Page 5
PART II.
AS for the Second Point, * 1.1 which is to see if there is effectively to be found in the Writings of the Ancients, sufficient Authorities to believe that the Ancients did not believe Tran∣substantiation.
Before I alledge their Authorities, two Reflections may be made.
First, that our own Authors do observe, [Obs 1] that Transubstan∣tiation is not expresly mention'd nor taught in the Scriptures. * 1.2 * 1.3 Scotus cited by Bellarmine, of the Eucharist, Lib. 3. cap. 23. saith, It doth not plainly follow from the words of Jesus Christ, This is my Body, that the Bread is transubstantiated.
† 1.4 Ockham saith of Transubstantiation, that it cannot be pro∣ved by natural Reason, nor by Authority of the Bible, but only by the Authority of the Ancients.
* 1.5 Alfonsus de Castro disapproves what Ockham says, that it can be proved by the Authority of the Ancients, for he saith, that it was not to be found, no more than Indulgences were, in the Writings of the Ancients.
Gabriel † 1.6 Biel speaking of Transubstantiation, saith, That it is not expresly taught in the Holy Scriptures.
Cardinal * 1.7 Cajetan does not find the words of Jesus Christ, This is my Body, clear, neither for the Real Presence, nor for Transubstantiation, without the determination of the Church be joyned to them.
The second Reflection, [Obs. 2] is that Transubstantiation comprehend∣ing a great many Difficulties quite contrary to natural Reason, * 1.8 none of the Jews nor Pagan Philosophers, disputing against the ancient Christians, ever dream'd of making any Objections against it in their Disputations. Trypho the Jew charges us with things monstrous, incredible, and strangely invented; as what we teach of Jesus Christ's being before Aaron, and Abraham, that he took on him our Nature, that he was born of a Virgin, that