The Catholick doctrine of the Eucharist in all ages in answer to what H. Arnaud, Doctor of the Sorbon alledges, touching the belief of the Greek, Moscovite, Armenian, Jacobite, Nestorian, Coptic, Maronite, and other eastern churches : whereunto is added an account of the Book of the body and blood of our Lord published under the name of Bertram : in six books.

The fifth Reflection.

Mr. ARNAƲD is not content to gather for himself alone the fruits of his victories, he is willing to bring in the Sociniens for a share with him, and his conceptions on this subject are remarkable. I brought some proofs drawn from Scripture touching the Trinity to shew in what manner this mystery is asserted in the word of God. These, says he, are only suppositi∣ons without proof. This is certainly absurd enough to call proofs, and such * 1.1 proofs too as are drawn from Scripture suppositions without proof. They would be, says he again, very rational in the mouth of a Catholick, because be accompanies these proofs, with the publick sense of the whole Church and all Tradition; but these same proofs are extremely weak in the mouth of a Calvi∣nist, without authority and possession, and who renounces Tradition and the Churches Authority. This proposition surprizes me. The proofs of Scri∣pture touching the mystery of the Trinity will be of no validity, but weak

proofs in their own nature without the benefit of Tradition, and all their evidence and strength must depend on the publick sense of the Church; Hoc magno mercentur Atridae. The Arians and Sociniens are much obliged to Mr. Arnaud. But this was not S. Austins sentiment, when disputing against Maximus an Arian Bishop, he told him, I must not alledg to you the Council * 1.2 of Nice, nor you to me that of Ariminis. For as I am not obliged to acquiesce in the authority of this last, so neither are you bound to be guided by the au∣thority of the first. But proceed we on the authority of Holy Scripture which is a common witness for us both, oppose we Cause to Cause, and Reason to Rea∣son. Should Mr. Arnaud's Principle take place, S. Austin would have been guilty of a great imprudence thus to lay aside the publick sense and Tradi∣tion, and wholly betake himself to the Holy Scripture, seeing the proofs taken thence concerning the Trinity, are weak, yea even infinitely weak, se∣parated from Tradition and the Churches Authority. What answer will Mr. Arnaud make a Socinien when he shall say we must not value this pub∣lick sense, and Tradition, which is in it self grounded on weak proofs. For after all, why has the publick intelligence taken the passages of Scripture in this sense, if the proofs of this sense are so slight in themselves. 'Tis nei∣ther rashly nor enthusiastically, nor without just grounds that Tradition is to be found on this side. But what are the reasons of it, if the proofs drawn from Holy Scripture, to ground this sense on, are in themselves ex∣treme weak? Mr. Arnaud does not consider that he not only gives the So∣ciniens an unjust advantage, but likewise ruines himself his own Princi∣ple, as fast as he thinks he establishes it.

HE says, that I suppose my passages concerning the Trinity are unanswer∣able. When a Socinien shall reply thereunto, we shall have enough to shew that his answers are vain, and yet I shall have right to suppose the solidity of my proofs till these pretended replies come. He adds, That I suppose the Sociniens object not any contrary passage. Which is what I do not suppose, but I suppose they cannot object any, that can prevail over those I offer'd. I have reason to suppose it without being obliged to discuss either their an∣swers or objections. If Mr. Arnaud's observations must be a rule, why has he contrary thereunto wrote this 10th. Book, which is only grounded on a supposition. He supposes the consent of all Christian Churches in the Do∣ctrines of Transubstantiation and the Real Presence, imagining he has well proved them. But I need only mind him of his own remarks, and tell him he supposes. 1. That his proofs are unanswerable. 2. That we will not offer contrary ones against them, and consequently his supposition is faulty. If he answers it belongs to me to make my replies, and produce my obje∣ctions, and that till then his supposition holds good, let him take the same answer from me on the subject here in question.

HE says in fine, That I suppose reason remains neuter, contenting it self without teaching the Trinity, and approving on the contrary certain truths which have a natural coheherence with that particular one, that I suppress this infinite crowd of difficulties, wherewith reason furnishes those against this Ar∣ticle, who take this dangerous way whereby to judg of the mysteries of Faith. A man that so confidently blames suppositions ought not to make such a ter∣rible one as this is, without grounding it at least on some proofs, That rea∣son furnishes us with an infinite crowd of difficulties against the Article of the Trinity. The objections made against this mystery proceed either from the weakness or corruption of reason, rather than from reason it self; and I

confess there are of this kind, not a crowd of difficulties as Mr. Arnaud ex∣aggerates it, but some, that may perplex a mans mind. So likewise did I never suppose this Article was wholly exempt from 'em; I have on the con∣trary formally acknowledged them. But to say no more, there needs on∣ly be read what I wrote on this subject to find, that Mr. Arnaud could not worse disengage himself from this part of my answer, having left it untoucht in its full strength. Especially let any one read the places wherein I establish by Scripture the Divinity of the three persons, and especially that of our Lord and Saviour, and judg whether 'tis wisely said, That I ruin the Soci∣niens without redemption, but 'tis by such a way, as will rather make them laugh, than change their minds. This discourse is not very edifying, and is perhaps capable of a sense which will not be to Mr. Arnaud's advantage. But 'tis better to pass on to his sixth Consequence.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Ch 6. p. 44, 45.
• * 1.2

  Aug. lib. 3. cont. Maxim. cap. 14.