THE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE OF THE EUCHARIST, DEMONSTRATIVELY PROVED FROM SCRIPTURE, FROM TRADITION, AND FROM THE WRITINGS OF SOME OF THE MOST EMINENT CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT AUTHORS WHO HAVE TREATED ON THE SUBJECT; IN SIXTEEN LETTERS, WITH NOTES AND APPENDICES, ADDRESSED TO THE LORD BISHOP OF EXETER, AND DEDICATED BY PERMISSION TO HIS IMPERIAL AND ROYAL MAJESTY THE EMPEROR OF AUSTRIA, KING OF HUNGARY, BOHEMIA, ETC. BY M. D. TALBOT.
I ask here now every upright Protestant, if he can seriously and sincerely persuade himself that God, in order to reform his Church, had raised up in an extraordinary manner those men who contradict, blacken, and excommunicate each other ? Can he persuade himself that God has spoken through the instrumentality of Luther, when he says, that Jesus Christ is really present with the bread ? that God has spoken through Zuinglius, when he says, that the eucharist is nothing more than a mere sign or figure ? that God has also spoken through Calvin, when he says, that Christ was really present in the sacrament, but by faith ? In fine, can God have spoken by the instrumentality of so many other Reformers, who are quite opposed to each other in most essential points, and which they themselves look on as essential for their religion, and who mutually treat each other as heretics? It is as clear, as the sun at mid-day, that they were not inspired by God, for they speak according to their whims and fancies, according to their intents and purposes, and God permits this frightful diversity of opinions, that they may confound each other. But what is most astonishing is that these different sects, so animated, so inveterate against each other, unite as one body against the Church of Rome, and what is equally extraordinary, until within these last few years, they permitted the public service of every sect in England and in Holland, while proscribing the Catholic Church, which was forbidden and denounced, although many of their ministers had declared that they could be saved in that religion. Now whence sprung this great enmity to the Roman Church, unless from this, that Protestants in these countries did not wish t»> have before their eyes a religion from which they themselves were deserters and apostates. This is the reason why they feared a religion which commands ohedience to ecclesiastical rale, and submission to secular authority. They feared a religion which commands the mortification of the flesh, which ordains fasts and abstinences, which obliges us to keep our passions under, to confess our sins, and to do penance.
Truth is one of the glorious attributes of God, and consequently I here again ask, in the presence of an enlightened public,—and recollect this is a most material point, and requires a clear and satisfactory answer,—Could Christ have instructed the Lutheran that he was really present in the Eucharist, and at the same time have informed the Zuinglian that he was there but in figure ? Oh surely not; for such conduct as this would make him the God of contradiction and not the God of truth—such a supposition, even for a moment, would be blasphemy. The more we reflect, the more we ponder on our duty to God, the more we shall see the absolute insanity of separating ourselves from the chair of unity, that is, from the chair of Peter. I cannot do better than to request the serious attention of my readers, whilst I lay before them a powerful and most satisfactory quotation from a most profound Catholic theologian, in which he shews, yes, and demonstratively shews, that the real presence was ever the doctrine of the Catholic Church, from the very era of the Apostles. He says:—
"The belief of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament, must have been the common belief of the Church; or, it must have happened by some inconceivable miracle, that not one of all the Christians of the world, though they were unceasingly urged by the language which expressed the real presence to believe that doctrine, ever yielded to a temptation, that proved afterwards to be so alluring and so powerful, as to seduce in an instant all the faithful of the universe. Had the ancient Church believed the real presence, it would be much less extraordinary, that none of its members should have been ever tempted to believe that Jesus Christ was not present in the Eucharist. Nevertheless, as the mystery of the real presence, like other mysteries of religion, has its peculiar difficulties, Catholics show that these difficulties have been followed by their natural consequences—that they have shaken the faith of some and thrown them into doubt and infidelity. The Capharnaites were the first who were scandalized at this mystery, and they abandoned Jesus Christ. St. Ignatius testifies, that some of the early heretics would not confess that the eucharist was the flesh, which Jesus Christ offered for us. Hesichius says, that we ought to consume by the fire of charity all the doubts that arise in the mind against this mystery. It is related in the Lives of the Fathers, that a solitary having fallen through ignorance in the error that the bread which we receive in the holy communion is not the natural body of Jesus Christ, but his body in figure only, two other ancient solitaries warned him not to adhere to his opinion, but to follow the doctrine of the Catholic Church, all the members of which believe, that the bread is the body of Jesus Christ, and the wine his blood, not in figure but in truth; they afterwards convinced him by a miracle, which their prayers obtained from God, that their doctrine was true. In the life of St. Gregory, written by John the Deacon, we find that a woman who had fallen into a similar error was converted by a miracle, which St. Gregory performed in the presence of all the people.
PREFACE. (c)
I ask here now every upright Protestant, if he can seriously and sincerely persuade himself that God, in order to reform his Church, had raised up in an extraordinary manner those men who contradict, blacken, and excommunicate each other ? Can he persuade himself that God has spoken through the instrumentality of Luther, when he says, that Jesus Christ is really present with the bread ? that God has spoken through Zuinglius, when he says, that the eucharist is nothing more than a mere sign or figure ? that God has also spoken through Calvin, when he says, that Christ was really present in the sacrament, but by faith ? In fine, can God have spoken by the instrumentality of so many other Reformers, who are quite opposed to each other in most essential points, and which they themselves look on as essential for their religion, and who mutually treat each other as heretics? It is as clear, as the sun at mid-day, that they were not inspired by God, for they speak according to their whims and fancies, according to their intents and purposes, and God permits this frightful diversity of opinions, that they may confound each other. But what is most astonishing is that these different sects, so animated, so inveterate against each other, unite as one body against the Church of Rome, and what is equally extraordinary, until within these last few years, they permitted the public service of every sect in England and in Holland, while proscribing the Catholic Church, which was forbidden and denounced, although many of their ministers had declared that they could be saved in that religion. Now whence sprung this great enmity to the Roman Church, unless from this, that Protestants in these countries did not wish t»> have before their eyes a religion from which they themselves were deserters and apostates. This is the reason why they feared a religion which commands ohedience to ecclesiastical rale, and submission to secular authority. They feared a religion which commands the mortification of the flesh, which ordains fasts and abstinences, which obliges us to keep our passions under, to confess our sins, and to do penance.
Truth is one of the glorious attributes of God, and consequently I here again ask, in the presence of an enlightened public,—and recollect this is a most material point, and requires a clear and satisfactory answer,—Could Christ have instructed the Lutheran that he was really present in the Eucharist, and at the same time have informed the Zuinglian that he was there but in figure ? Oh surely not; for such conduct as this would make him the God of contradiction and not the God of truth—such a supposition, even for a moment, would be blasphemy. The more we reflect, the more we ponder on our duty to God, the more we shall see the absolute insanity of separating ourselves from the chair of unity, that is, from the chair of Peter. I cannot do better than to request the serious attention of my readers, whilst I lay before them a powerful and most satisfactory quotation from a most profound Catholic theologian, in which he shews, yes, and demonstratively shews, that the real presence was ever the doctrine of the Catholic Church, from the very era of the Apostles. He says:—
"The belief of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament, must have been the common belief of the Church; or, it must have happened by some inconceivable miracle, that not one of all the Christians of the world, though they were unceasingly urged by the language which expressed the real presence to believe that doctrine, ever yielded to a temptation, that proved afterwards to be so alluring and so powerful, as to seduce in an instant all the faithful of the universe. Had the ancient Church believed the real presence, it would be much less extraordinary, that none of its members should have been ever tempted to believe that Jesus Christ was not present in the Eucharist. Nevertheless, as the mystery of the real presence, like other mysteries of religion, has its peculiar difficulties, Catholics show that these difficulties have been followed by their natural consequences—that they have shaken the faith of some and thrown them into doubt and infidelity. The Capharnaites were the first who were scandalized at this mystery, and they abandoned Jesus Christ. St. Ignatius testifies, that some of the early heretics would not confess that the eucharist was the flesh, which Jesus Christ offered for us. Hesichius says, that we ought to consume by the fire of charity all the doubts that arise in the mind against this mystery. It is related in the Lives of the Fathers, that a solitary having fallen through ignorance in the error that the bread which we receive in the holy communion is not the natural body of Jesus Christ, but his body in figure only, two other ancient solitaries warned him not to adhere to his opinion, but to follow the doctrine of the Catholic Church, all the members of which believe, that the bread is the body of Jesus Christ, and the wine his blood, not in figure but in truth; they afterwards convinced him by a miracle, which their prayers obtained from God, that their doctrine was true. In the life of St. Gregory, written by John the Deacon, we find that a woman who had fallen into a similar error was converted by a miracle, which St. Gregory performed in the presence of all the people.
