To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
BEllarmine and Vasquez perceiving that if the Minister should deliver these words of Christ [This is my Body]
onely as Narratively, rehearsing them, then hee could not therby consecrate the Bread, which is in his owne hands, be∣cause it is not that Bread, which was then in Christs hands, when he sayd [This is my Bodie.] And againe, if they should be uttered of the Priest, as in the person of Christ, which you call Significatively, as if Christ himselfe should now speake them, by the mouth of the Priest; yet being Pro∣nounced by the Priest, and not by Christ, the Priest in say∣ing, [My Bodie,] should consecrate his owne Bodie, and not the Bodie of Christ. They doe therefore assume and [ 10] conclude, that the Priest uttereth these words both Mate∣rially and Formally, that is, both Narratively, repeating them as the Minister of Christ; and Significatively, pro∣nouncing them in the person of Christ.
If they could illustrate this to be possible by any Similitudes, wee should more easily beleeve them, but they cannot. Let us try this. Bellarmine.* 1.1 It is (saith hee in the Margin) as when the Angell of God, taking upon him the person of God, said, [I am the God of your Fathers.] So hee. Wee (not to dispute now the truth of his Assertion, in saying it was Gods [ 20] Angell that sayd, I am the God of your Fathers, but to sup∣pose it true) doe reply, that the Similitude is not appliable: Because, if as the Priest repeating Christs words thus, [Iesus gave it to his Disciples, saying, [This is my Bodie;] So the Angell of God should have said, God speaketh unto you, say∣ing, [I am the God of your Fathers;] Every one at the first hearing would easily discerne that the Angell spake so, only as a Minister, or (as the word, Angell, signifieth) a Messen∣ger of God, and not as the person of God.
Your Iesuite Suarez will mend this, who, to shew that a [ 30] man may, in the same words, speake, both in his owne per∣son, and in the person of another,2 1.2 It is (saith hee) as if a Councell of some King should say, It is given us in charge to pronounce Sentence, saying, [I the King doe say in this Cause, &c.] So farre your Iesuite, and no farther. We Reply: That the point, which is to be proved, is, that the same words may bee spoken of the same man, both in his owne person and in the person of another. But when the Councell sayd, [It is gi∣ven us in charge that I doe say in this cause] they saying, It is [ 40]
given us in charge, spake it in their owne person, and not in the person of the King; for the Charge was not given to the King, but by the King to themselves. And when they said, [I the King doe say in the Cause] they spake not in their owne person, but in the person of the King. What need many words? To speake the same words in a mans owne person, and ••n the person of another (saith your Iesuit Vasquez i•• the Murgi••, and that most trulie) is Impossible; and hee therefore stan∣deth onely to that one Ter••••e, Significatively, which all your other Disputers held to bee necessarie for the Answe∣ring [ 10] of the maine Objection. But what need wee any Iesuit to plead our Cause, seeing that the Text it selfe will cleare∣lie evince the same?
See above in the former Section.
Suarez in 3. Thom. Disp. 58. §. 4 Non tantùm Recita∣tivè, sed etiam for∣maliter & Significa∣tivè proferuntur sig∣nificando.—quià ut verba efficiant consecrationem prae∣sentis materiae, opor∣tet ut illa verba sig∣nificent, alioqui non efficiunt, ut ait Tho∣mas: ulterius dici possit, si solùm materialiter proferentur, ex veritate illorum non posset colligi, Hoc, quod nunc est in manibus Sacerdotis, esse verum corpus Christi, quià illa hoc non significant—non potest colligi ex hoc, quòd Christus ea form. litèr protulit, nec ex facto Christi—Cum dicit Conc. Tridentinum ex veritate verborum Christi colligi ejus praesentiam: non loquitur tantùm de verbis, ut à Christo prolata sunt, sed ut à Sacerdote proferuntur. Christus (ait Chrysost.) per os Sacerdotis loquitur: et Ambrosius, non 〈◊〉〈◊〉 utitur Sacerdos verbis suis, sed Christi—Et (aliquanto post) praecedentia & subsequentia tantùm ma∣terialiter proferuntur, at illa verba etiam Significativè propter mysterium, possit enim quis loqui vel in persona sua, vel aliena—ut si Regium Concilium Sententiam proferat his vel similibus verbis; Nobis injunctum est, ut Sententiam proferamus, dicentes: [Ego Rex in hac causa dico.]