An exposition of the doctrine of the Catholic Church in matters of controversie: by the Right Reverend James Benigne Bossuet ... ; done into English from the fifth edition in French.

SECT. XII. Exposition of the Calvanists Doctrine concerning the real Pre∣sence.

BUT to remove all the Equivocations which Calvinists make use of in this matter, and show at the same time, how near they have approached to us, it will be convenient to add here, the exposition of their Sentiments, tho I only undertook to explicate the Doctrine of the Church.

Their Doctrine has two parts; the one speaks of nothing but the Figure, and the other of nothing but the Reality of the Body and Blood. We shall see each of these parts in order.

They tell us first, This great Miracle of the real Presence, which we admit, is useless; that it is enough for our Salvation, JESƲS CHRIST died for us; that his Sacrifice is sufficiently ap∣plied to us by Faith; and that this application is sufficiently cer∣tified to us by the Word of God. They add, That if this Word must be clothed with sensible Signs, it is enough to give simple Sym∣bols, such as the Water of Baptism, without any necessity of fetch∣ing the Body and Blood of JESƲS CHRIST from Heaven.

There seems to be nothing more easie than this manner of ex∣plicating the Sacrament of the Lords Supper. Nevertheless, our Adversaries themselves do not think it ought to suffice them. They know such kind of Imaginations made the Socinians deny the great Miracle of the Incarnation. God might have saved us, say these Hereticks, without so much difficulty; he had nothing to do, but to pardon out faults, and might have instructed us sufficiently, as well in Faith, as in Manners, by the Preaching and Examples of a Man full of the Holy-Ghost, without any need of making him a God. But the Calvinists, as well as we, see the weakness of this Argument, which appears first from its not appertaining to us to deny or affirm Mysteries, according as they appear to us useful or unprofitable to our Salvation. God alone knows the Secret; and it is our business to render them useful and saving to us, in belie∣ving them as he proposes them, and in receiving his Graces after the manner he bestows them upon us. Secondly, not to enter into the question, whether it was possible for God to save us by any other means than the Incarnation, and Death of his Son, and not to meddle

with that unnecessary dispute, which the Pretended Reform'd Re∣ligion treats of so at length in the Schools, it suffices, we have learnt from the Scriptures, that the Son of God has been pleased to testifie his Love to us by incomprehensible Effects. This Love has been the Cause of this so real an Union, by which he was made Man. This Love moved him to immolate the same Body for us, as really as he united himself to it. All these designs are consecu∣tive, and this Love maintains it self in all things with the same vi∣gour. So that, when it shall please him to make each of his Children experience the goodness which he has testified to all in ge∣neral, by giving himself to them in particular, he will find out a method to accomplish his Desires, by no less efficacious means, than those by which he had already accomplished our Salvation. Upon which account we must not be hereafter astonished, if he give to each of us the proper Substance of his Body and Blood. He does it that he may imprint this in our Hearts, that it was for us he took them, and for us he offered them up in Sacrifice. That which preceded, makes all that follows credible to us; the order of his Mysteries dispose us to believe all this; and his express word permits us not to doubt of it.

Our Adversaries saw very well, that simple figures and signs of his Body and Blood would not content Christians, who are accustomed to the Bounties of a God, who gives himself to us so really. Where∣fore they will not suffer us to accuse them of denying a real and sub∣stantial participation of JESƲS CHRIST in their Supper. They affirm, as well as we, that he makes us there Partakers of his pro∣per Substance; they tell us, that he nourishes and quickens us with the substance of his Body and Blood; and judging that it would not be enough to shew us, by some sign, that we are partakers of his Sacrifice, they say expresly, that the Body of our Saviour, which is given us in the last Supper, assures us of it: words very remark∣able, which we will examine by and by.

Behold then the Body and Blood of JESƲS CHRIST present in our Mysteries, by the acknowledgment of the Calvinists: for what is communicated according to its proper substance, must be really present. It is true, they explicate this Communication, by saying, it is in Spirit, and by Faith: but it is true also, they will have it real. And because it is impossible to make it intelligible how a Body, that is communicated to us only in Spirit, and by Faith, can be communicated to us really, and in its proper substance,

therefore they have not been able to continue firm in the two parts of a Doctrine so contradictory, and they have been obliged to ac∣knowledg two things which cannot be true, but by supposing what the Catholic Church teacheth.

The first is, That JESƲS CHRIST is given to us in the Eucharist after a manner whch neither agrees with that of Baptism, nor the Preaching of the Gospel, but is peculiar to this Mystery. We shall see by and by the Consequence of this Principle: but let us first see how it is granted us by those of the Pretended Reforma∣tion.

I will not here alledge the Authority of any particular Author, but the proper words of their Catechism, where it explicates what concerns the last Supper. It does not only tell us in express terms, that JESƲS CHRIST is given us in the Supper, in reality, and according to his proper Substance; but that, tho he be truly commu∣nicated to us, both by Baptism, and the Gospel, yet nevertheless, it is only in part, and not fully. From whence it follows, that he is given us in the Lords Supper fully, and not in part.

There is a vast difference betwixt receiving in part, and receiving fully. If then we receive JESƲS CHRIST every where else in part, and it be only in the Lords Supper we receive him fully; it follows, by the consent of our Adversaries, that we must look out for a participation in the last Supper which is proper only to this Mystery, and which does not agree with Baptism and Preaching; but at the same time it follows also, that this participation is not annexed to Faith, because Faith being generally dispersed through all the Actions of a Christian, is found in Preaching, and in Bap∣tism, as well as in the Lords Supper. In reality, it is remarkable, that what desire soever the Pretended Reformers had to render Baptism and Preaching equal to the last Supper, because JESƲS CHRIST is there truly communicated to us, they durst never af∣firm in their Catechisms, that JESƲS CHRIST is given us, in his proper Substance, by Baptism and Preaching, as they say he is given in the Eucharist. They saw then, they could not avoid at∣tributing to the Eucharist a manner of possessing JESƲS CHRIST peculiar only to this Sacrament; and that Faith, which is com∣mon to all the Actions of a Christian, could not be this particular manner. But this peculiar manner of possessing JESƲS CHRIST in the last Supper ought also to be real, seeing it gives to the Faith∣ful the proper substance of the Body and Blood of JESƲS

CHRIST. So that we must conclude, from what they grant us, there is in the Eucharist a real manner of receiving the Body and Blood of our Saviour, which is not performed by Faith; and this is what the Catholic Church teaches.

The second thing granted by the Pretended Reformers, is taken out of that Article which immediately follows that which I have already cited out of their Catechism; which is, That the Body of our Lord JESUS, for as much as it was once offered up in Sacrifice to reconcile us to God, is now given to assure us, we have a part in that Reconciliation.

If there be any Sense in these Words, if they be not an useless found, and a vain amusement, we ought to understand by them, that JESƲS CHRIST does not give us a Symbol only, but his proper Body, to assure us, we partake of his Sacrifice, and of the Reconciliation of Mankind. But if the reception of the Body of our Lord, assures us of our participation of the Fruits of his Death; this participation of the Fruits must necessarily be distinguished from the reception of the Body, seeing one is the pledg of the other. From whence, to proceed, I say, If our adversaries are forced to distinguish in the last Supper the participation of the body of our Blessed Saviour, from the participation of the fruits of his Grace in his Sacrifice, they must also necessarily make a distinction between the participation of this Divine Body, and all kinds of Spiritual participation by Faith. This latter participation will never furnish them with two distinct Actions, by one of which they receive the Body of our Saviour, and by the other, the benefit of this Sacri∣fice; no man being able to conceive what difference there is betwixt partaking by Faith of the Body of our Saviour, and partaking by Faith of the Fruit of his Death. They must therefore acknowledg, that besides the Communion, by which we spiritually partake of the Body of our Saviour, and also of his Spirit, by receiving the fruit of his Death; there is also a Real Communion of the Body of the same Saviour, which is to us a certain Pledg of the others being assured to us, if we put no impediment to such a Grace by an evil Disposition. This is necessarily included in the Principles they admit, and they will never be able to explicate this Truth, with the least shadow of Solidity, if they return not to the Senti∣ments of the Church.

Who will not here admire the force of Truth? All the consequen∣ces which follow from the acknowledged Principles of our adver∣saries,

are perfectly understood in the sentiment of the Church. Catholicks, the meanliest instructed, without difficulty con∣ceive, that in the Eucharist there is a Communion which JESƲS CHRIST, which is not to be found any where else. It is no diffi∣culty for them to understand his Body is given us, to assure us we partake of his Sacrifice and of his Death. They distinguish clearly betwixt these two necessary manners of uniting or selves to JESƲS CHRIST; the one in receiving his proper flesh, the other in re∣ceiving his Spirit; the first of which is granted us, as a certain pledge of the second. But seeing these things are inexplicable in the sentiments of our adversaries, tho on the other hand they cannot deny them, we must necessarily conclude, that errour has thrown them into a manifest contradiction.

I have been often astonished they did not explicate their Do∣ctrine after a more plain manner. Why did they not always, without so many formalities, persevere to say, that JESƲS CHRIST having shed his Blood for us, represented to us this effusion, by giving us two distinct signs of his Body and Blood; that he was pleased indeed to give to these signs the name of the thing it self: that these sacred signs were pledges to assure us of our partaking of the fruit of his Death, and that we were spiritually nourished by the vertue of his Body and Blood? After so many endeavours to prove that signs often receive the names of the things signified, and that for this reason the sign of the Body might be called the Body, all this connection of Doctrine obliges them naturally to fix there. To render these signs efficacious, it sufficed the Grace of Redemption was annexed to them, or rather, according to their Principles, that it was in them confirmed to us. They needed not have tormented themselves, as they have done, to make us understand we receive the proper Body of our Saviour, to assure us we partake of the Grace of his Death. They were well enough satisfied to have the water of Baptism a sign of the Blood which washeth us; and it never entred into their fancies to say, we there received the proper substance of the Blood of our Blessed Saviour, to assure us his vertue is there diffused upon us. If they had argued after the same man∣ner as to the Eucharist, their Doctrine would have been less em∣broyled. But those who invent and innovate, cannot express all they have a mind to. They find certain truths, and maxims established which incommode them, and force a violence upon their imaginations. The Arians would gladly have resused our Blessed

Saviour the name of God, or the only Son of God. The Nestori∣ans did not admit, but with reluctance, that kind of I know not what unity of person in JESƲS CHRIST, which we find in their writing. The Pelagians, who denied Original sin, would also willingly have denyed that Baptism was given to little children for the remission of sins: for by that means they would have been freed from the argument which Catholicks drew from this practice to prove that original defect. But, as I just now said, those who find some truths firmly established, have not the boldness, or rather impudence to overthrow all. Let the Calvinists ingenuously confess the truth; they would have been well pleased to acknowledge in the Eucharist the Body of our Blessed Saviour only figuratively, and the sole participation of his Spirit in effect, laying aside those great words of Participation of his proper substance, and the many others which import a real presence, and serve only to perplex them. It would have been more to their humour, to have acknowledged, in the Lords Supper, no other communion with JESƲS CHRIST, but what is also common to Preaching and to Baptism, without tell∣ing us, as they have done, that in the Lords Supper he is received in plentitude, and every where else only in part. But however this was their inclination, yet the very force of the terms opposed them, our Blessed Saviour having said so precisely of the Eucharist, This is my body, This is my Blood; which he never did of any other thing, nor upon any other occasion: what likelihood was there of rendring that common to all the Actions of a Christian, which his express word had annexed to one particular Sacrament? And far∣ther, the whole order of divine providence, the connexion of Do∣ctrine and Holy Mysteries, the intention of JESƲS CHRIST in his last Supper, the words themselves which he uttered, and the impres∣sion which they naturally form in the minds of the Faithful, give us nothing but the Ideas of his real presence. Therefore it was necessary our adversaries should find out some expressions, the sound of which might, at least, give us a confused Idea of this reality. When a Man fixes himself either entirely upon Faith, as Catholicks do; or entire∣ly upon humane Reason, as Infidels do, it is easie for him to esta∣blish a connected and uniform model of Doctrine. But when a man goes about to make a composition of one and the other, he al∣ways says something which he would not say, and afterwards falls into opinions, the sole contrarieties of which shew the manifest falsity of them.

This is what has hapned to these Gentlemen of the pretended reform'd Religion; and God has so permitted it to facilitate their return to Catholic unity. For, whereas their proper experience shows them, they must necessarily express themselves as we do, to speak the language of Truth; ought they not to judge it necessary to think as we do, to understand it right? If they observe in their own belief many expressions, which have no sence but according to our tenets; is it not sufficient to convince them, that Truth is not in its full perfection but amongst us? And those unconnected parts of Catholick Doctrine, which are scatered here and there in their Catechisms, but which, as I may say, require to be united to the whole, ought they not to excite them to search, in the Communion of the Church, a full and entire explication of the Mystery of the Eucharist? They would, no doubt of it, be brought to it, did not humane Reflections trouble and perplex their Faith, which has too much dependance upon Sence. But having shown what Fruit they ought to reap from the Exposition of their Doctrine, let us finish the explication of our own.

Notes

• Cat. Dim. 53.
• Conf. of Faith, art. 36.
• Cat. Dim. 52.
• Dim. 53.
• Dim. 52.