whose existence will be as incontestable, as its solution will remain impossible. To discover it, recourse must of necessity be had to Catholic principles; and she must behold with us, in the primitive Church, the belief of the real presence of our Saviour in his sacrament, the heavenly, the ravishing object of our faith and adoration. Then it will be readily conceived that by divulging the mystery so exalted and inaccessible to reason, scandal would have been given to the pagans and catechumens; and railleries provoked, which would infallibly have been poured forth by men who were not Christians, since you hear them incessantly even now from the mouths of your theologians and preachers. Then we can conceive that by speaking openly of the real presence, and of the change of substance, they would have shocked the imagination of the pagans, and kept those at a distance from the religion, whom it was their duty to attract to it. Then we can understand the precept of Jesus Christ, and the prohibition of the primitive Church, "to cast pearls "before swine." Then also we can well conceive, that through obedience to the law of their

divine Legislator, and the command of his Church, the faithful would rather shed their blood, than betray the secret. Then are we in admiration at the faith and heroism of those martyrs, who without revealing the secret, were contented modestly to reply in the midst of torments, "there is no evil committed among

us." Then in fine every thing is understood and explained in those illustrious ages; the rule of the Church-the exact conduct of the faithful-the self-devotion of her martyrs-and the frightful calumnies and atrocious torments, of which they were the glorious victims.

I finish with one final conclusion. The discipline of secrecy in the first four centuries is evidently incompatible with the actual doctrine of your Church; but perfectly conformable with that of ours. I had reason therefore to say, that it was a general proof that in the first four centuries, the Christians believed what the Catholics have believed, still believe, and will ever believe, the reality of the presence of our divine Saviour in the most holy and most adorable sacrament of the Eucharist.*

* On the subject of the atrocious crimes attributed to the

Second General Proof of the Catholic Doctrine on the Eucharist, taken from the ancient Liturgies.

I. When I perceived at my second reading of The Difficulties of Romanism, the title of the

first Christians, the Rector furnishes us with a striking proof of the candour of his soul, and the rectitude of his mind. He knows perfectly well that when we approach to the Holy Table, we are persuaded, as the persuasion generally was among you, up to the reign of Charles II. that we receive, under the sensible appearance of bread, the body of Jesus Christ present in a supernatural manner, a body spiritualized, invisible, inaccessible to all the senses. Such is the mystery which we believe on the word of our God-Saviour. Now listen to the reasoning of Mr. Faber : the pagans fancied that the early Christians "literally devoured human flesh and literally drank human “ blood.... Now they could not anith truth have denied the "existence of such abomination, if they had held the doctrine “ of the real presence : for in that case, they must have been conscious, that according to their full knowledge and belief, they were in the constant habit of literally devouring human "flesh and of literally drinking human blood. Yet under the "most severe torments, they invariably and totally denied the "fact. Therefore by denying the fact, they of necessity denied "also the doctrine of the real presence." Is it possible thus to keep those in the dark whom it is a duty to enlighten? Where is the Catholic in the whole world who can recognise his sentiments in those attributed to him by Mr. Faber? Which among us would not feel horror-struck at the idea of them? His language answers to the notion of the meu of Capharnaum; and one might imagine him to have just arrived among us from their synagogue.

7th chapter, I laid down the book upon my table, and asked myself these questions: "What "will the Rector say here? What part will he "take with regard to our ancient liturgies?" They all speak uniformly, and in expressions the most energetic of our doctrines. All proclaim with one voice the altar, the oblation, the unbloody sacrifice of the new covenant, the real presence of the victim, the change of substance, and in fine, the adoration. We see by them that all the Christians in the world, at the moment of communion heard from the mouth of the deacon these words, the body of Jesus Christ, and they replied, it is true. This Amen repeated by innumerable lips during a succession of generations and centuries, is an admirable confession of faith, which will resound from the

In quoting Mr. Faber's words, I have purposely substituted the real presence for the word transubstantiation which he employs; and my object was to shew you and make you sensible that his reasoning bears in the most direct manner, and in the first instance, against the doctrine of the real presence. He generally affects to reason only against the change of substance; because having set out with assuring us that our respective churches are agreed as to the real presence, he is afraid of appearing to contradict himself. But I beseech you only to pay attention, and you will see that he combats the real presence almost wherever he names transubstantiation.

primitive Church even to the end of the world in proof of the real presence.*

Would the Rector in those days have been daring enough to oppose his voice to that powerful and universal testimony; and instead of Amen, replied "I see nothing but a figure?" The liturgies agree in presenting us with lively invocations to beg of God to send his Holy Spirit upon the gifts offered, in order that the bread may become the body of Jesus Christ, and what is in the chalice may become his blood, by his changing them through the virtue of his Holy Spirit. Would Mr. Faber have raised his discordant voice to explain these invocations in his favourite language of a moral change? and will he still maintain before us now, that in imploring the Divine Omnipotence to descend upon the gifts, it was merely to change them from common and domestic use, to a service symbolical and religious? The liturgies repre

* Habet enim magnam vocem Christi sanguis in terrâ, cum eo accepto, ab omnibus gentibus respondetur Amen. August. contra Faustum. Lib. 12.

The liturgy, called that of the apostles-transmutet et perficiat-Lit. Syri. translated by Renaudot.-Transmutante in te. Lit. Nest, translated by Renaudot.