Luther, which it acknowledges as its head, and from whom it boasts to derive its name, never shewed to greater advantage the strength of mind and vehemence of language which he joined to a turbulent and impetuous temper, than in the defence of the literal sense against the new sacramentarians. He could not help paying a tribute of honor to himself on this score, with a modesty of which you shall be the judge: "The papists themselves are obliged to "give me the praise of having defended better than "they the doctrine of the literal sense. And I am "certain were they all melted up together, they "would not be able to support it as forcibly as I "do." Luther was mistaken, as we shall see in the following article: it is certain, however, that he remained constantly attached to the literal sense, and that the sacramentarians, unable to soften the inflexibility of his principles, have often been constrained to come nearer to them and to affect his language in the agreements they attempted to make with him at Wittemberg and at Smalkald.'

'Ap. Hosp. epis. Luth. ad an 1534.

"These agreements, in which sincerity had less to do than policy, could not be of long duration, and Luther again commenced with increased fury his old abusive attacks upon them. He treated them in his Short Confession of Faith "as fools, blasphemers, a "worthless tribe, damned wretches, for whom it was not lawful to "pray." He there protested that "he would have no communica"tion with them either by letter, by words, or by works, if they "did not acknowledge that the Eucharistic bread was the true "natural body of our Lord. .... It is as indifferent to me (said he "again), whether I am praised or blamed by the fanatic Zuinglians "or other such people, as it is to be praised or blamed by the Turk, "the Pope, or by all the devils: for being near unto death, Iam "desirous of carrying this glory and this testimony to the tribunal

爨

But I will now present you with a confession of faith that shall exceedingly surprise you: you are about to hear the Calvinists express themselves as forcibly as the Lutherans and the Catholics on the real presence: and one might take them to be zealous defenders of it, if we knew nothing of their variations. Beza and Farel,' were charged by the reformed Churches of France to carry it to Worms, where the states of the confession of Augsburgh were assembled. It is there said, "that in the Lord's Supper are "received not only the benefits of Jesus Christ, but "his substance even and his own flesh: that the "body of the Son of God is not proposed to use in it "in figure only and by signification symbolically 66 as a memorial of Jesus Christ absent, but that he "is truly and really made present with the symbols, "which are not simple signs. And if we add (said "they), that the manner in which this body is given "to us is symbolical and sacramental, it is not that it

"of Jesus Christ, that I have with my whole heart condemned "Carlostadtius, Zuinglius, Ecolampadius, and other fanatical "enemies of the sacrament, together with all their disciples who

66

are at Zurich and every day in our discourses do we condemn "their heresy full of blasphemies and impostures." Upon this the Swiss warmly retorted. They issued out against him a manifesto, in which they told him in plain terms, "that he was nothing but an

old fool that men must be as mad as himself to endure his angry "effusions; that he dishonoured his old age: that he rendered "himself contemptible by his violent conduct: and that he ought "to be ashamed to fill his books with so much abusive language and so many devils." Indeed Luther had taken care to put the devil within and without, above and below, before and behind the Zuinglians, by inventing new phrases to penetrate them with demons, and repeating this odious word till men were filled with horror, as Bossuet observes on this passage.

'Hospin. ad an. 1557.

❝is merely figurative, but because, under the species "of visible things, God offers us, gives us, and "makes present for us, together with the symbols, "that which is there signified to us. This we say, "in order that it may appear that we retain in the "Lord's Supper the presence of the true body and "blood of Jesus Christ, and that if there remain any "dispute, it will no longer refer to any thing but the "manner." Let people hold to this declaration, and disputes would easily be terminated. But why should I thus accumulate foreign authorities, while I can shew the same doctrines to have been supported in your country, by the most distinguished members of your Church, particularly in the reigns of Elizabeth, James, and Charles I.? "You and I," said Bishop Ridley, in the reign of Edward IV. to the catholics, "agree in this, that in the sacrament "is the very true and natural body and blood of "Jesus Christ, even that which was born of the

66

Virgin Mary, which ascended into heaven, which "sits on the right hand of God the Father, &c. we only differ in the way and manner of being there." Hooker, in his Ecclesiastical Polity, says that they, who in his time, held different opinions respecting the sacrament, were still found to accord in one: for "They grant (says he), that these holy myste"ries received in due manner, do instrumentally "both make us partakers of the grace of that body " and blood, which were given for the life of the "world: and besides also impart unto us, even in a "true and real, though mystical manner, the very

'Ridley's Confession, as related in the Acts and Monuments of John Fox. p. 159, &c.

66

person of our Lord himself, whole perfect, and " entire.""

"We believe, no less than you, in a true and "presence," said James I. and Bishop Andrews.' The same was said by Casaubon in his letter written by order of the Kings to the Cardinal du Peron.

We will now hear Bishop Montague on this subject. The contents of Chapter XXX. of his appeal are as follows. "A real presence maintained

by us. The difference betwixt us, and the Popish "writers is only about the Modus, the manner of "Christ's presence in the Blessed Sacrament. "Agreement likely to be made, but for the factious "and unquiet spirits on both sides. Beati Pacifici." In the body of the chapter is the following passage. "Concerning this point I said, and say so still, that "if men were disposed, as they ought, unto peace, "there need be no difference. And I added a reason, which I repeat again here; the disagreement is only in De modo præsentiæ (the manner of the presence.) The thing is yielded to on either side, that there is in the holy Eucharist a "real presence3.

66

66

66

Another of your Bishops exclaims': "God "forbid, we should deny, that the flesh and blood "of Christ, are truly present, and truly received of "the faithful at the Lord's table. It is the doctrine "that we teach others,and comfort ourselves withal."

'Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity. Book V. sec 67. p. 360. London. 1617.-Resp. ad Apol. Card. Bellarm. c. II. p. 11.-'An Appeal to Cæsar, ch. XXX. p. 288, 289. London, 1625.-'Bishop Bilson.

"In the explication of this question and the man"ner of the real presence it is much insisted upon, that "it be inquired, whether, when we say that we believe "Christ's body to be really in the Sacrament, we mean "that body, that flesh that was born of the Virgin "Mary, that was crucified, dead and buried. I answer "that I know none else that he had or hath: there is "but one body of Christ natural and glorified: but "he that says that body is glorified which was "crucified, says it is the same body, but not after the

66

same manner: and so it is in the Sacrament: we "eat and drink the body and blood of Christ that was broken and poured forth for there is no "other body, no other blood of Christ: but though "it is the same we eat and drink, yet it is in another "manner.... They that do not confess the Eucha"rist to be the flesh of our Saviour, which flesh "suffered for us, let them be anathema: for sure it ❝is, as sure as Christ is true."

992

"The doctrine of those Protestants seems most "safe, and true, who are of opinion, nay most "firmly believe, the body and blood of Christ to "be truly and really, and substantially present in "the Eucharist, and to be received by the faithful; "but that the manner of his being there, is incomprehensible in respect to human reason and "ineffable; is known to God, and not revealed in the Scriptures.""

66

"Of the real presence of the body and blood " of Christ in the Eucharist none of the Protestant

'Bishop Taylor on the real presence, in his "Collection of Polemical Discourses New and Old." p. 185, 186. Third edit. London, 1674.-lb. p. 256.-Forbes De Eucharistià, L. I. c. 1. sec. 7.