you drink it in Remembrance of me for as oft as you eat this Bread and drink this Cup you shew th Lords Death till he come Now saith he (l) Quod si a Domino praecipitur N. B. ab Apostolo ejus hoc idem confirmatur traditur ut quotiescunque biberimus in Commemorationem Domini haec saciamus quod fecit Dominus invenimus non observari a nobis quod mandatum est nisi eadem quae dominus secit nos quoque saciamus p. 152. if it be commanded by our Lord and the same thing be confirmed and delivered by his Apostle That as oft as we drink in Commemoration of our Lord we should do that which our Lord did we find that is not observed by us which is commanded unless we do the same things which our Lord did and mingling the Cup of the Lord after the same manner we recede not from the divine Institution Lastly If any of our Predecessors saith he out of Ignorance or Simplicity did not hold and observe that (m) Quod nos dominus facere exemplo Magisterio suo docuit c. p. 156 157. which the Lord taught us to do by his Example and command Gods Mercy may shew Pardon to him whereas no Pardon will be shewed to us being instructed and admonished to offer as our Lord did his Cup mixed with Wine if we do not so Wherefore we have directed Letters to all our Colleagues That the evangelical Command and the Tradition of our Lord should be every where observed and that there should be no receding from that which Christ both taught and did Here then is all that Protestants assert against the Definitions of the Councils of Constance Basil and Trent viz. 1. That our Lord taught both by Example and command the Ministration of the Cup or that this was enjoined by Inspiration and Command of God. 2. That Christ in ministring the Cup drank to Believers and That he commanded them to drink it by saying Drink ye all of this and that the same thing is confirmed by the Apostle saying This do as oft as you drink it in Remembrance of me 3. That this evangelical Command and Tradition of Christ is to be every where observed and that none should recede from what he did both teach and do none should recede from the divine Instruction that it is necessary that the Faithful Servant should obey his Lord and that he may justly fear his Anger if he do not what he hath commanded Now that St. Cyprian in this Epistle speaks not only of the Consecrution or Oblation of the Cup but also of the Distribution of it and the Participation of it by the People is evident beyond all Contradiction For 1. He expresly speaks of sanctifying the Lords Cup and vtinistring it to the People N. B. and of the Blood of the Lord (n) Epoto Sanguine Domint p. 153. drank off by them and of the Cup which in the Psalmist Phrase inebriates the Drinkers of it 2. He adds that some perhaps might plead in favour of that Practice he condemns That they used only Water least their Persecutors perceiving that they smelled of Wine in the Morning might hence conclude they had received the Sacrament and gather thence that they were Christians which could by no means be objected if he argued only for the Consecration of Wine and not for the Participation of it by Believers also seeing they could not smell of that which they did not partake of 3. P. 155. He saith That if the fear of smelling of Wine should keep Men from doing what Christ did and commanded to be done in commemoration of himself the Brother hood would be withdrawn from the Passion of Christ in the times of Persecution whilst they thus learned to be ashamed of his Blood in the Oblations Whereas if it belonged not to them to drink of the Blood of the Oblation jure communications by right of participation as St. Cyorian says it did if they were not obliged to drink of it in remembrance of him this consequence must be infirm 4. Whereas they who did celebrate this Sacrifice with Bread and Water consecrated in the Morning Sacrifice thought this a good excuse that in the Evening Sacrifice they used Wine mixed with Water St. Cyprian saith P. 136. That this excuse is not sufficient partly because the People could not be all invited to the Evening Sacrifice partly because in every Sacrifice me make mention of Christ's Passion and so must do no other thing in any Sacrifice than what Christ did which Reasons can carry no weight in them but upon supposition of an obligation on the People to communicate of the consecrated Wine and Water Lastly He adds That if the blush to drink the Blood of Christ Ibid. we cannot be prepared to pour out our Blood for Christ which not the Priest alone but all the People must be prepared to do it therefore is extreamly evident that here St. Cyprian discourseth not only of the Priest's obligation to consecrate Wine mixed with Water but also of the Peoples obligation to partake of the Cup so consecrated In the Apostolical Constitutions the Apostles are introduced § 3. giving this order (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. 2. c. 57. When the Sacrifice is offered let every order of Believers receive by themselves of the Lord's Body and of his precious Blood. The Title of which Constitution is What every one of the Clergy and Laity ought to do in the Assembly In the Sacramental Thanksgiving they speak thus We give thee thanks O Father for Christ's precious Blood shed for our sakes and for his precious Body (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 7. c. 25. the Antitypes of which me now celebrate be having commanded us to shew forth his Death This Prayer all the Faithful make and all that are Baptized are the persons who are thus to shew forth his Death In the Prayer after the divine Oblation they say thus (q) Lib. 2. cap. 13. Let the Bishop Communicate then the Priests Deacons c. Amongst the Women the Deaconnesses Virgins and Windows then the Children then all the People in their Order and the Priest let him tender the Oblation saying The Body of Christ and let the Receiver say Amen the Deason let him hold the Cup and giving it say The Blood of Christ the Cup of Life and he that drinketh it let him say Amen And in the close of these Prescriptions are these words (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. c. 15. These things we the Apostles have commanded you Bishops Priests and Deacons to observe touching the Mystical Service St. Basil is an express assertor of the same Doctrine for he spends a whole Chapter to prove that he who is regenerated by Baptism (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tom. 1. l. 1. de Bapt. c. 3. ought afterwards to be nourished by the participation of the divine Mysteries
in the plural not by one of them only and (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 580. how this should be done Christ saith he hath taught us saying unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood you have no Life in you He that eateth my Flesh and drinks my Blood hath eternal Life c. And at the close of the Gospels it is written that Jesus taking Bread and giving thanks brake and gave it to his Disciples and said Take eat this is my Body broken for you this do in remembrance of me and taking the Cup and giving thanks he gave it to them saying Drink ye all of this c. The Apostle also doth attest these things saying I received from the Lord that which I delivered unto you that the Lord Jesus in the Night in which he was betrayed took Bread and giving thanks brake it and said This is my Body broken for you do this in remembrance of me Likewise after Supper he took the Cup saying This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood do this in remembrance of me for as of as you shall not this Bread and drink this Cup you shew forth the Lord's Death till he come (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 581. What therefore do these words profit us That eating and drinking we might be always mindful of him who died for us and rose again Which words are as full a confutation of the Roman Doctrine as can be desired by any Protestant For they expresly teach that every Baptized person (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moral Reg. 21. Tom. 2. p. 431. is bound to partake of both the Mysteries of the Bread and of the Cup that our Lord hath taught him how he should be nourished by these mysteries even by eating Sacramentally of his Flesh and drinking Sacramentally his Blood. That the words of the Institution of this Supper mentioned in the Gospels and in particular those words Drink ye all of this belong to all Believers even as much as the forementioned words He that eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood hath eternal Life c. they being here introduced to prove that all Believers ought to be nourished by the holy Mysteries that therefore 3. Do this in both these Places is not a Command directed to the Apostles to Sacrifice Christs Body and his Blood but to Believers to eat and drink them And 4. That we are to remember and shew forth Christs Death not only by eating but by drinking also St. Ambrose speaking of these Sacraments as he and many of the Ancients call the consecrated Bread and Wine informs us that Christ speaks of them in the Song of Songs saying (y) Edite inquit fratres mei inebrianimi De Sacram l. 5. c. 3. quoties enim bibis remissionem accipis peccatorum inebriaris in Spiritu ibid. Eat my Brethren and be inebriated for as oft as thou drinkest thou receivest Remission of Sins and art inebriated with the Spirit And the same Ambrose elsewhere saith If as oft as this Blood is poured out it is poured out for the Remission of Sins (z) Debeo illum semper accipere ut semper mihi peccata dimittantur l. 4. c. 6. I ought alwaies to receive it that my Sins may always be remitted In which Words he not only asserts That Christ's Blood poured out ought to be received which cannot be done by receiving it only by Concomitance with the Body but also that our Lord commands his Brethren not to eat only of these Mysteries but to be inebriated and saith That we are thus inebriated by drinking St. Chrysostom is copious on this Subject for saith he § 4. many things conduce to christian Love (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Matt. Hom. 32. p 223. one Table is offered to all the same Drink is given to all and not only so but it is given out of one Cup For the Father being willing to induce us to love one another ordered this making us to drink out of one Cup which is an Instance of intense Love So that the Sacrament of the Cup according to St. Chrysostom was of the Institution of the Father and he thus ordered Matters for the Advancement of his great Commandment of Christian Love. In his Twenty seventh Homily upon the First Epistle to the Corinthians he saith That as Christ said over the Bread and over the Cup do this in Remembrance of me (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 421. revealing to us the Cause of giving us this Mystery So doth St. Paul here say As often as you eat this Bread and drink this Cup you shew the Lord's Death Christ therefore did command the drinking of this Cup and did it for a Cause which will remain to the Worlds End and equally concern all Christians viz. The Remembrance and Annunciation of his Death And in his Fifteenth Homily upon the First of Timothy he brings in Christ thus speaking to the Laity as well as Clergy I have united I have joined you to my slf (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 316. I have said eat me drink me And whether Christ or the Trent Council should be obeyed in this Matter it is not hard to judge especially if we consider That in the Judgment of St. Chrysostom Christ did not only institute but command these things to be done His Words are these As chiefly we remember those Words which we last hear from our departing Friends and are wont to say by way of Admonition to their Heirs if they dare to transgress their Commands consider this is the last Voice which your Father uttered and till his last Breath he required these things Even so Paul being willing hence to render his Discourse formidable Remember saith he that he gave this his last Mystery and in that very Night in which he was to be slain for us (d) In Cor. 1. Hom. 27. pag. 421. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he commanded these things St. Austin doth sufficiently inform us of the same thing by asking of this Question When our Lord saith Exceept ye ear my Flesh and drink my Blood you shall have no Life in you how is it that the People are so much reslrained from the Blood of the Sacrifices which were offered for Sins If by those Sacrifices this one Sacrifice was signified (e) Ab hujus Sacrificii sanguine sumendo in alimentum non solum nemo prohibetur sed ad bibendum omnes exhortantur qui volunt habere vitam qu. 57. in Levit. from taking of the Blood of which Sacrifice not only no Man is restrained but All Men are exhorted to drink it who will have Life for surely such an Exhortation must be equivalent to a Command § 5 It is worth the Enquiry saith (f) In Levit. p. 327. Procopius Gazaeus how it comes to pass That when in the Law the eating of Blood is forbidden Now Christ commandeth us to eat his
3 C. 10. 1 Cap. de celebr Miss p. 88. c. 10. Alcuin 2 L. 1. c. 19. Rabanus Maurus and 3 C. 10. Micrologus assign the same reason others following St. Cyprian give this mystical Reason of this mixture That in (l) Videmus populum in aqua intelligi in vino vero ostendi sanguinem Christi ergo si vinum tantum quis offerat sanguis Christi incipit esse sine nobis si vero aqua sit sola plebs incipit esse sine Christo Julius Concil Tom. 2. p. 526. Scripture Water signifies the People the Wine shews the Blood of Christ and therefore if Wine alone be offered the Blood of Christ will be without the People if only Water the People will be without Christ So Pope Julius the Councils of (m) Concil Brac. Concil tom 6. p. 563. Braga and Worms but others say this must be done in complyance with our Lord's Institution and the Practice of the Church that we may do the same thing which our Lord did (n) Amalar. de Eccles Offic l. 3. c. 24. a Magisterio divino non recedamus and may not recede from his Command § 5 2. Others used Water without Wine in Celebration of those Mysteries and that not out of aversation to Wine which was the cause why the Aquarii the Encratites and the Manichaeans did refuse to drink it in the Sacrament for in the Evening-Sacrifice they freely drank it but to avoid being discovered to be Christians by smelling of it in the Morning Now against these persons St. Cyprian argues from the institution of the Sacrament by Christ and from his practice in the Oblation and the distribution of it (o) Admonitos autem nos scias ut in calice offerenda dominica traditio servetur neque aliud fiat a nobis quam quod pro nobis dominus prior fecerit Cyp. Ep. 63. p. 48. For know saith he that we are admonished to observe the Tradition of the Lord in offering the Cup and that nothing else may be done by us than that which our Lord did first for us Now Cyprian before had said That in offering the Cup and ministering it to the People our Lord had used Water mixed with Wine Again he adds if Jesus Christ be the High-Priest of God the Father and first offered himself a Sacrifice to the Father and commanded this to be done in commemoration of himself (p) Utique ille Sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur p. 155. surely that Priest truly officiates in Christ's stead who imitates that which Christ did and offers a full and true Sacrifice to God the Father if so he doth begin to offer as he saw Christ did offer And again (q) Exponere enim justificationes Testamentum Domini non hoc idem facere quod fecerit Dominus quid aliud est quam sermones ejus abjicere disciplinam Dominicam contemnere p. 157. To declare the Statutes and take the Testaments of the Lord into our Mouths and not to do the same thing which our Lord did what other thing is it than to reject his Words and to contemn the Lord's Discipline And whereas some pleaded a Custom for offering only Water he saith (r) Si in Sacrificio quod Christus obtulerit non nisi Christus sequendus est utique id nos obaudire sacere oportet quod Christus fecit quod faciendum esse mandavit Neque enim hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem p. 154 155. We must enquire whom the Authors of this Custom followed for if in the Sacrifice which Christ offered Christ alone is to be followed surely that we ought to obey and do which Christ did and commanded to be done for we must not follow the Custom of Man but the Truth of God. Lastly Because we make mention of his Passion in all our Sacrifices we ought to do nothing but what he did for the Scripture saith As often as you cat this Bread and drink this Cup you shew the Lord's Death till he come (s) Quotiescunque ergo calicem in commemorationem passionis ejus offerimus id quod constat Dominum fecisse faciamus p. 156. wherefore as oft as we offer up the Cup in commemoration of our Lord and of his Passion we ought to do that which it is manifest he did Now here let it be noted That from the Third to the Twelfth Century this Discourse of Cyprian is cited and approved by all the Doctors of the Western Church by Pope Julius Ubi supra by the Councils of Braga and Worms by Isidore by Alcuin Rabanus Maurus Walafridus Strabo by Micrologus Amalarius by Ivo and Gratian and particularly that Amalarius having cited these Words We find that it is not observed by us which is commanded unless we do the same things which Christ did and mixing the Cup after the same manner recede not from the divine Institution He adds That (t) Quamvis hoc ille de comixtione vini aquae conclusisset tamen de tota Institutione Dominica intelligere possumus adimplendum in quo suum mandatum est Apostolorum observatio De Ecclesiast Offic. l. 3. c. 24. though Cyprian concluded this only of the mixture of Wine and Water yet may we understand it as a thing to be fulfilled in the whole Institution of the Lord in which is his command and the Apostles observation of it § 6 Now surely they who thought themselves obliged to mix Water with their Wine because it was according to our Saviour's Institution and doing of this Action as our Lord delivered it and was according to the Canons and Practice of the Church must also think themselves obliged for the very same reasons to Minister the Cup unto the People present at their Sacraments and say unto them as our Saviour did Drink ye all of this They who believed they were by no means to recede from our Lord's Institution in this matter could never think it fit to recede from it in the delivery of the Cup. They who decreed the Deposition of those Bishops or Priests who did neglect this mixture as imperfectly shewing forth this Mystery would more assuredly have for that reason deposed those who robbed the People of the Cup for since according to St. Paul 1 Cor. xi 26. we shew forth the Lord's Death by eating of this Bread and drinking of this Cup It clearly follows that if he who gives Wine without Water does but imperfectly shew forth the Mystery to them who do receive it he that neither gives consecrated Wine nor Water must do it more imperfectly They who declared against the offering of Water only as a thing unlawful because all Christians were obliged to observe the Tradition of the Lord offering the Cup and ministring it to the People and to imitate what Christ did unless they would be thought contemners of
dwelleth in me c. (e) Necesse habemus sumere corpus sanguinem ejus ut in ipso maneamus ejus corporis membra simus De inst cler l. 1. cap. 31. wherefore 't is necessary that we should take the Body and Blood of Christ that we may dwell in him and be his Members Whosoever worthily eateth the Body and the Blood of Christ shews that he is in God and God in him And we saith (f) Lib. 2. f. 55. b. Guitmund who take the Communion of this Holy Bread and Cup are made one Body with Christ. Theophylact upon the Tenth to the Corinthians adds That which he saith is this That which is in the Cup is that which flowed from his side and (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ad v. 16. by participation of it we communicate with that is we are united to Christ That Men might not only learn by words saith (h) Ed. Erasm p. 217. Petrus Cluniacensis that they cannot live unless they be joined and united to Christ after the manner of carnal Food and Life they receive the Body of Christ and drink the Blood of Christ. We saith (i) Et nos Jesa Christo Jesus Christus nobis unitate foederatur inenarrabili c. De coena Domini f. 320. b. St. Bernard by the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ are joined in an ineffable Vnity to Christ and Christ to us as he said He that eateth my Flesh and drinks my Blood abidethin me and I in him § 2 2. This will be further evident from those Expressions in which they say That the receiving of the Cup is necessary for the Remission of Sins for without this Remission there is no Salvation When thou receivest saith St. Ambrose What saith the Apostle to thee As often as we eat this Bread and drink this Cup we shew forth the Lord's Death if we shew forth his Death we shew forth the Remission of Sins and (k) Si quotiescunque effunditur sanguis in remissionem peccatorum funditur debeo illum semper accipere ut semper mihi peccata dimittantur qui semper pecco semper debeo habere medicinam De Sacr. l. 4. c. 6. l. 5. cap. 3. if as often as this Blood is poured forth it is done for the Remission of Sins I ought always to receive it that my Sins may always be forgiven for as oft as thou drinkest thou receivest Remission of Sins Now this Passage being cited and approved by many others in the following Ages and extant in the (l) Dist 2. c. 14. Can. de consecrat Canon Law it will be needless to cite more Authors to this purpose only let it be noted that to receive the Blood shed for the Remission of our Sins is to drink of it saith St. Ambrose and well he might no other way of receiving the Blood shed for the Remission of Sins being then known than that of drinking the Sacramental Cup. § 3 3. They do expresly teach That the Sacramental eating and drinking is ordinarily necessary to eternal Life (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orat. 42. Without any doubting or shamefaced fear eat Christ's Body and drink his Blood saith Nazianzen if thou desirest Life Gregory Nyssen condemns Eunomius for asserting That the Mystical Symbols did not confirm our Piety But we saith he who have learned from the Holy Scriptures That unless a Man be born again of Water c. and that he who eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood shall live for ever (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tom. 2. contr Eunom p. 704. We believe that our Salvation is corroborated by the Mystical Rites and Symbols (o) In Levit. qu. 47. This Blood all Men are exhorted to drink who would have Life saith St. Austin Charles the Great confuting the vain Imaginations of the Second Nicene Council and comparing the sacred Blood with Images speaks thus (p) L. de Imag. 2. c. 27. Seeing without the participation of this Blood no Man can be saved whereas all Orthodox Persons may be saved without the observation of Images It is manifest that they are by no Man of a sound Mind to be compared or equalled to so great a Mystery Alcuin the Master of Charles the Great saith We must know that it is not lawful to offer the Cup of the Lord's Blood unmixed with Water for Wine was in the Mystery of our Redemption when Christ said I will not drink henceforth of the fruit of the Vine and the Water with Blood flowing from his side shewed the Wine pressed out of the true Vine of his Flesh with Water (q) Haec enim sunt Sacramenta Ecclesiae sine quibus ad vitam non intratur De Celeb. Miss p. 88. for these are the Sacraments of the Church without which we cannot enter into Life (r) De Officiis Eccles l. 3. c. 26. Amalarius saith the same And our Lord saith (s) De Instit Cler. l. 1. c. 31. Rabanus Maurus having pronounced concerning his Body and Blood that his Flesh is Meat indeed and his Blood Drink indeed and that he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my Blood hath Eternal Life he therefore hath not that Life who eateth not that Bread and drinketh not that Blood for although Men who are not in his Body by Faith may have that Life in this World which is Temporal they can never have that Eternal Life which is promised to the Saints Christ saith (t) Fol. 216. b. Petrus Cluniacensis gives his Flesh and Blood to be eaten and drunken that as it is discerned that without carnal Meat and drink none can pass through this temporal Life so it may be believed that without this spiritual Meat and Drink none can obtain eternal Life for how could he better commend himself to the World to be the Life of Men than by Example of those things in which Man's Life consists and therefore the Wisdom of God decreed to give his Flesh to Men to eat and his Blood to drink in the species of those things when he saith I am the Way the Truth and the Life c. we learn by hearing that he is Eternal Life but when he saith except you eat my Flesh c. we learn by eating that he is the Eternal Life of Men. That Men therefore might not only learn by Words but more familiarly by Deeds that they cannot Live except they be united to him they take the Body they drink the Blood in the likeness of Food not given by or taken from any other but Christ to shew this he signified that he would give to all Men his Flesh to eat and his Blood to drink And truly if any Doctrine can deserve to be suspected as new strange and incongruous to the Analogy of Faith it must be this That the Cup of Life the Cup of Blessing which we bless the Cup of Salvation which we take according to our Lord 's own Institution and
intire Sacrament is taken under either Species The Fathers and the School-Men do expresly say the contrary viz. Epiphanius §. 1. The Council held in Trullo P. Julius P. Gelasius the Council of Braga §. 2. Paschasius Corbeiensis Algerus and St. Bernard §. 3. Alexander Halensis Thomas Aquinas Bonaventure Albertus Magnus Durantus Petrus de Palude Gulielmus de monte Laudano Lyra Carthusianns Andreas Frisius §. 4. The Inferences from these Sayings § 5. WHereas the Trent Council asserts Sess 21. cap. 3. l. 4. de Sacr. Ench. c. 22. s. utraque That a true Sacrament is taken under either Species that is as Bellarmine Interprets it An intire Sacrament nothing is more repugnant to the plain Judgment of Antiquity than these Assertions And though the silence of all Antiquity in this matter is a full demonstration that they held no such Doctrine seeing no reason can be given why they had they embraced this Doctrine which is frequently inculcated by all the Roman Doctors who write upon this Subject should never say with the like plainness as they so often do That an entire Sacrament is given under one Species only or any thing to that effect or give themselves the trouble to Answer that Enquiry which so disturbs the Roman Doctors and which they see themselves so much concerned to Answer viz. Why then did our dear Lord himself distribute and institute this Sacrament to be received under both kinds I say though this be a sufficient prejudice against that Assertion of the Council of Trent and though it will more fully be confuted by an impartial Reflection on what we have Discoursed of the constant Declaration of the Church that to give the consecrated Bread dipp'd in the Cup was not to give a compleat Sacrament with many things of the like nature yet shall I wave all these Advantages at present and shew from the plain Sayings both of the Ancients the Writers of the middle and chiefly of the latter Ages or the Doctrine of the Schools that they conceived the Reception of both Species by persons capable was requisite to the integrity of this Sacrament § 1 Epiphanius speaking of the Encratites saith That in this Mystery they use only Water and wholly do abstain from Wine the censure which he passeth on them for so doing is this That having the Form they deny the Power of Godliness (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Haer. 47. §. 3. Pag. 401. for whosoever saith he doth omit one part of a work by the omission of that one part doth really omit the whole The Inference he maketh from that Rule is this That the Mysteries they celebrate by Water only are really no Mysteries but only false Mysteries in imitation of the true in which they are convinced by the Right words of our Saviour saying I will not henceforth drink of the Fruit of the Vine § 2 The General Council held in Truillo being informed that the Armenians did celebrate the Mysteries in pure Wine not mixed with Water declares that the did (b) Can. 32. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imperfectly shew forth the Mystery Now let it be observed from St. Paul that it is not by offering only but by partaking of this Bread and drinking of this Cup that we do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shew forth the Lord's Death and then it clearly follows that if he who distributes Wine without Water imperfectly shews forth the Mystery he that gives neither Wine nor Water must do it more imperfectly When some in the Diocess of Squillaci out of some unknown Superstition would have taken the Bread without the Cup (c) Apud Ivon decret part 2. c. 89. Gelasius decrees that they should either take the entire Sacrament or be entirely driven from it he therefore evidently determined that taking of one Species only was not taking an entire Sacrament In the Fourth Century (d) See cap. 2. § 2 Pope Julius in the Seventh Council of Braga in the Eleventh Micrologus in the Twelfth Peter Lombard do with one voice deny that the Bread dipp'd in the consecrated Wine can be administred pro complemento Communionis for an entire or compleat Communion and therefore much less could they think that the Communion was entire when ministred only in dry Bread. The great Sticklers for Transubstantiation averr the same thing Sect 3. Paschasius Corbeiensis saith That (e) De Corp. Sang. Dom. c. 11. therefore we are fed with and made to drink of these two only in the way that our whole Man which consists of two Substances integrè reparetur may be entirely repaired both therefore were in his judgment needful to an entire reparation of the whole Man. Algerus in Answer to this Question Why the Body and Blood of Christ is consecrated rather in Bread Wine and Water than in any other kinds of Bodies saith That because we so live by Bread and drink that we can want neither of them (f) Utrumque in Sacramento suo esse voluit De Sacr. Euch. l. 2. c. 5. our Lord would have both be in his Sacrament least if either of them should be wanting as by this imperfect sign of Life he should seem to be represented not as full but as imperfect Life And a little after he saith This is done proptr commodiorem aptitudinem Sacrametalis perfectionis for the more commodious representation of the Sacramental perfection The Species of Bread and Wine is propounded saith (g) De coena Domini f. 321. b. St. Bernard that it might be taught that there is a full and perfect refection in taking the Body and the Blood of Christ a full refection of Meat and Drink the principal Substances of Meat and Drink being Bread and Wine § 4 But above all the School-Men do declare against this Doctrine of the Trent Council (h) In iv sent q. 40. membr 3. Art 2. q. 53. membr 1. Alexander of Hales saith That whole Christ is not under either Species Sacramentally but the Flesh only under the Species of Bread the Blood under the Species of Wine only for to the perfection of the Sacrament is required a representation according to the Institution but in one kind the matter of the Sacrament is not entirely and perfectly I say there is not a perfect Sacrament as to the Sacramental Perfection of it (i) Sum. part 3. q. 76. Art. 2. Adv. Gent. l. 4. c. 61. in 1. Cor. c. 11. Aquinas saith That though Christ is contained under both Species yet is it convenient to the use of this Sacrament that the Body of Christ should be delivered apart for Food to the Faithful and his Blood for Drink both saith he is of the perfection of this Sacrament for the perfection of refection for the representation of Christs Passion and for the effecting of the Salvation both of Soul and Body 1. For its perfection for it being a Spiritual Refection it ought to have spiritual Meat and
secret Traditions should be manifested to the Eyes of Christians that the People might know what they are to avoid and fly from 3ly The very word Superstition shews that Gelasius did not intend the Manichees for superstition intimates a design of Reverence and Veneration of the Sacrament although misplaced and not well designed whereas the Manichees in their refusal of the Cup were acted by the grosest Heresie they refused Wine as being unclean and the Gall of the Devil and as P. Leo saith condemned the Creature in Creatoris injuriam to the reproach of the Creator 4ly Gelasius speaks only of those persons who were then within the Country of Squillaci and in the Diocess committed by him to Majoricus and John whereas it is uncertain whether one Manichee was ever there and is most certain they did abound elsewhere Nor 5ly can these words Let them receive the entire Sacraments or be excluded from them be reasonably applied to the Manichees for none who know the * Vide Concil Laod. can 6. 33. Discipline of Ancient times can think that the Abettors of so gross an Heresie as that of Manes which held (i) Aug. ad quod vult Deus c. 46. That there were two first Causes one Good the other Evil which denied the Worship of the God of the Old Testament denied the Resurrection and the Virgin birth of our dear Lord and worshipped the Sun as God could be admitted to the participation of the Holy Sacraments without a previous condemnation of those prodigious Errors and a publick Penance much less that they could be admitted with such freedom by that Gelasius who declares That (k) Cum nullo prorsus eorum participare debetis mensae dominicae puritatem quam majores nostri semper ab haeretica magnopere servarunt pollutione discretam Caus 24. qu. 2. c. nec quisquam Christians might not partake of the purity of the Lord's Table with an Heretick which Table our Ancestors have always abundantly kept severed from all Heretical Pollution and who succeeded that Leo who compelled the Manichees before they were admitted to the Communion of Christians to do publick Penance and by a publick Profession and Subscription in the Church to condemn the Manichean Heresy Now the Confutation of this pretence that Pope Gelasius made this Decree against the Manichees is a full confutation of all that Romanists do offer to elude the force of it against them for then it follows that this Decree cannot reasonably be restrained to them who regarded the species of Wine as an object of aversion or who abstained from the Cup out of an horrour of Wine or of the blood of our Lord For all these descants evidently do relate unto the Doctrine of the Manichees and therefore they are all confuted by the refutation of that vain pretence That P. Gelasius made this Law against the Manichees And whereas others tell us that these were laws then made to restrain the liberty the Church before had granted to receive in publick in one kind this as it is said without any shadow of proof so it is fully confuted by the very words of the Decrees of these Two Popes Leo objects against the Manichees that by avoiding of the Cup they declined the drinking of the Blood of their Redemption Now can it be supposed that he knew then of any liberty the Church had granted to the Faithful to decline the drinking the Blood of their Redemption that is of doing the very thing for which he so severely doth condemn the Manichees Gelasius decrees touching them of Squillaci That they shall either take the Sacraments entire or be entirely driven from them plainly insinuating that they who received not the Cup received not an entire Sacrament and could the Faithful in those times receive the Sacrament so that in the judgment of so great a Pope it was imperfectly received by them Moreover that this practice must in the judgment of the Holy Fathers be Sacrilegious will farther be made evident from the comparing of their Sentiments touching the distribution and receiving of the Cup by all the Faithful with those descriptions which the School-men given of Sacrilege For 1. Sacrilege saith (l) Medul Theol. l. 3. Tr. 1. de primo praecepto Dec. c. 2. Dub. 2. Busenbaum is the violation of a thing holy that is dedicated to divine Worship and to violate what is holy is saith (m) In 22. Disp 6. q. 15. punct 1. Gregorius de Valentiâ nothing else but to do something repugnant to that Worship to which a thing is designed Wherefore if the reception of the Cup by the Laity was designed for their shewing forth the Lord's Death and the remembrance of his Passion it must be Sacrilege to rob them of it because it is the violation of a thing dedicated to Divine Worship and the doing that which is repugnant to that Worship to which the Cup was designed Now the Fathers frequently tell us after St. Paul That we are to eat this Bread and drink this Cup to shew forth the Lord's Death (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moral c. 3. p. 432. We ought saith Basil to eat the Body and drink the Blood of Christ in remembrance of our Lord's Obedience to the Death and this he proves from our Lord's institution Luke xxij and from St. Paul's rehearsal of it 1 Cor. xi (o) Quoniam morte domini liberati sumus hujus rei memores in edendo potando carnem sanguinem quae pro nobis oblata sunt significamus In 1 Cor. xi p. 170. Because we are delivered by the death of the Lord being mindful of this thing saith St. Ambrose we signify it by eating and drinking of the things that are offered (p) Glaphyr l. 2. The Communicating of his holy Plesh and the Cup of his holy Blood hath in it a Confession of Christ's Death by the participating of these things in this world we commemorate Christ's Death saith Cyril of Alexandria When the Hoast is broken saith (q) Apud Grat. dist 2. c. de consecr Lanfranc de Sacr. Ench. p. 124. St. Austin whilst the Blood is poured out of the Cup into the Mouth of the Faithful what other thing is showed forth but the offering of our Lord's Body on the Cross and the Effusion of his Blood out of his Side Christ in this Mystery saith P. Gregory is offered again for us (r) Ibi Christi Corpus sumitur ejus caro in populi salutem partitur ejus sanguis non jam in manus infidelium sed in os fidelium funditur Dial. l. 4. cap. 58. for his Body is there taken hsi Flesh is parcell'd out for the Salvation of the People his Blood is not given into the hands of Infidels but poured into the Mouths of the Faithful (s) Quem cum bibimus quid aliud quam mortem domini annunciamus De Corp. sang Dom. cap. 21. When we drink out of this Cup saith
Paschasius what do we else but declare the Lord's Death This do saith (t) In 1 Cor. xi Anselm that is drink this Cup in remembrance of me as oft as you drink it that you may never drink it without the Memory of my Passion but may have in mind that I suffered Death for you Therefore saith the Apostle our Lord said This should be done in commemoration of him for as oft as you shall eat this Bread of Life and shall-drink this Cup of eternal Salvation you shall shew forth that is shall represent the Death Christ suffered for us till he comes to Judgment (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In 1 Cor. xi v. 25. By the Cup thou dost celebrate the commemoration of our Lord's Death saith Theophylact. (x) L. 2. cap. 8. Algerus in answer to this Question Why the Bread is consecrated into the Flesh and the Wine into the Blood apart saith This was done because the Custom prevailed in the Church from Christ himself who consecrated and gave his Blood not for division of the Substance but for distinction of the Figure that whilst the Bread is grinded by the Teeth it might signifie Christ's Body broken in his Passion and whilst the Wine is poured into the Mouth of the Faithful it might signifie Christ's Blood shed from his Side nor is the Body and Blood said to be apart as if the Body were without the Blood or the blood divided from the Body but it is so said in memory of his Passion because in the Sacrament we ought to shew forth the Death of Christ When the Bread of the Lord that is the Body of the Lord is eaten saith (y) De Sacra edit Erasm fol. 212. Petrus Cluniacensis when the Cup of the Lord that is the Blood of the Lord is drunk the Death of the Lord is shewed forth that is it is then represented What he did saith (z) Comment in vi Joh. Rupertus that we well know we do in Commemoration of his Death viz. Eat his Flesh and to drink his Blood. And surely when two things are equally designed and set apart by Christ for the commemoration of his Passion when they are equally apt and proper to shew forth and bring to our remembrance the thing they were designed to signifie when Christ and his Apostles do command both should be done in prosecution of that end when the Fathers do with one voice declare without the least disparity distinction or limitation that both concurr unto that end And lastly when one naturally doth import and shew the breaking of Christ's Body on the Cross the other doth as naturally signifie shew forth and bring to our remembrance his Blood shed and separated from his Body and in both these consists the Passion of our Lord to say our Saviour's Passion is wholly and entirely represented by the Reception of one of the two Species only is to reflect unworthily upon the Wisdom of our Lord's Institution of them both and his command to do both in order to the shewing forth his Death and evidently to contradict the plain Assertions and the concurring Judgment of the Church of Christ that by drinking and receiving into our Mouths this Cup this Blood we do and ought to declare signifie represent commemorate and shew forth Christ's Death Secondly Christians saith (a) L. 2. q. 99. Art. 1. thomas Aquinas are sanctified by the Sacraments of Christ and therefore what is done to the injury of Christian People pertinet ad irreverentiam rei sacrae unde rationabiliter Sacrilegium dicitur is Sacrilege because it appertaineth to the irreverence of a sacred thing To Sacrilege saith (b) Q. 99. p. 1146. Becamus is referred omnis injuria omnisque abusio Sacramentorum all injury and abuse of the Sacraments and this is evident even from the drift of the Commandment Thou shalt not steal for that for bids in reference to temporal concerns omne nocumentum quod homini injustè infertur in rebus exterioribus All hurt done to them in external Things In reference to spirituals it therefore must for bid all spiritual hurt or injury Men suffer by the detaining of things spiritual from them Now surely if Christians can be hurt orinjured they must be so when they by others are deprived of the means of Grace and of Sanctification and spiritual Blessings Now of these say the fathers Christians are deprived as oft as they are thus deprived of the Cup of Blessing For they constantly affirm That the eating of the Bread and drinking of the Cup did tend to the Sanctification both of Soul and Body (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paedag. l. 2. c. 2. p. 151. The Temperature of both the drink and the word saith Clemens of Alexandria is called the Eucharist of which they who by Faith are made partakers are sanctified in Body and Soul. In the New Covenant saith Cyril of Jerusalem there is the Heavenly Bread and the Cup of Salvation sanctifying the Soul and Body (d) Catech. Mystag 5. p. 245. Come to the Cup and receiving of the Blood of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be thou sanctified Who can express saith (e) Et Sacrosanctum vivifici corporis sanguinis sui Mysterium Membris suis tribuere quibus corpus suum quod est Ecclesia pascitur In Psal vi poenit Gregory the greatness of that Mercy by which Mankind was redeemed with the Effusion of Christ's precious Blood and The sacred Mystery of his Life-giving Body and Blood was given to his Members by which the Church his Body is fed and made to drink is washed and sanctified The super substantial Bread and the Cup consecrated by solemn Benediction (f) Ad totius hominis vitam salutemque proficit Apud Cypr. p. 39 40. doth profit to the Life and the Salvation of the whole Man saith Arnoldus Carnotensis the Bread is Meat the Blood is Life the Bread for fitness of Nourishment the Blood for efficacy of giving Life Moreover this is written with a Sun-Beam in the Church's Liturgies in which they call the Cup received after the Body (g) Const Clem. l. 8. c. 13. Lit. S Petri p. 26. Lit. Greg. p. 22. Marc. p. 46. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Cup of Life 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Cup of everlasting Salvation In which they declare that Christ Blessing the Cup (h) Lit. Chrysost p. 1001. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and filling it with the Holy Ghost said Drink ye all of this and said it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fulness of the Holy Spirit that it was the Blood of the New Testament shed for many (i) Lit. St. Marc. p. 47. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and distributed for the Remission of Sins in which they order the Deacon when he hath received it to say This hath touched my Lips and will take away mine iniquities and purge away my Sin and in which they lastly pray That (k) Lit.
it to be received of all that were fitted for and capable to receive it and in it said unto them Drink ye all of this 2. This appears farther from the Reason annexed to the Receiving of the Sacrament by Christ's Apostles for since that Reason equally concerns all Believers capable and fitted to Receive it the Institution must concern them all Now the reason why Christ said to his Apostles Take and eat what I have broken is by himself declared to be this because it was his Body broken or his Body given for them take it saith Christ this is my Body given for you this therefore being the Reason why they were to take and eat and this Reason concerning all Believers capable and fitted to receive it as much as the Apostles and succeeding Priests the Institution or command to take and eat must equally concern them This Argument transferred unto the Cup runs thus The Reason of the Participating of the Cup viz. because it is the Blood of the New Testament which is shed for the Remission of Sins doth concern Laicks as well as Priests his Blood being equally shed for both therefore the Command Drink ye all of this to which the Reason is annexed concerns them also Again another Reason why Christ said to his Apostles Eat this Bread and drink this Cup was that by so doing they might remember his death his Body broken and his blood shed for them saith St. Luke and shew it forth till his second coming saith St. Paul. Now this as St. Paul clearly shews in his discourse to the Corinthians and all the World believes as well concerneth all Believers as it doth Priests and therefore the drinking of the Cup by which as well as eating of the Bread this Commemoration is by our Lord's Institution to be made must equally concern them A Second Argument to prove that Lay-men by virtue of Christ's Institution have a right to and are obliged to Receive this Cup of Blessing is taken from these words of the Evangelist St. Mark Chap. xiv 23. And taking the Cup giving thanks he gave it to them and they all drank of it For here the Evangelist informs us That All the Apostles drank of this Cup and I presume they did it because our Saviour gave it to them for that end for to what other end it should be given them the Roman Doctors have not yet inform'd us Now hence it follows that Lay-men also have a right to be partakers of the Cup for the Apostles were then Lay-men they being afterwards made Priests by our Lord's saying Joh. xx 22. after his Resurrection As my Father hath sent me so send I you receive the Holy Ghost For as our Saviour saith Joh. vij 39. The Holy Ghost was not yet given because Jesus was not glorified or risen from the dead I know the Roman Doctors Syn. Trid. Sess 22. cap. 1. and J. L. from the Trent Council teach That the Apostles were made Priests when Christ said Do this and that then he gave them the Chalice as Representatives of the Clergy not of the People But 1. Let it be considered how unlikely it is that Christ should at one time institute Two Sacraments as they esteem them viz. that of Ordination and the Eucharist and yet speak nothing of the Use or the Reason or the Benefit or the Necessity of one of them nor tell them that he did so nor explicate the Mystery nor distinguish the Rite or the Words though the nature of these Sacraments being so extreamly different required these things but that he should leave all this to be supposed by the most improbable construction in the World. 2. If the Apostles were made Priests by Hoc facite Do this spoken before the Institution of the Chalice then must Judas also be made a Priest by Christ for that he also did receive the Sacrament is extreamly evident from these words of Luke Luk. xxij 20 21. This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood but behold the Hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the Table And 3. If the Apostles were made Priests by our Lord's saying Do this then were they doubly Consecrated and the Character of Priests was twice imprinted on them which contradicts the common tenet of all Christians that the Sacrament of Orders is not to be reiterated and the peculiar Tenet of the Church of Rome Concil Trid. Sess 7. Can. 9. That Sacraments which impress a Character must not be reiterated The reason of the Consequence is plain because as the Apostle witnesses our Lord said 1 Cor. xi 24 25. Do this both after the giving of the Bread and after the giving of the Cup. 4. Had the Apostles been made Priests by our Lord 's speaking of these words to them yet being not Conficients they had no right to receive it as Priests more than the Laity for the fore-mentioned Councils have determined That Clerks being not Conficients are by no Divine Right obliged to Receive under both Species There being then no difference betwixt them and the Laity in reference to this matter since All the Apostles drank of this Cup why should not the Laity do so too A Third Argument to prove that Lay-men by virtue of Christ's Institution are obliged to receive the Cup of Blessing is taken from the Recapitulation of our Lord's Institution by St. Paul who doth expresly teach us That our Lord Jesus 1 Cor. xi 25. in the same Night in which he was betrayed took the Cup saying This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood this do ye as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me Now in the Three Evangelists no such words are expressly to be found nor any thing like them spoken at the distribution of the Cup unless these words Drink ye all of this for this is my Blood of the New Testament that is shed for many for the Remission of Sins be of like import with the words of St. Paul. Since therefore the Apostle doth expresly teach That our Lord used these words at his last Supper and that he received them from the Lord as words which he had spoken then what remains but they virtually are the same with those recorded by St. Matthew and then they must also be a Command obliging all to drink of this Cup as being the Memorial of the Blood of the New Testament shed for them and therefore to be drunk by all in the remembrance of the Blood shed for them as often as they did present themselves to Celebrate that Holy Mystery I say obliging all that are capable when they present themselves before God to Celebrate the memory of his precious Death and his Blood shed for their Redemption to drink of that Cup which is the Memorial and Symbol of his Blood shed for them For sure the means which Christ appointed for such an end ought to be used by all who are obliged to pursue that end Since therefore all Christians are obliged Sacramentally
to remember That Christ shed his Blood for them and by that Blood shed confirmed the New Covenant to them and since Christ hath appointed the drinking of this Cup and this alone to be the memorial of his Blood shed all Christians capable of doing so must be obliged when they do Sacramentally Commemorate these Mercies to drink of this Cup. And this demonstratively follows from the ensuing words Vers 26 Do this as oft as you drink it in remembrance of me for as often as you eat this Bread and drink this Cup you shew the Lord's death till he come for they do manifest that as well by drinking of the Cup as eating of the Bread the Lord's Death is shewed and that until his second coming both these things are to be done in order to that end And since these words are not the words of Christ but of St. Paul who speaks here of the whole Church of Corinth the words preceeding Do this as oft as you shall drink it in remembrance of me must belong also to all the Members of that Church because of the connective Particle which joins the 25th and 26th Verses and makes it necessary that the same persons should be spoken to in the words This do c. and in the following words For as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup. And if this was the Duty of the whole Church of Corinth it must be equally the Duty of the whole Church of Christ there being no peculiar reason why the Church of Corinth should be obliged to drink this Cup in order to these ends more than all other Christian Churches And when our Lord hath taken so great Care to tell us That the Bread is his broken Body and therefore is to be eaten in remembrance of him i. e. of his Body broken that the Cup is the New-Tastament in his Blood and therefore is to be drank in remembrance of his Blood shed for us When his Apostle doth as distinctly say 1 Cor. x. 16. The Bread which we break is the Communion of the Body of Christ the Cup which we bless is the Communion of the Blood and neither of them have hinted in the least that the Cup is the Communion of his Body or the Bread of his Blood but by a particular and separate institution distribution and signification ascribed to them have strogly insinuated the contrary for men after all this to say one of these Species will suffice for the Bread is as well the blood shed as the broken Body and the participation of it is the Communion of the Blood of Christ and that by the partaking of it we do as well remember and shew forth the shedding of his Blood upon the Cross as by the partaking of the Cup is to my apprehension an affront offered to our dear Lord and to the Wisdom of the Holy Ghost In Answer to these Arguments some of the Roman Doctors are pleased to say that this Discourse of the Apostle imports only a conditional Order to do this in Remembrance of Jesus Christ as often as one shall do it and not an order absolutely to do it To this I Answer 1st He who not only doth command us at the celebration of the Sacrament to remember his Blood shed but also Institutes a sign for the memorial of it and doth command us to use this sign because it is appointed to be the memorial of it commands us when we receive the Sacrament to receive that sign for he who wills the end must will the means which he hath instituted for the accomplishing that end but this doth Christ for he institutes a Cup of Wine to represent his Blood shed he saith Drink ye all of this for this is my Blood shed this I command you to do in remembrance of me He therefore doth command us when we receive the Sacrament to receive this sign which in his Institution of this Sacrament he appointed as the means of this remembrance 2dly He who commands us to drink this Cup as oft as we drink it in remembrance of him because we do by drinking of it shew forth the Lords Death till he come commands us to do it as oft as we receive the Sacrament seeing as oft as we receive the Sacrament we shew forth the Lord's Death but Christ saith the Apostle did lay upon us this command for this very Reason saying Do this as oft as you shall drink it in nomembrance of me for as often as you shall eat this Bread and drink this Cup you shew forth the Lord's Death till he come 3dly Where there is parity of Reason there the command may very well be deemed of equal latitude and extent for ratio legis est lex where there is equal reason to command there may we reasonably suppose the will of the Law-giver to be equal in commanding but ther is equal reason why our Lord should absolutely command the drinking of the Cup in remembrance of his Blood shed as why he absolutely should say touching the eating of the Bread Do this in remembrance of me the one being as much the Symbol of his Blood shed as is the other of his broken Body and the one shewing forth his Death as much as doth the other we therefore have no cause to doubt but that he equally intended the doing both in order to this end § 3 Second That it doth not appear either from the words of our Saviour Joh. vi or from the practice of himself or his Disciples that he left this practice indifferent will be made evident from an impartial consideration both of our Saviour's words and of his practice and first to clear up the true meaning of our Lord's Discourse in the Sixth Chapter of St. John Let it be observed First That our Lord 's mystical Expressions of labouring for the Meat that doth not perish of eating the true Bread from Heaven are by himself plainly expounded to import only the believing on him or the embracing of him as their Prophet and their Saviour for when he had exhorted them to labour for the meat that did not perish he tells them v. 29. That this was to believe on him that God had sent when he had told them v. 35. That he was the Bread from Heaven he immediately adds He that cometh to me shall never hunger and he that believeth in me shall never thirst Having said that he was he Bread which cometh down from Heaven and giveth Life unto the World v. 33. He confirms this Expression v. 40. by these words This is the Will of my Father that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on him should have eternal Life And again v. 47. Verily verily I say unto you he that believeth on me hath everlasting Life I am that Bread of Life Secondly Observe that nothing was more common among the Eastern Nations than to express the Actions of believing embracing and obeying the words of Wisdom Vide Leight Hor. Hebr.
the precious blood of Christ. (a) F. 11 12. Lanfrank informs us That sumitur quidem caro per se sanguis per se The Flesh is taken by it self and the Blood by it self the Flesh under the form of Bread and the Blood under the form of Wine They therefore seem not even in his days to have been acquainted with the new Doctrine of Concomitance Sixthly This is apparent from the Decrees of Leo and Gelasius concerning those who in their time abstained from the Cup. For of the Manichees (b) Serm. 4. in quadrages cap. 5. P. Leo saith That they indeed received the Body of Christ but they declined haurire sanguinem Redemptionis nostrae to drink the Blood of our Redemption he therefore thought that they could not drink the Blood according to our Saviour's Institution who received not the Cup. (c) Apud Ivon decr part 2. cap. 89. Gelasius saith That the declining of the Cup was the dividing of one and the same Mystery which could not truly be affirmed if by taking of the Bread alone an entire Sacrament and whole Christ Body and Blood were taken and received He also adds Let them either take the whole Sacrament or be driven from the whole clearly intimating that by receiving the Bread only they received not the whole But it is needless to proceed in confutation of this vain imagination for had it ever entered into the Heads of the Renowned Fathers of the Church they would not so unanimously have said the Cup was necessary to be received for the remembrance of our Lord's Death and Passion for the procuring of our union to Christ for the Remission of Sins for the increase of Grace for the Sanctification and Salvation both of Soul and Body they would not have concluded the Sacrament was imperfect when it was not received nor would they with such Passion have exhorted those who had received the Body to come and be partakers of the Cup or stiled it as in their Liturgies they always do the Cup of Life Redemption and Salvation as we have seen they did § 6 Mr. Condom nevertheless thus Triumphs over us Gentlemen open your own Books open Aubertine P. 356. the most learned Defender of your Doctrine you will find there in almost every Page passages taken from St. Ambrose St. Chrysostom the two Cyrils and from many others where you may read That in receiving the sacred Body of our Lord they received his Person it self seeing they received say they the King in their Hands they receive Jesus Christ and the Word of God they received his Flesh as living not as the Flesh of a meer Man but as the Flesh of God is not this to receive the Divinity together with the Humanity of the Son of God and in a word his entire Person after this what would you call Concomitancy Answ What is all this to the purpose Is this the manner of speaking used by the Romanists since the New Doctrine of Transubstantiation was invented and since the Sacrilegious Defalcation of the Cup Do they express Concomitance by saying You receive Jesus Christ the King the Word of God the living Flesh of God Is it not this they carefully and frequently inculcate that under that one Species alone which is distributed to them they receive Jesus Christ whole and entire Doth not the Council of Constance thus express it That (d) Sess 13. vide Basil Sess 30. Concil Tom. 12. p. 601. it is firmly to be believed and no way to be doubted that the whole Body and Blood is truly contained both under the Species of Bread and likewise under the Species of Wine Doth not the (e) Sess 13. cap. 3. can 1 Trent Council say That by virtue of this Concomitance the Body is under the Species of Wine and the Blood under the Species of Bread Anathematizing them who teach the contrary and that under one Species is contained a true Sacrament Are not the Romanists still endeavouring to possess the People with these Sentiments That in receiving one Species alone they loose nothing since by Concomitancy they receive both the Body and the Blood Is it not this which the (f) Sess 13. cap. 3. Trent Council is so concerned to teach that as much is contained under either Species as under both Let therefore Mr. Condom if he believes the Fathers held Concomitancy shew out of all their Writings any thing of this Nature which may convince us that they did assert it or let him rest assured that what the Romanists since the Twelfth Century (g) Attendant insuper Sacerdotes quod cum Communionem sacram porrigant simplicibus sollicite eos instruant sub panis specie simul eis dari corpus sanguinem Domini Concil Lambeth A.D. 1281. Concil Tom. 11. part 1. p. 1159. have been continually inculcating and obtruding upon others what filleth all their Books and their Discourses on this Subject but never was once mentioned by any Christian Writer for a Thousand Years though they were equally concerned and had all the same reason if they believed Concomitancy yea and the same occasion if they had generally practised the half Communion so to do is but a Novelty invented by the Romish Doctors only to serve a cause and justifie the Defalcation of the Cup. When the Doctors of that Church would in their suppositious Treatises make the Ancients speak in this new Dialect they do not mince the matter thus but make them speak exactly in their Roman Language Thus in that Epistle falsly said to be writ by Isidore Hispalensis to Redemptus they introduce him speaking thus (h) Cum praedictorum fuerit consecratio non ut quidam putant indocti sub panis specie sola caro Christi in Calice tantummodo sumitur sanguis sed in utroque Deus homo in corpore glorificato totus integer Christus integer Christus in calice panis vivus qui de coelo descendit totus est in utroque Epist Isidori ad Redemptum p. 696. When the consecration of the Elements is made there is under the Species of Bread not the Flesh of Christ only and in the Chalice not his Blood only as some unskilful persons think but in both there is God and Man whole and entire Christ in his Glorified Body whole Christ in the Cup the living Bread who came down from Heaven is entire and whole in both Here is plain dealing only the Language and other unquestionable circumstances as (i) De Eucharist p. 902. Aubertine well notes demonstrate that the Author could not write before the middle of the Eleventh Century because the Controversie betwixt the Greeks and Latins touching unleavened Bread which gave occasion to that Discourse began not till the year 1053. APPENDIX CHAP. VIII The Contents The Assertions of J. L. touching Communion in one kind § 1. Against whom it is proved 1. That Christ's Institution of the Sacrament is virtually a Command obliging
46. c. 2. p. 518. in the Church of God in the Mystical distribution of the spiritual Nourishment the Body and the Blood of Christ is taken But adds That Ser. Sancto de jejun Sept. mensis Ser. 89. the Lord saying Vnless you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood you shall have no Life in you we ought so to communicate of this Holy Table as not to doubt of the Truth of the Body and Blood of Christ Gelasius also saith Disp de duabus naturis Christi Bib. patrum Tom. 4. p. 432. That the Sacraments we take of the Body and Blood of Christ are a Divine Thing whence by them we are made partakers of a Divine Nature and yet the Substance and Nature of Bread and Wine doth not cease to be or to remain and in this Decree that the taking of both Species is the taking of one and the self-same Mystery which therefore is not celebrated by taking of one Species only and that the not receiving of the Cup when the Bread hath been taken is the dividing of one and the self-same Mystery or the destroying of its Unity so that he argues against this practice from a Reason essential to the Mystery and which respects the Unity thereof which by the practice of receiving in one kind only is destroyed Having thus demonstrated that the Fathers and Doctors of the Church till the 12th Century taught Cap. 1. That the Laity by divine Precept were obliged to receive both kinds when they were capable of doing so Cap. 2.6 That they condemned all variation from the matter of the Institution and the Doctrine of Concomitance Cap. 3.5 That they conceived the Receiving of the Cup by the Laity was requisite to their shewing forth the Lord's Death their Vnion to Christ the increase of Grace the Remission of their Sins the Sanctification and Salvation of their Souls and Bodies and lastly Cap. 4. for their receiving an entire Communion That they constantly exhorted the People having received the Bread to take the Cup also Cap. 6.5 declaring that it was Vnlawful Erroneous and even Sacrilegious to receive the one without the other if they were capable of receiving both and having fully answered and confuted all that J.L. hath offered to the contrary Cap. 8. I shall conclude in these words of Mr. Condom on this subject a little varied viz. Thus many constant practices of the Primitive Church P. 160. thus many different Circumstances whereby it appears in particular and in publick and always with an universal approbation and according to the established Law that she gave the Communion under both Species so many Ages before the Council of Constance and from the origin of Christianity till the time of this Council do invincibly demonstrate that this Council did thwart the Tradition of all Ages P. 161. when it defined that the Communion under one kind was as good and sufficient as under both and that in which manner soever they took it they neither contradicted the Institution of Jesus Christ nor deprived themselves of the Fruit of this Sacrament In his Second Part P. 194. Sect. 4th he lays down this as a principle which alone carries along with it the decision of this Question P. 195. viz. That in all practical Matters we must always regard what has been understood and practised by the Church P. 196. That the true means to understand God's Holy Law is to consider in what manner it has been always understood and observed in the Church Since there appears in this Interpretation and perpetual Practice a Tradition which cannot come but from God himself P. 200. and that Sence thereof which hath always appeared in the Church is as well inspired as the Scripture it self Now by this as he well saith P. 203. our Question is decided for in the sacred Ceremony of the Lord's Supper we have seen that the Church hath always believed and taught for a Thousand years and upwards that the Laity by divine Precept and for the ends forementioned were obliged to receive both Species that the Fathers exhorted them to do so and did both by express Declarations and by many Customs and determinations sufficiently condemn the contrary Practice when any Hereticks or Superstitious Persons did decline the Cup. That they did generally so Interpret our Saviour's Institution that it as well concerned the Laity as Clergy and with one voice asserted it was not lawful to vary from it or celebrate the Mystery otherwise than it was delivered by Christ and his Apostles and practised in the Primitive Church Behold what has been always practised behold what ought to stand for a Law in opposition to all the Definitions of the Councils of Constance Basil Trent and all their Non obstante 's to our Lord's Institution and to the Practice of the Primitive Church FINIS
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 98. the Blessed Apostles in their Gospels had delivered that Christ commanded them to do so for be having taken Bread and given thanks is by them declared to have said Do this in remembrance of me this is my Body and also when he had taken the Cup and given thanks to have said This is my Blood and to have given it to them alone Where note first that Justin Martyr speaks here of a command of Christ which cannot possibly relate unto the consecration but to the participation of the Elements the command being Do this Take eat Drink ye all of this Secondly he had said before that only (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 98. Believers did communicate this he now proves because Christ delivered the Elements to them alone commanding them to partake of them He therefore clearly speaks of delivering the Bread and Wine to the Communicants Moreover speaking of the service performed by Christians on the Lord's Day he saith Prayers being finished we offer Bread P. 98. Wine and Water and the President gives thanks and Praise and the People say Amen and there is made a Distribution of those things which have been consecrated and every one partakes of them and then he thus concludes that (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p 99. B. Christ rising upon this day appeared and taught those things which we have now laid before your Eyes He therefore must have taught according to Justin Martyr the distribution of the Bread and Wine to every Communicant Here then observe to the confusion of the Trent Council First That it was the Tradition of the Apostles that Christ commanded that the Eucharist under both kinds should be given to every one present at the Sacrament and that the distribution of those things which were consecrated so that every one should partake of them is that which Christ taught Secondly That they declared that Christ gave this commandment in his Gospels whence it is evident that the Apostles and all the Christians of their times and of the times of Justin Martyr did interpret the Institution of the Sacrament by Christ as a command that every faithful Person present should partake both of the consecrated Bread and Cup and that both should be distributed to them St. Cyprian in his Epistle to Cacilian complains of some § 2. who out of Ignorance or Simplicity in sanctifying of the Cup of the Lord and (f) In calice Domini sanctificando plebi ministrando Ep. 63. ed. Oxon. p. 148. in the Ministration of it to the People did not that which Jesus Christ our Lord and God the Author and Teacher of that Sacrifice did and taught because they used only Water and mixed not Wine with it in the Cup they consecrated and distributed among the People Where note that this they did not out of any prophane Opinion of the Wickedness of drinking Wine as the Aquarii and Encratitae and the Tatiani did but only out of Ignorance and Simplicity and therefore he informs us That they did this only in their morning Sacrifice that the Heathens might not conclude that they were Christians and so hale them away to Martyrdom because they smell'd of Wine And that (g) Cum ad coenandum venimus mixtum calicem offerimus p. 155 156. in their evening Sacrifice they offered a Cup mixt according to Custom Now against this humane and novel Custom he argues First From the Custom of (h) Quanquam sciam Episcopos plurimos Ecclesiis Dominicis in toto mundo divina dignatione praepositos vangelicae ritatis ac minicae traditionis tenere rationem nec ab eo quod Christus magifter praecepit gessit humana novella institutione decedere Ibid. p. 148. most Bishops in the Church of Christ Who says he keep to the evangelical Truth and the Tradition of our Lord and do not by any new and humane Institution recede from that which Christ our Master hath commanded and performed Whence it is evident that in the Judgment of St. Cyprian Christ both commanded That the Cup mixed with Water should be administred to the People and did so administer it Secondly From the Necessity of obeying Christ's Institution and Command for saith he (i) Religiosum pariter necessarium duxi has ad vos literas facere ut siquis in isto errore adhuc teneatur veritatis luce perspecta ad radicem atque originem traditionis dominicae revertatur Quando aliquid Deo inspirante mandante praecipitur necesse est domino servus fidelis obtemperet excusatus a pud omnes quod nihil sibi arroganter assumat qui offensam domini timere compellitur nisi faciat quod jubetur ib. I thought it both Religious and Necessary to write these Letters to you That if any be yet held under this Error seeing the Light of the Truth they may return to the Root and Original of the Tradition of our Lord. For when any thing is injoined by the Inspiration and Command of God it is necessary that the Faithful Servant should obey his Lord and he will be excused of all Men That he arrogantly assumeth nothing to himself who is compelled to fear the Anger of the Lord if he do not what he hath commanded St. Cyprian therefore did believe that Christ required That the Cup offered in Remembrance of him should be mixed with Wine and Water and being thus offered should be distributed to the People and that he who did not so Administer did arrogantly assume unto himself and had just Cause to fear the Indignation of his Lord. Thirdly This he proves also from the Exhortation and Command of Wisdom * Prov. ix 5. Come eat of my Bread and drink of the Wine that I have mingled Where by mixed Wine the Cup of the Lord mixed with Wine and Water is saith he prophetically spoken of adding That we could not drink the Blood of Christ had not He first been pressed and trampled upon and (k) Nisi Christus calicem prior biberet in quo credentibus propinaret p. 150. had not be first drunk the Cup in which he drunk to Believers Moreover as Christ saith he commanded the Water of eternal Life to be given to Believers in Baptism so also by the Example of his Mastership he taught the Cup was to be mingled with Wine and Water For about the Day of his Passion taking the Cup He blessed it and gave to his Disciples saying Drink ye all of this for this is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins And the Apostle Paul saith the Lord Jesus the same Night in which he was betrayed took Bread and giving Thanks he brake it and said This is my Body which shall be delivered for you do this in Remembrance of me likewise after Supper he took the Cup saying This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood this do as oft as