BY M. D. TALBOT.
Words so clear against the Calvinian doctrine of a few years later, that Mr. Prynne asks with indignation, " Whether any other Protestant did ever hold the doctrine of Christ's body being upon the altar ? No," says he, " never Protestant wrote so before himself." f
Thus the Archbishop, who having quoted this passage of Bellarmine, viz., " Conversionem panis esse substantialem, sed arcanam et ineffabilem," owns that had he left out the word, conversionem, no man had spoken better.
Having sufficiently proved the true and real presence of our Saviour in the sacrament to be the true and real doctrine of the Church of England, I might certainly end here, but the reader will, I trust, pardon a short digression, for the purpose of my giving a most remarkable passage from the works of Luther in favour of transubstantiation, unquoted till recently by any Catholic author. And it is not only singular on that account, but important, as containing an answer to the silly cavil founded on the words, " do this in remembrance of me."
"Every act of our Saviour was intended for our advantage and instruction. ' This do' said he, 'in remembrance of me' What doth this mean ? Is is not, what I now do, do ye ? What did Christ do ? ' Panem accepit, et verbo quo dicit hoc est corpus meum, mutat in corpus suum, et dat manducandum discipulis' viz., He took the bread, and by the words, this is my body, he changes it into his body, and gives it to his disciples." It is one hundred chances to one that these words of Luther have never as yet arrested the attention of your Lordship, but you may see them by consulting the second Tome of his works, p. 253, Wittemberg edition, A.D. 1562.
So much for the true and original belief of the Church of England in regard of the real presence in the Eucharist. " And thus," says Bossuet, " a good English Protestant, without blemish to his religion or conscience, may believe that the body and blood of Christ are really and substantially present in the bread and wine immediately after consecration." — (History of the variations of the Protestant Churches, Book 14, sec. 122.)
I omitted to mention, that Dr. Heylin in his treatise, entitled " Respondet Petrus," openly reproaches Archbishop Usher with having, in his answer to a Jesuit's challenge, deviated in toto from the doctrine of the Church of England concerning the real presence, and quotes many passages to prove that she holds it as firmly as the Catholics. It is well known that Usher, like some other prelates, was more a Calvinist than a true member of the established Church on the doctrine of the Eucharist, and hence this reproach.
Thus the Archbishop, who having quoted this passage of Bellarmine, viz., " Conversionem panis esse substantialem, sed arcanam et ineffabilem," owns that had he left out the word, conversionem, no man had spoken better.
Having sufficiently proved the true and real presence of our Saviour in the sacrament to be the true and real doctrine of the Church of England, I might certainly end here, but the reader will, I trust, pardon a short digression, for the purpose of my giving a most remarkable passage from the works of Luther in favour of transubstantiation, unquoted till recently by any Catholic author. And it is not only singular on that account, but important, as containing an answer to the silly cavil founded on the words, " do this in remembrance of me."
"Every act of our Saviour was intended for our advantage and instruction. ' This do' said he, 'in remembrance of me' What doth this mean ? Is is not, what I now do, do ye ? What did Christ do ? ' Panem accepit, et verbo quo dicit hoc est corpus meum, mutat in corpus suum, et dat manducandum discipulis' viz., He took the bread, and by the words, this is my body, he changes it into his body, and gives it to his disciples." It is one hundred chances to one that these words of Luther have never as yet arrested the attention of your Lordship, but you may see them by consulting the second Tome of his works, p. 253, Wittemberg edition, A.D. 1562.
So much for the true and original belief of the Church of England in regard of the real presence in the Eucharist. " And thus," says Bossuet, " a good English Protestant, without blemish to his religion or conscience, may believe that the body and blood of Christ are really and substantially present in the bread and wine immediately after consecration." — (History of the variations of the Protestant Churches, Book 14, sec. 122.)
I omitted to mention, that Dr. Heylin in his treatise, entitled " Respondet Petrus," openly reproaches Archbishop Usher with having, in his answer to a Jesuit's challenge, deviated in toto from the doctrine of the Church of England concerning the real presence, and quotes many passages to prove that she holds it as firmly as the Catholics. It is well known that Usher, like some other prelates, was more a Calvinist than a true member of the established Church on the doctrine of the Eucharist, and hence this reproach.
