A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation wherein the same is declared, by…A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation vvherein the same is declared, by…

I answer: The reason is not alike.

For 1. The Serpent was made of that Rod: but it is absurd to say that Christs body is made of bread. Yea the Papists themselves are at a stand here, and cannot well tell what to say. For they say indeed commonly, that ⁱthe Bread is turned into Christs Body: and they say sometime also that ^kChrists body is made of bread: and that ^lthe Priest maketh Christs body of bread. Yea Bellarmine sticketh not to say, that ^mThat body of Christ which was crucified, was truly, or verily made of bread. They may believe him that lift. And yet they deny that ⁿChrists Body is made by the Priest: (He maketh Christs body of bread, and yet Christs body is not made by him:) or that ^othe body of Christ is produced of bread, but doth succeed only in the room of bread. But it is absurd to say a thing is made of that in the room whereof it only succeedeth, or is turned into that that succeedeth only in the room of it: or to call a thing seriously (for in mockery indeed sometime we do) by the name of some other thing, only because it is now in the place where that thing before was: unless it be in some Magical action, ^pwherein that seemeth to be done that indeed is not, and so the speech is not according to the truth of the thing, but according to that that seemeth to be. In a word we may truly say, of that Serpent, that it was once a Rod: but we cannot truly say of Christs body, that ever it was bread.