Article was defined, when they determined the Real Presence; they at the same time declare the Exiftendi Ratio to berineffable; and in the 4th. Chapter, where Transubstantiation is decreed, the Canon runs thus: That, "By the Confecration of the Bread and Wine, "there is a Conversion of the whole Substance "of the Bread into the Substance of the Body of ८८ Christ, and of the whole Substance of the Wine " into the Substance of his Bloud, which Conver"fion is fitly and properly called by the Holy Catho"lick Church, Transubstantiation. In all which the Council onely appropriates the Word Tranfubftantiation to express the Real Prefence, which it had before determined in the First Chapter, not to be after a natural way of Existence,as Chrift fits at the right Hand of God, but Sacramental, after an ineffable manner. Tho here some peevishly object, the Inconfiftence of the Council with it self, when it declares, that the thing is inexpressible and yet appropriates a word to exprefs it: Whereas all Christendom knows that the Proceffion of the Eternal Word from the Father is Ineffable, and yet is expressed by the Word Generation: and that the Union of the divine and humane Nature is ineffable, and yet is called the Hypoftatical Union; and that the Unity in the Trinity is ineffable, and yet is expressed by the Word 1 Word Confubftantial: 60 that this Council feems to have defin'd no more than the Council of Nice did in the Doctrine of the Bleffed Trinity, in expreffing the Unity of the Three Persons by the Word ὁμεία, and the Distinction, by the Word πρότασις, which amounted to no more than this, That as it is certain from the Holy Scriptures, that in the Unity of the Godhead there is a Trinity, to the Holy Fathers to avoid the Niceties of contentious Men, fuch as Arius was, determine that for the time to come the Mystery shall be expreffed by the Terms ὁμεσα and ὑπόστασης; but as for any Philofophycal Notion of the Mystery, the Church never prefum'd to define it, and this is the Definition of the Council of Trent, of the Real Presence, that there is a Converfion of the Substances under the Species or Appearances of Bread and Wine, which the Church hath thought convenient to exprefs by the Word Transubstantiation. And though the Council approve the Word, yet it does not impose it, it onely declares it to be convenient, but no where says 'tis neceffary. And as for the Term Converfion, it is much older than the Word Transubstantiation, familiarly ufed by the Ancient Fathers; and fo is the Word Species: I know indeed it is usual with Schoolmen and Proteftant. Writers to tranflate the Words under Species of Bread and Wine, by these : these Words, under the Accidents of Bread and Wine, as particularly the late Bishops of Durham and Winchester have done. But this is to impofe Philofophick Niceties upon the Decrees of the Church... TW L L : And tho perhaps all the Fathers of the Council believed the Reality of the New Subftantial Prefence under the Old Accidents, yet they had more Temper and Difcretion than to Authorife it by conciliar Determination, and therefore ufe only the Word Species (and no other Word is ufed by Nicolas II, Gregory VII, and Innocent III, that are thought the Three great Innovators in the Argument of the Real Prefence) that properly fignifies Appearance, but nothing of Phyfical or Natural Reality, fo that the the Prefence under the Species be Real, yet as the Council hath defined it,it is not Natural but Satramental, which SacramentalReal Prefence they exprefs by the Word Transubstantiation, and recommend the Propriety of the Word to the acceptance of Chriftendom, This is the short Hiftory of the Real Prefence in the Church of Rome, where, as far as I can difcern, the thing it felf hath been owned in all Ages of the Church, the Modus of it never defined, but in the Schools, and though they have fancied a thousand Definitions to themselves, their Metaphyficks were never admitted into the Church. And fo I proceed. ceed to give an account of it, as it hath been defin'd in the Proteftant Churches, where we shall find much the fame Harmony of Faith and Discord of Philosophy as in the Church of Rome And first we must begin with the famous Confeffion of Ausburg, that was drawn up by Melanthon, and in the Year 1530. presented to Charles the Fifth, by several Princes of Germany, as a Declaration of the Faith of the first Reformers; and as the onely true standard of the Ancient Proteftant Religion. : The Confeffion confifts of Two parts. I. What Doctrines themselves Taught. II. WhatAbuses they defired to be reformed. As to the later; the Emperour undertook to procure a General Council. CU As to the former; particularly this Article of the Prefence in the Sacrament, they have published it in two several forms : In the Latin Edition it is worded thus: "Concerning the Lord's Supper, 66 we teach, That the Body and Bloud of Christ are "there present indeed, and are diftributed to the "Recievers at the Lord's Supper; and condemn ८८ ८७ ८८ those that teach otherwise. In the German Edition it is worded thus: "Concerning the Lord's Supper we teach, That the true Body and Bloud of Christ are truely present in the Supper, un"der the species of Bread and Wine, and are there "distributed and received. And in an Apology written written by the fame hand, and published the Year following, it is thus expressed: "We be"lieve, That in the Supper of our Lord, the Body " and Blood of Christ are really and substantially " present, and are Exhibited indeed with those "things, that are seen, the Bread and Wine. This “ belief our Divines constantly maintain, and we " find not only the Church of Rome hath afferted "the Corporeal Presence, but that the Greek "Church bath anciently, as well as at this time, affer“ted the same ; as appears by their Canon Mislæ. The same Author Explains himself more at large in his Epistle to Fredericus Myconius. "I fend you (fays he) the passages out of the "Ancients, concerning the Lord's Supper, to prove, " that they held the same with us; namely, "That the Body and Blood of our Lord are there " present indeed. And after divers Citations he concludes " That feeing this is the express "Doctrine of the Scriptures, and constant Tra"dition of the Church, I cannot conceive how, " by the name of the Body of Christ, should only be " understood the fign of an absent Body; for though "the Word of God frequently makes use of Meta"phors, yet there is a great difference to be made "between Historical Relations, and Divine Insti"tutions. In the first, matters transacted among "Men, and visible to the Sence are related; and " here we are allow'd, and often forced to speak figu E |