A TREATISE OF COMMUNION UNDER BOTH SPECIES By the Lord JAMES BENIGNE BOSSUET ' Bishop of Meaux Councellour to the King heretofore Preceptor to Monseigneur le DAUPHIN first Almoner to Madame la DAUPHINE PRINTED AT PARIS By SEBASTIAN MABRE CRAMOISY Printer to his Majesty M.DC.LXXXV WITH PRIVILEDGE THE PVBLISHER TO THE READER MANY doubtesse will wonder that I who cannot well endure the very Name even but of a Papist in Masquerade should yet translate and publish a Book of popery and this too in a point peradventure of higher concerne then any other now in debate betwen Papists and Protestants To give therefore some account of my proceeding herein it is to be noted that the Church of England if I apprehend her doctrine aright concerning the Sacrament of the last Supper hath receded from the Tenent of the Church of Rome not so much in the thing received as in the manner of receiving Christs Body and Blood both Churches agree that Christ our Saviour is truely really wholy yea and substantially though not exposed to our externall senses present in the Sacrament And thus they understand the words of Christ This is my Body which shall be delivered for you This is my Blood which shall be shedd for the remission of sins my Flesh is meat indeed and my Blood is drink indeed c. Only the Papists say This reall presence is effected by Transsubstantiation of the elements and Protestants say noe but by some other way unintelligible to us Nor is the adoration of Christ acknowledged present under the formes of bread and wine so great a Bugbeare as some peradventure imagine For as John Calvin rightly intimates adoration is a necessary sequel to reall presence Calvin de Participat Corpor. Chr. in Coenâ What is more strange saith he then to place him in Bread and yet not to adore him there And if JESUS-CHRIST be in the bread t is then under the bread he ought to be adored Much lesse is the Oblation of Christ when present upon the Altar under the symboles such an incongruity as to render the Breach between Papists and Protestants by Protestants I mean Church of England men wholy irreparable for if Christ be really present under the consecrated species upon the Altar why may he not so present be offered a gratefull Sacrifice to his heavenly Father in thanksgiving for blessings received in a propitiation for sin and in commemoration of his Death and Passion 1. Cor. 11. But the main stone of offence and Rock of scandall in this grand Affaire is Communion under one kinde 1. Pet. 2.8 wherein the Roman Clergy are by some heartily blamed for depriving tke Laity of halfe Christ and halfe the Sacrament For my part I am not for making wider Divisions already too great nor do I approve of the spirit of those who teare Christs seamelesse Garment by fomenting and augmenting schismes in the universall Church Indeed I do not finde it any Part or Article of the Protestant faith to beleeve that in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper one halfe of Christ is in the bread and the other halfe in the Wine but on the contrary that in some exigences as of sicknesse a man may receive under one kind or species all Christ and an entire Sacrament So that upon the whole matter the difference herein betweene the Church of England and the Roman seemes to me from the concessions of the most learned and antient Protestants for I wave the figments of moderne Novelists reducible in great measure to mere forme and Ceremony It is true Christ instituted this Sacrament at his Iast Supper under two kinds which he did as well to signify by a corporeall Analogy to bread and wine the full effect and refreshment this divine food workes in the soule as also say the Papists to render the Sacrifice of his Body and Blood upon the Altar distinctly commemorative or representative of his Passion and therefore when he said Luke 22. This is my Body which is now given not only to you but for you 1. Cor. 11. he added This not only eat but doe that is Offer or Sacrifice in remembrance of mee Act. 13.2 Hence the Christians in the Acts of the Apostles are found Ministring that is as the Greeke text hath it sacrificing to the Lord of which Sacrifice Saint Paul also speaks Wee have an Altar saith he whereof they have no right to eat who serve the Tabernacle But that Christ gave his Body seperated from his Blood under one element and his Blood squeezed from his Body under another and that by consequence he that receives under one kind receives only halfe Christ and halfe a Sacrament is as Saint Austin attests a Judaicall way of understanding this Mystery no wise agreable as is before said to the doctrine of the Church of England Jo. 6.53 Neverthelesse this Communion under one kind though in my judgement but a bare Ceremony yet hath beene since the reformation alwayes regarded as a mighty eye-sore and alleaged as one sufficient cause of a voluntary departure and seperation from the preexistent Church of Rome Wherefore being conscious of the dreadfull guilt danger and mischeife of Shisme and unwilling to shutt my selfe out of Christs visible sheepfold upon dislike of a Ceremony so to loose the substance for the shadow after having duly examined the Arguments made by some Protestant divines against the Papists on this subject I thought it prudence and justice both to my selfe and them to heare also what the Papists could say in their owne defence And least I might be imposed upon by the malice or ignorance of any in a businesse of this high nature I made choice of an Author whose learning and vertue renders him omni exceptione major above the reach of calumny to denigrate or even criticisme to finde a blemish in A person who were he not a Romanist might justly be stiled the Treasury of Wisdome the Fountaine of Eloquence the Oracle of his age In breife to speake all in a word 'T is the great James formerly Bishop of Condom now of Meaux Whether the Author enoble the worke or the worke the Author I dare not say but 't is certain that if he write reason he deserves to be believed if otherwise he deserves to be confuted And however it be 'T is no fault especially in Protestants who adhere to the Dictamen of their own Judgement without penning their Faith on Church-Authority to read him and this too without Passion or Prejudice To which end I have here as a friend to Truth and lover of unity translated his Treatise into English for the benefit of such as being of the same spirit with me are yet strangers to the French language A TABLE OF THE ARTICLES contained in this Treatise THE FIRST PART The Practise and Judgement of the Church from the first ages I. AN Explication of this Practise p. 2 II. Four authentique Customes to ' shew the judgement
of the primitive Church p. 7 First Custome Communion of the sick p. 8 III. Second Custome Communion of little Children p. 65 IV. Third Custome Domestick Communion p. 94 V. Fourth Custome Communion at the Church and in the ordinary Office p. 119 VI. A continuation The Masse on Good Friday and that of the Presanctifyed p. 131 VII The Judgement and Practise of the later ages founded upon the judgement and Practise of the primitive Church p. 160 THE SECOND PART Principles on which are established the judgement and practise of the Church of which principles the Pretended Reformers make use as well as wee I. FIrst Principle There is nothing indispensible in the Sacraments but that which is of their substance or essentiall to them p. 167 II. Second Principle To know the substance or essence of a Sacrament wee must regard its essentiall effect p. 173 III. That the Pretended Reformers do agree with us in this principle and can have no other foundation of their discipline An examen of the doctrine of M. Jurieux in his Booke entituled Le Préservatif c. p. 165 IV. Third Principle The law ought to be explained by constant and perpetuall Practise An exposition of this Principle by the example of the civill law p. 194 V. A proofe from the observances of the Old Testament p. 205 VI. A proofe from the observances of the New Testament p. 224 VII Communion under one kind established without contradiction p. 260 VIII A refutation of the History concerning the taking away the Cupp writt by M. Jurieux p. 279 IX A reflection upon concomitancy and upon the doctrine of the sixth chapter of the Gospel of Saint John p. 306 X. Some Objections solved by the precedent doctrine p. 322 XI A reflection upon the manner how the Pretended Reformers make use of Scripture p. 334 XII Occurring difficulties vain subtilityes of the Calvinists and M. Jurieux the judgement of antiquity concerning concomitancy reverence exhibited to JESUS-CHRIST in the Eucharist the doctrine of this Treatise confirmed 342 A TREATISE OF COMMUNION UNDER BOTH SPECIES A division of this discourse into two parts THIS Question concerning the two Species whatever is said thereof by those of the Pretended Reformed Religion hath but an apparent difficulty which may be solved by the constant and perpetuall practise of the Church and by Principles assented unto by the Pretended Reformers themselves I shall then in this discourse lay open 1. This Practise of the Church 2. These Principles on which this Practise is grounded Thus the businesse will be cleared for on the one side wee shall see the constant matter of Fact and on the other side the assured causes of it THE FIRST PART The Practise and judgement of the Church from the first ages § I. An Explication of this Practise THE Practise of the Church from the Primitive times is that Communicants received under one or both kinds without ever imagining there wanted any thing to the integrity of Communion when they received under one alone It was never so much as thought on that the Grace annexed to the Body of our Lord was any other then that which was annexed to his Blood He gave his Body before he gave his Blood and it may be further concluded from the words of S. Lukc and S. Paul Lukc 22. v. 20. 1. Cor. 11. v. 24. that he gave his Body during the supper and his Blood after supper in such sort that there was a considerable interval between the two actions Did he then suspend the effect which his body was to produce untill such time as the Apostles had received the Blood or did they so soon as they had received the Body at the same instant receive also the Grace which accompanied it that is to say that of being incorporated to Jesus Christ and nourished by his substance Undoubtedly the later So that the receiving of the Blood is not necessary for the Grace of the Sacrament nor for the ground of the Mystery The substance is there whol and entiere under one sole Species and neither dos each of the Species nor both togeather containe other then the same ground of sanctification and of Grace S. 1. Cor. 11.27 Paul manifestly supposeth this Doctrine when he writes that Hee who eateth this Bread or drinketh the Chalice of our Lord unworthily is guilty of the Body and Blood of our Lord From whence he leaveth us to draw this consequence that if in receiving the one or the other unworthily wee profane them both in receiving either of the two worthily wee participate of the Grace of both To this there can be no other reply but by saying as the Protestants also do that the disjunctive particle or which the Apostle makes use of in the first part of the Text hath the force of the conjunctive and of which he serveth himselfe in the second This is the only answer M. Exam. de l'Euch V I. Tr. 7. Sect. p. 483. Jurieux affords to this passage in the treatise he lately published upon the subject of the Eucharist and he calls our Argument a ridiculous cavill but without ground For though he had made it out that these particles are sometimes taken the one for the other yet here where S. Paul useth them both so manifestly with designe in placing or in the first part of his discourse and reserving and for the second wee must of necessity acknowledge that by so remarkable a distinction he would render us attentive to some important truth and the truth which he would here teach us is that if after having taken worthily the consecrated Bread wee should so forgett the Grace received afterwards to take the sacred liquor with a criminall intention wee should be guilly not only of the blood of our Lord but also of his Body A truth which can have no other ground then what wee lay dowen viz that both the one and the other part of this Sacrament have the same foundation of Grace in such a manner as that wee cannot profane one without profaning both nor also receive either of the two devoutly without partaking of the sanctity and vertue both of the one and the other 'T is also for this reason that from the beginning of Christianity the faithfull beleeved that after what manner soever they communicated whether under one or both species the Communion had alwayes the same efficacy of vertue § II. Four authentick Customes to shew the judgement of the Primitive Church FOUR authentick customes of the Primitive Church demonstrate this Truth These customs will appeare so constant and the oppositions made against them so contradictory and vaine that I dare avouch an expresse acknowledgement of them would not render them more indisputable First Custome Communion of the sick I Finde then the custome of receiving under one kind or Species in the Communion of the sick in the Communion of infants in domestick Communions formerly in practise when the Faithfull carryed the Eucharist
or no it were fitt to condemne so many Martyrs so many other Saints and the whole primitive Church which practised this domestick Communion M. Jurieux cuts of the discourse with too much confidence Is there the least sincerity sayes he to draw a proofe from a practise opposed to that of the Apostles which is condemned at present and which would passe in the Church of Rome for the worst of crimes Was it not his businesse here again to make the world beleeve that wee condemne togeather with him and his the practise of so many Saints as contrary to that of the Apostles But wee are far from such horrible temerity M. Jurieux knows it very well and a man who boasts thus much of sincerity ought to have so much of it as to take notice that the Church as I have showne elsewhere dos not condemne all the practises she changes and that the Holy-Ghost who guides her makes her not only condemne ill practises but also to quitt good ones and forbid them severely when they are abused I beleeve the falsity of this History which M. Jurieux gives us of the first ages of the Church for a eleaven hundred or a thousand yeares appeares sufficiently what he sayes of following times is no lesse contrary to truth I have no neede to speake of the manner how he relates the establishment of the reall presence and Transubstantiation during the X. age that is not to our present subject Sect. V. p. 469. and otherwise nothing obliges us to refute what he advances without proofe But that which is to be remarked is that he regards Communion under one kind as a thing which was not introduced but by presupposing Transubstantiation All in good time when therefore it shall henceforth appeare as wee have invincibly shown that Communion under one species was practised even in the first ages of the Church and in the times of the Martyrs it can be no more doubted but that Transubstantiation was also at that time establised and M. Jurieux himselfe will be obliged to grant this consequence But let us retourne to what follows in his History He shows us there Communion under one species as a thing first thought of in the eleaventh age after the reall presence and Transubstantiation had been well established For then they perceived sayes he that under a crumme of bread Ibid. 470. as well as under every drop of wine the whole Flesh and all the Blood of our Lord were included What happened upon it Let us heare This false reason prevailed in such a manner over the institution of our Lord and over the practise of the whole antient Church that the custome of communicating under the sole species of Bread was insensibly established in the XII and XIII ages It was insensibly established so much the better for us What I have said then is true that the people reduced themselves without contradiction and without difficulty to the sole species of Bread so well were they prepared by the Communion of the sick by that of infants by that which was received at home by that which was practised in the Church it selfe and finally by all those practises wee have seen to acknowlege a true and perfect Communion under one species This is an untoward and troublesome businesse for our Reformers They have great reason indeed to boast of these insensible changes where in they putt the whole stresse of their cause they never yet produced neither will they ever produce one example of such a change in essentiall matters That indifferent matters should be insensibly changed and without contradiction is no such great wonder but as wee have said the faith of the people and those practises which are beleeved essentiall to Religion are not so easily changed For then Tradition the antient beliefe custome it selfe and the Holy Ghost who animates the Body of the Church oppose themselves to his novelly When therefore a change is made without difficulty and without being perceived it is a signe the matter was never beleeved to be so necessary M. Jurieux saw this consequence Ibid. and after having said that the custome of communicating under the sole species of bread was establised insensibly in the XII and XIII age he adds immediately after It was not however without resistance the people could not suffer without great impatience that they should take from them halfe of JESUS-CHRIST they murmured in all parts He had said a little before that this change verry different from those which are made after an insensible manner without opposition and without noise was on the contrary made with great noise and splendour These Gentlemen answer things as best pleases them the present difficulty transports them and beeing pressed by the objection they say at that moment what seemes most to disentangle them from it without much reflecting whether it agree I do not say with truth but with their own thoughts The cause it selfe demands this and wee must not expect that an errour can be defended after a consequent manner This is the state in which M. Jurieux found himselfe This custome says he that is to say this of communicating under one kind was insensibly established nothing can be more quiet and tranquile It was not neverthelesse without resistance without noise without the greatest impatience without murmuring on all sides behold a grand commotion Truth made him candidly speake the first and the adhesion to his cause made him say the other In effect nothing can be found of these universall murmurs of these extreame impatiences of these resistances of the people and this induceth to the establising an insensible change On the other side it must not be said that a practise which is represented so strange so unheard of so evidently sacrilegious was established without repugnance and without taking any notice of it To avoid this inconvenience a resistance must be imagined and if none can be found invented But furthermore what could be the subject of these universall murmurings M. Jurieux has told us his thoughts of them but in this point he coheares as little with himselfe as in all the rest That which caused these murmurings is sayes he that the people suffered with the greatest impatience that they should be deprived of one halfe of JESUS-CHRIST Has he forgot what he even now said that the reall presence had made them see that under each crumme of bread the whole Flesh and all the Blood of JESUS-CHRIST were contained Ibid. p. 469. Dos he reflect upon what he is presently about to say that if the doctrine of Transsubstantiation and of the reall presence be true Sect. VI. p. 480. it is true also that the bread containes the Flesh and the Blood of JESUS-CHRIST Where then was this half of JESUS-CHRIST taken away which the people suffered according to him with the highest impatience If a man will have them make complaints let him at least afford them matter conformable to their sentiments