to make the 
 
 Jign of the crojs. 
 The Pope does not deny any of the charges, but excom- 
 municates the Council in the name of God Almighty. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 963, lib. 56, Jec. 6, 7. 
 John XII. the above Pope is killed by a blow on the 
 head in the commijjion of adultery. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 964, lib. 56, fee. 10. 
 Benedi^i IX. aged 12 years, elefted Pope by bribery — ^his 
 life is infamous — reigns eleven years. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1033, lib. 59, fee. 31. 
 
142 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface, 
 
 Benedict IX. is driven from his palace for murder and 
 other crimes. 
 
 Sylvejler III. becomes Pope — Benedift IX. returns to 
 Rome with his forces and continues his excejjes — ^Jells his 
 pontifical rights to enjoy more licenje in pleafure, for 1500 
 livres to John Gratian who takes the name of Gregory VI. — 
 non objiante — the purchaje and Jale — Gregory VI. Sylvejler 
 III. and Benedi^l IX. all claim the Papacy. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1044, lib. 59, fee. 47. 
 
 Leo IX. marches his army, coUefting all the rabble he can 
 enlijl, againjl the Normans — a bloody fight — the Pope is 
 captured — he releajes the Normans from excommunication 
 as the price of his liberty. Fleury, a. d. 1053, ^^' 59? f^^- ^2. 
 
 Alexander IV. on his death bed orders the Inquijitors to 
 jell the confiscated property of heretics and apply the pro- 
 ceeds to the needs of the Church. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1261, lib. 85, Jec. 7. 
 
 Clement V. fells his benefices — his mijlrefs is the beautiful 
 Countefs of Perigord — he fpeaks of it openly — leaves im- 
 menfe wealth to nephews, 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 1314, lib. 92, fee. 11. Villani. 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
Vicars of Chriji. 
 
 '43 
 
 Clement VI. licentious as archbijhop and Pope — exceeds 
 the young nobles in gallantry. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1352, lib. 96, Jec. 13. Villani. 
 
 Innocent VIII. has feven children — different mothers — 
 before his eledion — the exa6l jums of money and names of 
 the Chateaux given to the Cardinals to fecure the eledion 
 jpecified — generous and courteous before his eledion — took 
 for his motto / will wajh my hands in innocency. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1484, lib. 115, fee. 142 and 145. 
 
 Corpje of Innocent VIII. hooted with malediSions by the 
 populace in defiance of military authority. 
 
 Fleury, A. D. 1492, lib. 117, fee. 30. 
 
 Alexander VI. (Borgia) is eleded Pope— his Holinefs is 
 forthwith adored by the Cardinals : the crofs placed in the 
 window : the prelates kifs his feet : the young nobles have a 
 torch light caroufal in the Place of St. Peter's and receive the 
 approval of the Pope. 
 
 Alexander VI. has four fons and a daughter: their mother 
 is the wife of Dominic Arimano — his fecond fon, Caefar, a 
 cardinal. Fleury, A. d. 1492, lib. 117, fee. 31. 
 
 Alexander VI. feeks the ajjijlance of the Turks againjl 
 
the French. Fleury, a. d. 1494, lib. 117, fee. 90. 
 
 Alexander VI. in an attempt to poifon four of his richejl 
 cardinals whofe heir he is as Pope, poijbns himjelf and dies. 
 Fleury, a. d. 1503, lib. 120, fee. 5. 
 Julius III. creates the keeper of his monkey, a cardinal. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1549, lib. 145, fee. 156. 
 Julius II. Leo X. Clement VII. and Paul III. all believe 
 in ajlrology. Fleury, a. d. 1559, lib. 154, fee. 32. 
 
 Sixtus V. feigns decrepitude : before the votes were fully 
 counted, ajfured of his eledion, he flings his crutch into the 
 middle of the hall, Jlands ere6! and looks like a man of 30, 
 and Jings the Te Deum with a ringing voice. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1585, lib. 177, fee. 22. 
 Sixtus V. in council applauds the zeal and courage of 
 Jaques Clement, the murderer of Henry III. 
 
 Fleury, A. D. 1589, lib. 178, fee. 121. 
 
 The firjl Council of Nice A. d. 325, prohibits any additions 
 to the creed (Nicene). 
 
Cup. 
 
 H5 
 
 Cup, 
 
 A. D. 1 195. The Council of Clermont decrees the com- 
 munion in both kinds — 28th canon — nift corpus, feparatim et 
 fanguinem, &c. Col. Reg. torn. 26, p. 663. 
 
 The Council of Conjlance admits that the primitive Church 
 communed in both kinds, but decrees that whoever jb com- 
 munes is a heretic, mujl be jubjefled and punijhed. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 14 15, lib. 103, fee. 79. 
 
 The general Council of Bajle gives the Cup to the Huf- 
 Jites — non ohjiante, they declare it a herejy. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1436, lib. 107, fee. 14. 
 
 Twenty prelates of the one hundred and Jixty-fix voting at 
 the Council of Trent, favored the cejjion of the cup : there 
 were fix confliSing views refpeding it. 
 
 Fleury, 1562, lib. i6o>fec. 37. 
 
 The Cup was firjl forbidden by the Latins a. d. 1300, 
 although injtituted by Chrijl, preached by the apojlles, and 
 obferved by all Chrijlian nations to that time. 
 
 Father Paul, Cone. Trent, p. 153. 
 
 Cardinal St. Angelo at Trent, would not give a cup full 
 of fuch deadly poyfon to the people of France : it was better 
 
Notes to Tranjlators Preface, 
 
 to let them die : the French ambajjador did not think it 
 right to give the name of poyjbn to the bloud of Chrijl, nor 
 that of poyfoners to the apojlles. 
 
 Father Paul, Cone. Trent, p. 430. 
 
 Purgatory, 
 
 Unsettled until the Council of Florence 15th century — 
 bajed on 2 Mace. xii. 46, Apocrypha. 
 
 See Butler's cat. purgatory. 
 
 Immaculate Conception, 
 
 Did not become a dodrine of the Church until the prejent 
 century. 
 
 Tranfuhftantiation. 
 
 Penance, 
 
 A Jacrament by which venial Jins, committed after baptijm, 
 are forgiven. 
 
 Papacy. 
 
 I 
 
Indulgences. 
 
 147 
 
 Indulgences. 
 
 Cone. Trid. XI. 25, Butler's cat. 
 
 Mariolatry. 
 
 Infallibility. 
 
 The forged Decretals embracing the period from Clemens 
 Romanus to Servitius, 300 years — pjeudo IJidorian colledion 
 — for many centuries were law to the Church — although now 
 allowed to be Jpurious, the Papacy clings to the material 
 advantages of the fraud, to wit : the Jupremacy of the See of 
 Rome, &c. &c. 
 
 Tradition. 
 
 Of equal authority with holy writ. 
 
 Butler's cat. lejjbn. 
 
 Hail Mary. 
 
 The above ten and many other novelties were adopted 
 after the prohibition of the firjl Council of Nice. 
 
148 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface, 
 
 Two Natures of Chriji. 
 
 The Nejlorians were excommunicated a. d. 431, for hold- 
 ing among other views, two natures of Chrijl. 
 
 The Council of Chalcedon, a. d. 451, confirmed the doc- 
 trine of the two natures of Chrijl, which the Church had 
 repudiated. 
 
 ^^angling; anti »>!)acfelinff of »)ccipture* 
 
 Scripture was firjl forbidden to the Laity at the Council of 
 Thoulouje, A.D. 1229 — a Pfalter, breviary and hours of the 
 Virgin being allowed but not in the vulgar tongue. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1229, lib. 79, fee. 58. 
 
 Ctlifaacp* 
 
 The power and crimes of Rome are all referable to the 
 confejjional and celibacy. If marriage be conceded to the 
 clergy, Jaid the Cardinal di Carpo at Trent — the priejls not 
 being dependent on the Pope, but on their Prince, the 
 authority of the Apojlolic See would be confined to the walls 
 of Rome. 
 
 The Roman Church calls celibacy, a holier Jlate than that 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
Celibacy. 
 
 149 
 
 from which Enoch was tranjlated, and impojed by God on 
 the high Priejl of the Ijraeiites, Levit. xxi. 14 — and in 
 which Abraham, the friend of God, lived — ^James ii. 23. 
 
 In 1 Timothy iii. 2, we are told that a Bijhop mujl be the 
 hujband of one wife. 
 
 In I Timothy iii. 4 and 5, his children muJl be in Jiibjec- 
 tion or how Jhall he take care of the Church of God ? 
 
 In I Timothy iv. 3 — The Spirit fpeaketh exprejjly that in 
 the latter times fome Jhall depart from the faith forbidding to 
 marry. 
 
 I Timothy iii. 1 1 — Paul inJlruSs deacons how to chooje 
 their wives. 
 
 The blejjed Virgin was married— Peter, firji Pope, was 
 married — all did well— thoje who in times of persecution 
 were hiding in the clefts of the rocks did better to remain 
 Jingle. 
 
 %zmfit reaction^ 
 
 Notes omitted. 
 
150 
 
 Notes to 'Tranjlator' s Preface. 
 
 Vid. conflicts of councils, popes, &c. 
 
 Dominicans and Francijcans — on immaculate conception — 
 lajled many centuries. 
 
 Schijin at Florence. ^ a. d. 1062. 
 
 Schijm at Worms, 1076. 
 
 Schijm during vacancy of Papacy after death of Celejlin 
 IV. — I year and 8 months. 1241. 
 
 Innocent IV. a fugitive — no one will Jhelter him. 1244. 
 
 Papal throne vacant 2 years and 9 months -^ 
 
 [> 1269-71. 
 Gregory X. elected by compromife J 
 
 Thomijls and Scotijls : efficacy of grace and imm. con. 
 
 Papal See vacant from death of Clement V. 20th April, 
 
 1314, to John XXII. 28th June, 1316. 
 
 Jejuits and Janjenijls on the dodrine of grace. 
 
 The hijlory of the Church is a hijlory of Schijm, 
 
 Subterfuge. 
 
 Gregory VII. jays that the Church has dijjembled many 
 things which were Jubjequently adjujled with great care. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1080, lib. 73, fee. 7. 
 
 I 
 
Harbor of Slave Ships. 
 
 151 
 
 Gregory VII. claims that the Roman church has never erred. 
 Fleury, a. d. 1081, lib. 73, fee. 11. 
 Forged decretals — vid. ante, p. 147. 
 Corrupting canons — text of authors, &c. Vid. ante, p. 1 19. 
 
 l^arbor of ^late ^Stp^* 
 
 The ports of Spanijh IJlands are the only harbors of Jlave 
 Jhips. 
 
 It is now propojed in Spain to rejlore the Inquijition. 
 
 Irelanti* 
 
 Adrian IV. a. d. 1155, by bull authorizes Henry II. of 
 England to reduce Ireland, to ejlablijh pure Chrijlianity, 
 claiming all the IJlands profejjing Chrijlianity as fiefs of the 
 Church. He requires Henry to fubje^l the Irijh to the laws 
 of England, extirpate their vices, and tax them a penny on 
 each houfe as dues to St. Peter. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1156, lib. 70, Jec. 16. 
 
 Previous to that time Ireland called the landof Jaints from 
 the purity of her people. 
 
 In virtue of this Jale or gift in a. d. 1169, an Englijh 
 
^52 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface. 
 
 army invades Ireland. In 1361, the province of Uljler Jlill 
 independent: In 1541 Henry VIII. whoje title is Lord of 
 Ireland under the Pope, is proclaimed King by the Irijh 
 Parliament — the ijland not conquered until 1603, by the in- 
 vajion of the Spaniards at the requejl of the Pope. 
 
 Petec> 
 
 The papacy is bajed on Matt. xvi. 18 — Thou art Peter ; 
 on this rock I will build my Church. Protejlants Jhow that 
 Cyril, Jerome, Chryjbjlom, Leo I, Hilary, Ambroje, &c, re- 
 ferred TTETpa — rock — Jbmetimes to Peter, jbmetimes to his 
 confejjion, jbmetimes to Chrijl. St. Augujline in his Retrac- 
 tions, is Jatisfied that it applies only to Chrijl. 
 
 Peter as fpokejman of the Apojlles, makes the firjl injpired 
 avowal of the Mejjiahjhip — Chrijl anjwers — thou art ttet^oj 
 — Peter — a Jlone or piece of rock, and on this ttet^cx, — rock — 
 I will build my Church — not on the flejb, but on the faith of 
 Peter, or as Augujline hath it, on Chrijl himfelf— for we 
 know that the Church was built on the foundation of the 
 Apojiles and Prophets, J^fr^ Chrijl being the chief corner Jione 
 — Eph. ii. 20. 
 
Peter. 
 
 153 
 
 Our Savior ujed the word keys to defignate Peter's office 
 as firjl, to open the Church to Jews and Gentiles : ^o Peter 
 underjlood it — ASs xv. 7. 
 
 In his dijcharge of that duty he introduced the prejent 
 policy of Rome — imitation — for which he was blamed by 
 Paul and checked by the Council of Jerufalem. 
 
 No Jupremacy was ever claimed by or accorded to Peter : 
 on the contrary, at the Council of Jerusalem, Peter was de- 
 fendant ; James as Prejident gave the decree commencing, 
 My fentence is, &c, and aljb ruled againjl the worjhip of 
 images — A6!s xv. 19, overruled by 2nd Nice which was 
 again overruled by the Council of Frankfort. 
 
 Had Peter been Primate, no power was given by Chrijl to 
 his fucceJOfor — nor did Peter appoint a Juccejjbr, but injlru6!ed 
 the Prejbyters not to be lords 'over Chrijfs heritage — i 
 Peter v. 3. 
 
 The Jame power was given to all the apojlles to bind and 
 loofe— to remit Jins, &c.— John xx. 23. Matt, xviii. 18. 
 
 Moreover the ultramontane rock, not as bad as Judas, yet 
 was mojl exceptionable — the foolijh Peter walked on the 
 water: the vengeful Peter cut off Malchus' ear : the Juda- 
 
154 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator* s Preface. 
 
 ijing Peter was withjlood by Paul to the face — the infidel 
 Peter rebuked his majler and received from Chrijl the name of 
 Satan — Matt. xvi. 2'^—vade poji me Satana, in the Vulgate. 
 Satana is the proper Hebrew name of the Devil — ^o applied 
 34 times in the New Tejlament and only Jo applied, the 
 word ujed for Satan in the wildernefs — Luke iv. 8. 
 
 The parallel of Peter with the Papacy fails with Peter's 
 reformation ; the offenjive Peter that favoured not of the 
 things that he of God, but of thofe that be of men — the faith- 
 lejs Peter that after his confejjion and boajlful love, although 
 forewarned and invejled with the keys, denies his Majler again 
 and again, with curjes and oaths — denies himjelf — takes up 
 his crojs and follows Chrijl. 
 
 Peter was never at Rome except by tradition — Paul wrote 
 to the Romans calling many by name — he wrote Jlx letters 
 from Rome, but neither in thofe letters, nor in the narrative 
 of the j£ts does it appear that Peter was ever there. There 
 can be no quejlion that Peter was at Corinth — He wrote from 
 Babylon, the See of his Diocefe — thither no doubt, he led his 
 wife, and there no doubt he died, after fulfilling the duties of 
 hujband, father and bijhop. 
 
Patrimony of St. Peter, 
 
 ^55 
 
 Patrimony of ^u peter- 
 
 In the eighth century, all the Princes of the Merovingian 
 family being imbecile, the Mayors of the Palace exercijed 
 royal authority over the Franks. Charles Martel held this 
 rank at his death — his Jon and fuccejjbr Pepin, ambitious of 
 the title of King, conjulted Pope Zachary who replied that he 
 Jhould have the name of King who had the power of a King. 
 Pepin was crowned a. d. 752, and confined Childeric 
 III. King of France and his Jon, Theodoric, in Jeparate 
 monajleries. 
 
 Rome was attacked by the Lombards — Stephen II. pre- 
 Juming on the credulity of Pepin, Jent him a letter in imitation 
 of the Epijlles — Paul^ called to he an Apojile of fefus Chriji^ 
 Son of the living Gody &c. in which the Apojlle Paul conjured 
 Pepin in the name of the virgin, angels, martyrs, faints, to aid 
 his Jpiritual mother and fight the Lombards, promijing, if 
 obedient, eternal Jalvation ; if contumacious, the penalties of 
 hell. 
 
 Pepin, conjcious that his only claim to the Crown was 
 derived from the Pope attacked and defeated the Lombards 
 and gave to the Papacy as Patrimony of St. Peter 22 Lom- 
 
156 
 
 Notes to Tranjlator s Preface, 
 
 bard cities — whence aroje the temporal power of the Popes. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 741, lib. 42, Jec. 24. 
 
 „ 752, lib. 43, fee. I. 
 
 „ 755, lib. 43»^c. 17. 
 
 „ 755, lib. 43.^c. 18. 
 
 3libecateti ^fn'can0> 
 
 Pajloral of Rt. Rev. Augujlin Verot, Bijhop of Savannah, 
 to Churches of Georgia and Florida, Sep. 1866. 
 
 Plenary Council of Baltimore, 1866. 
 
 Pius IX. is the only fovereign that conveyed hisfympathy 
 by letter to Mr. Davis during the Southern rebellion. 
 
 Letter of Bijhop Quinlan and others, of Mobile, to Pius 
 IX. May, 1867. 
 
 JfaitSful »)5ep!jei:tig^, |c* 
 
 Letter of Cardinal Barnabo — Prefed of the Propaganda. 
 March 5, 1866. 
 
 ILmxi race* 
 
 Napoleon III. to General Forey — Moniteury January 16, 
 1863. 
 
Tranjlation of Papacy, 
 
 ^57 
 
 '^Ecanaation of i^apacp. 
 
 Pius IX. — allocution — Oftober 31, 1866 — If need be he 
 will Jeek the freer exercije of his minijlry in a foreign land. 
 
 Dec. 17, 1866 — the leading Romanijls of the Council of 
 Baltimore invite the Pope by letter to vijit the United States. 
 
 The evident Jympathy for the Fenians in the Federal 
 States is mainly due to their defiance of the Roman Church. 
 — There is a recklejs tendency among American politicians 
 to bid for popularity — The chief executive of the U. S. was 
 confpicuous in the Plenary Council of Baltimore. 
 
 The fame motive largely enters into the dejign of abforb- 
 ing Mexico, Cuba, and Canada. 
 
 In the Roman Ordo of 1866, page 52 — It feems that the 
 Hierarchy in the United States is divided into feven Pro- 
 vinces and five apojlolic vicariates. Page 49, the Hierarch 
 is John Mary Majlai Feratti — crowned June i, 1846, at 
 Rome. 
 
 On page 64, the Bijhop of Axieren who Jucceeded the 
 Bijhop of Bajileopolis has charge of the partes — infidel 
 regions — infidelium — omitted here, but not omitted on page 53 
 — province of Oregon — comprijing the province of New 
 
Notes to Tranjlator' s Preface, 
 
 York jbuth of 42 degrees north latitude, except Long 
 IJland. 
 
 On page 54, the Propaganda decides that the See of Bal- 
 timore has precedence in America — The Bijhop of Lingone, 
 Baltimore, has a chancellor, and a council of 12 eccle- 
 jiajlics. 
 
 Page 72, the Bijhop of Pompeiopolis lives in partibus at 
 Cincinnati. The Bijhop of Claudiopolis has charge of the 
 fpace between 29th and 31JI degrees of north latitude, which 
 are not in partibus. 
 
 It does not appear by the Gazetteer that Claudiopolis, 
 Pompeiopolis or Bajileopolis are cities in America. 
 
 Of the 310 churches in the City of New York, the Pro- 
 tejtant Episcopalians have .... 60 
 
 Prejbyterians ....... 43 
 
 Hebrews — Synagogues ..... 26 
 
 Romanijls . . . , . . . 33 
 Ritualijls— St. Albans i 
 
 In the United States the Papacy has Bijhops and Arch- 
 bijhops ....... 47 
 
ConfeJJionaL 
 
 Mitred Abbots 
 
 3 
 
 Priejls 
 
 . 2400 
 
 Churches ...... 
 
 • 3671 
 
 Colleges, Schools and Academies 
 
 . 1500 
 
 Convents, Jlridly fo called .... 
 
 99 
 
 A large number of Monajleries. 
 
 
 A.D. 1867, the Papal population is about 6,« 
 
 500,000 : in 
 
 1831, about 600,000. 
 
 
 Confe(Conal. 
 
 Hujbands and fathers of daughters may conjiilt Sanchez to 
 learn the quejlions authorized by the Church : and Dens, to 
 learn the Jlandard of purity of the Confejjbr — Dens is a text- 
 book at Maynooth. Liguori, a Jimilar free authority has 
 been a Jaint fourteen years. 
 
 geCuit peftilente. 
 
 By Jejuit jlatijlics publijhed in Rome, February, 1865, 
 the Society has 7,728 members, of which there are 726 in 
 North America, i in Mexico, 28 on the continent of Europe 
 out of the Roman States — In the United States they often 
 
i6o 
 
 Notes to Tranjlators Preface, 
 
 conceal the name of Jejuit under Jbme lejs odious dejigna- 
 tion. 
 
 plague S)pOt. 
 
 Roman Catholic churches and injlitutions, efpecially thofe 
 of the Jejuits, largely depreciate values of Real Ejlate in 
 their vicinity. 
 
 The People of the United States now tolerate the Roman 
 worjhip; the Pope excludes from the City of Rome, the 
 Churches of all creeds but his own. What may Americans 
 expeft if Rome Jhould gain the political ajcendancy at which 
 Jhe now openly aims? The American Protejlant Chapel 
 within the walls of Rome has caujed much contention — it is 
 however as yet unmolejled. 
 
 The Papal Church in the United States has recently 
 adopted the title of Roman Catholic. It appears in large iron 
 gilt letters over the gate of the Afylum in 5th Avenue, New 
 York — Roman Catholic Male Orphan Afylum, 
 
 Pajquin ever critical and clajjical has latinized the word 
 male^ in dividing the Jyllables ma and /^, by the point of the 
 gothic arch : an opinion, entitled to rejped, traces this read- 
 ing, to a Bull of Milejius, 
 
 1 
 
MaJJacre of Bartholomew, 
 
 i6'i 
 
 9^affacce of »)t. :25art!)Olometo» 
 
 25,000 butchered in the Provinces. 
 
 50,000 at Paris — the carnage continued a week. 
 
 See Fleury, Sijmondi, and Froude. 
 
 Charles IX. and his Court join the procejjion formed to 
 return thanks to God for the fuccefs of the majjacre — medals 
 Jlruck to perpetuate its memory — Charles makes an edift 
 from the throne of yujiice, that all had been done by his 
 orders. Fleury, A. d. 1752, lib. 173, Jec. 35. 
 
 Gregory XIII. goes in procejjion from St. Peter's to the 
 Church of St. Louis, returns thanks to God, and Jlrikes 
 medals in honor of the occajion. 
 
 [A large painting of the majjacre Jlill remains on the walls 
 of the Vatican, a memorial of the Pope's gratification and 
 approval — public attention is not drawn to it — although 
 much objcured by dirt, the antiquary may identify it by the 
 inscription.] 
 
 Philip II. of Spain attends the eulogium of the majfacre. 
 It is jlyled the triumph of the Church militant. 
 
 Fleury, A. d. 1752, lib. 173, fee. 39. 
 
l62 
 
 Notes to Tranjlators Preface. 
 
 Philip is never known to have laughed during his whole 
 life except at the announcement of the majjacre. Froude. 
 
 Charles IX. amufed himjelf by Jhooting from the windows 
 of his palace all that came within reach. 
 
 Priejls with crucifixes and Jwords headed the murderous 
 gangs, inciting them to kill friends and relatives. 
 
 farce ofaCrenc 
 
 The legates write to Rome that the inJlruSions of the 
 Pope would make them the ridicule of the world. 
 
 Fleury, a. d. 1546, lib. 142, fee. 41. 
 To Jecure a majority of votes, the Pope Jends back the 
 Venetian bijhops who had left the Council for their homes. 
 Fleury, A. D. 1546, lib. 144, jec. 11. 
 The papalins are abujive : the merry prelates could not 
 forbear obfcene jokes. Father Paul — Trent, 598. 
 
 Henry II. of France for a long time refujes to Jend dele- 
 gates, as the Council is neither free nor general. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 155 i, lib. 146, fee. 121. 
 
 Cardinal Loraine fays the Council is not free, and its info- 
 
 lency great. Coun. Trent, Father Paul, 593, 594. 
 
Curfed be all Heretics, 
 
 163 
 
 The chief legate enjoins fecrecy on the fathers, lejl the 
 world might know how little of moderation and harmony 
 exijls in the Council ; many Jhed tears of Jhame, but conceal 
 the fads until they become notorious. 
 
 Fleury, a.d. 1562, lib. 158, Jec. 74. 
 
 The Council is completely under the control of Pius IV. — 
 this fad gives occajion to the witticifm of the French ambaf- 
 jador, that the Holy Spirit comes from Rome to Trent in a 
 mail bag. Fleury, a.d. 1562, lib. 159, fee. 12, &c. 
 
 Pius IV. during the Council, orders the Inquijition to cite 
 Cardinal Caligni and Jeveral archbijhops to Rome, to anjwer 
 to the charge of favoring herejy. F. Paul, Coun. Trent. 
 
 CucfeD be all Secetic^. 
 
 Card. Anathema cunSlis hareticis. 
 
 Rejp. Anathema — Anathema. 
 
 The lajl words of the lajl general Council of Rome in the 
 afternoon of Saturday the 4th day of December, 1563, a.d. 
 35th SeJJ. CoUedio Regia, Paris, torn. 35, p. 638. 
 
 Summa conciliorum, tom. i, p. 600 
 
The 255 delegates Jubjcribe under pain of excommunica- 
 tion. 
 
 The Cardinal of Lorainc leads this acclamation with a 
 voice of thunder : the hall Jhakes with the enthufiajlic 
 rejponje. 
 
 Cardinal Loraine entered the Council in the oppojition, 
 complaining that the Council was packed by tools of the 
 Pope, and that it was neither general nor free : he was con- 
 ciliated by Pius on his vijit to Rome at the Pope's invita- 
 tion — Loraine had committed the acclamations to writing. — 
 It was remarked that fuch premeditated uje of the word 
 heretics^ included the tlien prejent, pajl and future. 
 
 CHISWICK press: PRINTED BY WHITTINGHAM AND WILKINS, 
 
 TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE. 
 
 /C 
 
 f 
 
 n 
 
I 
 
RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT 
 lOmm^ 202 Main Library 
 
 LOAN PERIOD 1 
 HOME USE 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 
 Renewals and Recharges may be made 4 days prior to the due dote. 
 
 Books may be Renewed by calling 642-3405. 
 
 DUE AS STAIVIPED BELOW 
 
 fiPR 14 1993 
 
 
 
 ^UTO. DISC. 
 
 
 
 ,0^0X1992 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 {^wyyj^*' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY j 
 FORM NO. DD6 BERKELEY, CA 94720 f 
 
« ^ *tiC-00*^ 
 
 U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES