That Opinion which will thus Transubstantiate a Loaf, may as well Annihilate a God; it were better for a man to loose his Life, than to swallow such a barbarous Heresy; hence the ⟨p. 12⟩Arabian Philosopher chose to perish with his Pagan Fathers and Neighbours, rather than to take his Lot with a people who were so much worse than Cannibals, that Manducant Deum suum. And yet our Fore-fathers had this infinite absurdity thrust down their Throats with burning Fire-brands! It is therefore not unjustly said by a Learned and a Witty person, Whenever I become a Scholar in the School of the Eucharist, and renounce the Reason which God has given me, to Embrace the Romish Doctrine of Transubstantiation, I am fully resolved to keep a Decorum in it, and I will certainly go over to that Church upon all Four. But if sense and reason may not be heard, in this case, what will Rev•l•tion say? I wonder why our Lord Jesus Christ Himself after his Resurrection Appealed unto the Eyes and Hands of the Standers by, to convince them of its being He, if Seeing, Feeling, Tasting; might give no Direction to our Opinion in these concerns. Alas, that this lewd piece of Priest-craft should ever make the world such a stage of Blood and Fire, as it has! Give me leave to repeat the words of our Lord, The Flesh profits nothing. Wherefore, do not look for proper & real Flesh, in the Eucharist, but expect only, according to the Language of Tertullian, A Figure of our Lords Body; and consent rather with holy Austin, who upon that place in Joh. 6. 53. Except ye eat the Flesh ⟨p. 13⟩of the Son of Man, saw cause to say, This seems to command a most heinous wickedness, and therefore the speech is Figurative. We are not ignorant, that Cyprian in the Third Century, said, It was Wine that our Lord called His blood; or that Ambrose in the Fourth Century called it, The similitude of his precious blood. And not to multiply quotations; we are not ignorant, That the Doctrine of even the Church of England it self, seven hundred years ago, was this; in the Sacrament, it is naturally corruptible bread, and corruptible Wine; nothing is therein to be understood bodily, but all is g••stly to be understood. May we thus be evermore sound in our Belief, about that which the Roman Catholics have made such a burning Article!
That Opinion which will thus Transubstantiate a Loaf, may as well Annihilate a God; it were better for a man to loose his Life, than to swallow such a barbarous Heresy; hence the ⟨p. 12⟩Arabian Philosopher chose to perish with his Pagan Fathers and Neighbours, rather than to take his Lot with a people who were so much worse than Canabals, that Manducant Deum suum. And yet our Fore-fathers had this infinite absurdity thrust down their Throats with burning Fire-brands! It is therefore not unjustly said by a Learned and a Witty person, Whenever I become a Scholar in the School of the Eucharist, and renounce the Reason which God has given me, to Embrace the Romish Doctrine of Transubstantiation, I am fully resolved to keep a Decorum in it, and I will certainly go over to that Church upon all Four. But if sense and reason may not be heard, in this case, what will Rev•l•tion say? I wonder why our Lord Jesus Christ Himself after his Resurrection Apoealed unto the Eyes and Hands of the Standers by, to convince them of its being He, if Seeing, Feeling, Tasting; might give no Direction to our Opinion in these concerns. Alas, that this lewd piece of Priest-craft should ever make the world such a stage of Blood and Fire, as it has! Give me leave to repeat the words of our Lord, The Flesh profits nothing. Wherefore, do not look for proper & real Flesh, in the Eucharist, but expect only, according to the Language of Tertullian, A Figure of our Lords Body; and consent rather with holy Austin, who upon that place in Joh. 6. 53. Except ye eat the Flesh ⟨p. 13⟩of the Son of Man, saw cause to say, This seems to command a most heinous wickedness, and therefore the speech is Figurative. We are not ignorant, that Cyprian in the Third Century, said, It was Wine that our Lord called His blood; or that Ambrose in the Fourth Century called it, The similitude of his precious blood. And not to multiply quotations; we are not ignorant, That the Doctrine of even the Church of England it self, seven hundred years ago, was this; in the Sacrament, it is naturally corruptible bread, and corruptible Wine; nothing is therein to be understood bodily, but all is g••stly to be understood. May we thus be evermore sound in our Belief, about that which the Roman Catholicks have made such a burning Article!
