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
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.
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.
in Joh. p. 112 113. or hearkening to her Councils and Instructions by eating and by drinking of them Thus Wisdom cryeth in the Streets saith Solomon Come eat of my Bread and drink of my Wine that I have mingled Prov. ix 5. that is Go in the way of understanding v. 6. Eat you that which is good and let your Soul delight it self in Fatness that is Isa lv 2. Incline your Ear hear and your Soul shall live And by the Son of Syrach Wisdom is introduced speaking thus They that eat me shall yet be hungry and they that drink me shall yet be thirsty Ecclus xxiv 21. i. e. He that obeys me v. 22. Hence Philo the Jew informs us That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Joh. vi v. 51. to eat is a Symbol of Spiritual nourishment Add to this that of Mr. Leightfoot That the Talmudists make frequent mention of eating the Messiah and thereby understand only their being made partakers of his Benefits And that of Clemens of Alexandria upon that passage of St. Paul I have fed you with Milk Strom. l. 5. p. 579. and not with strong Meat viz. Milk is the rudiments of Faith or the Doctrines of the Catechism the first nourishment of the Soul strong meat a comtemplation which makes us to discern the divine power and essence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these Contemplations are the Flesh and Blood of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meat and drink of the divine Word is the knowledge of the divine Essence Thirdly Observe that from these Metaphors our Lord proceeds to that contained in these words objected by the Roman Doctors v. 51. The Bread which I will give is my Flesh which I will give for the Life of the World that is It is my Body which I will give up unto death that by it the world may have life which is a greater Benefit exceedingly than that which you received from that Manna which Moses gave you in the Wilderness or from that meat with which I did so lately fill your Bodies The Jews taking these words in a gross sence as if our Lord had promised to give his real Flesh to be swallowed down their Throats and eaten by them as they had eaten Bread the day before and as their fore Fathers had eaten Manna in the Wilderness exclaimed against him as promising a thing absurd inhumane and imposible saying How can this Man give us his Flesh to eat to this our Saviour Answers v. 53. in words still more expressive of his violent and bloody Death for the salvation of Mankind viz. Except you eat my Flesh and drink my Blood c. Now these words are by some conceived to import thus much Vnless you with the Mouth of your Bodies do eat my real and corporeal Flesh and drink my proper Blood you cannot have eternal Life Having premised these Observations I shall now proceed to shew both from this Chapter and from other Reasons that our Lord spake not here of oral and corporeal eating of his natural Flesh and drinking of his proper Blood but only of doing of these things spiritually and that not only in the celebration of that Sacrament which by our Lord was Instituted for the remembrance of his Death and Passion but generally believing that by his Death and Passion he became the Saviour of the World and purchased Pardon and Salvation for all that heartily believed in him and would sincerely yield Obedience to his precepts And 1. Against the gross and for the spiritual Interpretation of these words I argue from the 51. v. thus The Flesh which Christ here promised to give for the Life of the World is the same with the Bread of God that cometh down from Heaven and giveth Life unto the World v. 33. for so we learn expresly from these words I am the living Bread which came down from Heaven if any Man eat of this Bread he shall live for ever and the Bread which I will give is my Flesh that I will give for the Life of the World. And again having said He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood hath eternal Life v. 54. and he that eateth me shall live by me v. 57. he adds immediately This is the Bread which came down from Heaven and he that eateth of this Bread shall live for ever Now our Lord hath expresly taught us that the eating of this Bread of Life imported only our believing on him v. 35. as hath already been made evident from our second Observation therefore the eating of his Flesh doth certainly import the same spiritual Action Moreover we are only to eat of Christ as Flesh in that importance of the Phrase in which we are to eat of Christ as Bread for as Christ saith he will give Flesh to eat so doth he say he will give Bread to eat as he saith He that eateth of my Flesh shall live for ever so he saith He that eateth of this Bread shall live for ever but none can say that Christ was or could properly be Bread or eaten by the Mouth as such wherefore he being only figuratively and spiritually Bread could only figuratively and spiritually be eaten as Bread if therefore in the same importance only we are to eat his Flesh that also is to be eaten in a spiritual Sence 2. From these words v. 52. How can this Man give us his Flesh to eat 't is evident the Jews conceived that our Lord promised to give them his proper Flesh to eat and swallow down their Throats as they had done the Bread with which he fed them And it on all hands is agreed that they mistook the sence of Christ's words and fansied such a meaning of them as he did not intend but had our Lord intended the corporeal eating of his Flesh and drinking of his Blood 't is certain that it must be swallowed down their Throats as properly as was the Bread which they had eaten and therefore no Man who maintaineth this corporeal eating of Christ's Flesh to be intended here can suitably to his Opinion say That they imposed a false sence upon our Saviour's words since from this sence it does inevitably follow that Christ intended that his humane Flesh should properly be eaten and their words signifie no more Add to this one Consideration which shews what apprehensions the Fathers of the first Three Centuries had of this eating of the Flesh of Christ viz. when 't was objected to them by the Heathens that they did eat Man's Flesh they constantly in their Apologies reject the accusation as the vilest calumny and as a most abominable thing sufficient to discover that the Author of such an institution must be some wicked Damon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We Christians saith Apol. 2. p. 70. 1. 50. Justin Martyr do not own the eating of humane flesh it is an infamous thing and falsly is reported of us This is saith Ad Authol l. 3. p. 119 126. Theophilus the most wicked and inhumane of
Forms of Communicating the Sick used in the Ancient Liturgies of the Church and from the Canons which concern this Affair For after the Vnction of the infirm Person it was the Custom to give him the Communion and that he received in both kinds is evident from the words of the Priest who ministred the Sacrament viz. Corpus sanguis Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam zeternam Amen The Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve thy Soul to Life eternal And from the following Prayer viz. Domine Sancte Pater Omnipotens aeterne Deus te fideliter deprecamur ut accipienti huic fratri nostro famulo tuo Sacro-sanctum Corpus sanguinem Jesu Christi filii tui Domini noftri tum Corporis animae sit salus Ex Theodori Poeniten p. 326. Father omnipotent eternal God we faithfully pray thee that the Holy Body and Blood of our Lord received by our Brother thy Servant may tend to the Salvation of his Body and Soul. Apud Larroq Hist Euch. p. 135 136. Hugh Menard tells us from a Manuscript of St. Remy of Rheims That when the sacrament was ministred to such as were not extream ill it was said unto them separately the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ keep you to life everlasting the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ ransom you to Life everlasting which words make a separate and distinct reception But as for those who were at the point of Death these two Expressions were joined together The Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve thy Soul unto everlasting Life because there was given to the Sick Person in a Spoon the Body of our Lord steeped in the Holy Blood. The reason of this steeping we learn from the Quae sacra oblatio intincta debet esse in sanguine Christi ut veraciter Presbyter possit dicere infirmo corpus sanguis Domini proficiat tibi in vitam aeternam De Discip Eccles l. 1. can 70. Canon of the Council of Tours cited by Regino That every Priest shall have his Pyx or Vessel worthy of so great a Sacrament where the Body of our Lord shall be carefully reserved for the Viaticum of the Sick and that this sacred Oblation ought to be steeped in the Blood of Christ that the Priest may truly say to the Infirm The Body and the Blood of our Lord profit thee to Life eternal and for the Remission of Sins Now this practice and the reason of the practice here assigned and approved of do expresly shew their Faith was this That the Priest could not name them both without a Lye unless he gave both and that they who enjoined that what Christ had instituted to be received separately should rather be received together than that either Species should not be received at all did think both Species necessary to a full and entire Communion as it hath been well noted by Cassander For to what purpose should hey so carefully require this intinction if they had then believed that there was nothing wanting to the Grace or the integrity of the Communion when they received under one Species alone And though this be abundantly sufficient to shew what was the practice of the Church till the 12th Century yet it is easie to produce farther evidence of this matter A Synod held in the Region of Ticinum and therefore stiled Synodus Regio Ticinensis thus Decrees That Si is qui infirmatur publicae poenitentiae mancipatus est non potest hujus myfterii consequi medicinam nisi prius reconciliatione percepta communionem corporis sanguinis Christi meruerit Concil Tom. 8. p. 64. if who is infirm is in a state of Penance he cannot have the benefit of this Mystery viz. of Sacred Unction unless being first reconciled he be worthy of the Communion of the Body and the Blood of Christ And mongst the things which visibly and wholesomly are done in the Church In perceptione corporis sanguinis ejus infirmis Viaticum dari L. 1. de Sacr. Euch. cap. 7. fol. 18. b. Algerus mentioneth the giving the Body and Blood of our Lord for the Viaticum of the Sick In the 13th Century L. 3. contr Albing cap. 7. Lucas Pishop of Tuy informs us of an Heretick who being Sick was admonished by his Host to send for a Priest and discourse with him as a Penitent that he might receive from him Sanctissimum Sacramentum corporis fanguinis Domini the most holy Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord. Now all these Instances do plainly shew that it was far from being a received and authorized Custom of the Church to Communicate the Sick under the Species of Bread alone or to give nothing to them but one Species only On the contrary it is extreamly evident from all the Canons of the Church produced touching the case of Penitents and others that it was a thing established by the highest Authority of the whole Church of Christ that both the holy Mysteries should be exhibited to the infirm and dying Person And seeing the Ancients looked upon it as so great a benefit to dying Persons to be refreshed with the food of the Body and the Blood of Christ since they took so much care to give the Bread steeped in the consecrated Wine to them who through infirmity of Body could not sallow it down dry and to minister each Species apart to them who were not extream ill since as De Discipl eccles l. 1. c. 195. Regino doth inform us they determined that great care was to be taken least the doing this being deferr'd too long it should prove to the destruction of the Soul our Lord having said unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood you shall have no life in you I say from all these things it is extreamly evident that it was a receied and in subjects capable was deemed a necessary thing to communicate the infirm and dying person under both Species of Bread and Wine Moreover § 6. that Children also if capable of doing so received in both kinds will be evident against the precarious Assertion of J.L. 1. From the clear Testimony of St. Cyprian in his Book De Lapsis for there he introduceth the Children who by their Parents were carried to eat things offered to Idols or to offer to them thus pleading of their Cause to God Nos nihil fecimus nec derelicto cibo poculo Domini ad profana contagia sponte properavimus perdidit nos aliena perfidia parentes senfimus parricidas p. 125. We have done nothing nor did we of our own accords leaving the Meat and Cup of the Lord hasten to these prophane contagious Solemnities our Parents were our Parricides Where he affords us a plain demonstration that they then ordinarily received both the Elements for had they not as many as were capable received the Bread as well as the Cup why doth he introduce them
(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
Blood. § 6 Isidore Hispalensis saith in Allusion to the Words of Wisdom That Christ the Wisdom of God hath built him an House the Church in which he hath slain the Sacrifices of his Body in which he hath mingled the Wine of his Blood in the Cup of the divine Sacrament and prepared his Table that is the Altar of the Lord when sending forth his Servants the Apostles and Teachers to the Foolish that is to all Nations that knew not the true God he saith unto them (g) Dixit eis venite comedite panem meum bibite vinum quod miscui vobis id est Sancti corporis escam sumite poculum sanguinis sacri percipite De Gent. vocat cap. 26. Come eat my Bread and drink my Wine which I have mingled that is take ye the Meat of my sacred Body and receive the Cup of my sacred Blood. His Command therefore according to Isidore was by his Apostles sent to all Nations and to the Foolish among them to drink the Cup of his sacred Blood. The Council held at Braga in the same Century speaking of those who delivered to the People a piece of Bread dipp'd in the Wine for the whole Communion confutes this Practice by recurring not only to the Custom of the Church but also to the Doctrine of the Gospel and the Command of Christ for say they (h) Quidam in Sacrificiis Domini Eucharistam vino madidam pro complemento communionis credunt populis porrigendam Quod quam sit Evangelicae Apostolicae Doctrinae contrarium non difficile ab ipso fonte veritatis probabitur a quo ordinata ipsa Sacramentorum Mysteria processerunt Seorsim enim panis seorsim calicis commemoratio memoratur Concil To. 6. p. 563. how Repugnant this Practice is to the Doctrine of the Gospel and Custom of the Church may easily be proved from the Fountain of Truth who gave the Cup by it self saying Drink ye all of this as he took the Bread by it self saying Take eat c. Hence then we learn That the Fountain of Truth commanded and the Doctrine of the Gospel requireth That all the People should receive the Cup and that they should receive it ordinarily apart from the Bread. Regino quotes from venerable Bede these Words (i) Postquam infirmus sacra Unctione fuerit delibutus statim corpore sanguine Domini recreandus est ut de cujus vita temporali desperatur vivificari in anima vita aeterna mereatur ait enim Dominus qui manducat c. Proinde Sancti Canones praecipiunt ut nulli fideli in extremis posito Communio denegetur De Eccles Disc l. 1. c. 119. p. 77. § 7 When the infirm Person hath been anointed he presently is to be refreshed with the Body and Blood of our Lord that he may deserve to be quickned with Life Eternal in his Soul when his corporal Life is despaired of for our Lord saith He that eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood hath eternal Life and unless you eat you shall have no Life in you And hence the sacred Canons command that the Communion should be denyed to none of the Faithful in the Close of this Life Where we learn 1. What was then understood by the Word Communion viz. the receiving of both Species the Body and the Blood and how these Species were to be received viz. The Flesh was to be eaten and the Blood to be drunk 2. Why they were to be both received viz. Because of our Lords Sayings John vi And 3ly We also learn for Confutation of Mr. Condom's first pretended Practice of the Church That the Sick were to receive the Body and the Blood and that the Canons of the Church required that they should not be withheld from them Zacharias Chrysopolitanus cites from the same Bede these Words (k) Hinc est quod ait Bibite ex hoc omnes ore corde ut sitis participes passionis meae Monotess p. 306. Hence it is that he saith Drink ye all of this both with the Heart and with the Mouth that ye may be Partakers of my Passion § 8 Paschasius Rathertus saith It is Christ alone who breaketh this Bread and distributeth it to Believers by the Hands of his Ministers (l) Similiter calicem porrigit eis dicens accipite hibite ex hoc omnes tam ministri quam reliqui credentes cap. 15. saying Take ye and drink ye all of this as well Ministers as the rest of the Faithful This is the Blood of the new and everlasting Testament Cassander informs us That the Gloss called expositio quadruplicis Missae expounds the Words thus (m) Ex hoc scilicet Calice sanguinis omnes scilicet sine personarum acceptione De Com. sub utraque specie p. 1043. Drink ye of this Cup of Blood All without exception of Persons Hincmarus Remensis having cited the same Words adds (n) Tom. 2. p. 90. Haec dixit dicit This he said then and this he saith now All plainly contradicting the R. Gloss and Mr. Condom's Exposition That these Words Drink ye all of this were only spoken to and concern'd only the Apostles Lanfranck § 9. Arch-bishop of Canterbury speaks thus to Berengarius If thou couldest with Christian Caution understand these things which ought to be understood literally and spiritually (o) Proculdubio crederes quod universalis Ecclesia credit praedicares quod Apostolica Doctrina in tota mandi latitudine praedicandum instituit carnem scilicet sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi ore corpore ore cordis hoc est corporaliter spiritualiter manducari bibi De Sacr. Euch. f. 131 132. thou wouldest without doubt believe that which the universal Church believes thou would-est publish what the Doctrine of the Apostles hath appointed to be published through the World viz. That the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is to be eaten and drunken both by the Mouth and Body and by the Mouth of the Heart that is both bodily and spiritually And Anselm his Successor in the same See saith We ought to eat and drink this Sacrament two ways (p) Ore cordis ore Corporis Com. in 1 Cor. 11. with the Mouth of the Heart and of the Body The doing both these things the drinking of the Blood of Jesus with our Mouths is that which ought to be done that which the Doctrine of the Apostles hath appointed to be published Pope Paschal writes to Pontius Abbot of Clun §. 10. thus (q) Scribens ad Caecilium B. Cyprianus ait quando aliquid Deo inspirante mandante praecipitur necesse est domino servus fidelis obtemperet excusatus apud omnes quod nihil sibi arroganter assumat ne aliud fiat a nobis quam quod pro nobis Dominus prior fecit igitur in sumendo corpore sanguine Domini juxta eundem Cyprianum Dominicatraditio servetur necab
eo quod Christus Magister praecepit gessit humana novella institutione discedatur novimus enim per se panem per se vinum ab ipso Domino traditum quem morem sic semper in Sancta Ecclesia conservandum docemus atque praecipimus praeterquam in parvulis omnino infirmis qui panem absorbere non possunt Ep. 32. De non porrigenda Communione intincta Concil Tom. 10. p. 656. Cyprian writing to Caecilius saith When any thing is required by the Inspiration and command of God it is necessary that the faithful Servant should obey his Lord. Therefore in taking the Body and Blood of our Lord according to the same Cyprian let the Tradition of the Lord be observed nor let that be departed from by any humane and novel Institution which Christ our Master commanded and did He therefore owned the taking of the Cup apart from the Bread to be a Command of Christ which no new Institution of Men could alter Our Lord Jesus saith (r) Lib. 2 de Sacram. Part. 8. Fol. 395. Hugo de Sancto Victore instituted the Sacrament of the Body and the Blood of Christ and commanded that they should afterwards do the same thing in remembrance of himself (s) In Johan Cap. 6. Rupertus Tuitiensis informs us That our Lord prescribing the whole manner of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood saith * Vid Theoph. 〈◊〉 Matth. c. 26. p. 162. Do this in remembrance of me Arnoldus Carnotensis delivers the same Doctrine most expresly For faith he (t) Scholae Evangelicae hoc primum magisterium protulerunt Lex quippe esum sanguinis prohibet Evangelium praecipit ut bibatur the Doctrine of the Sacrament is new and the evangelical Schools first brought forth this Command This Discipline was first made known unto the World by Christ our Teacher That Christians should drink Blood the Vse of which the old Law did forbid for the old Law forbids the eating Blood the Gospel commands it should be drunk In which Commands the Christian Religion ought chiefly to discern this That the Blood of Beasts in all things differing from the Blood of Christ hath only the Effect of temporal Vivification and cannot profit to eternal Life * Bibimus autem de sanguine Christo ipso jubente Inter opera Cypr. adscript p. 41. but we drink of the Blood by his Command being made Partakers of eternal Life with him and by him Christ himself is the Butler who hath reach'd forth this Cup and taught that we should not only outwardly be dashed with this Blood but inwardly by the powerful Aspersion of it should be fortified in our Souls Petrus Cluniacensis in the same Age speaks thus (u) Cum Christus imperet N. B. dicens Hoc facite hoc plane non aliud hoc idem quod accipitis ad comedendum quod sumitis ad bibendum corpus scilicet meum fanguinem hoc inquam facite in meam commemorationem quid ultra certe quaeritis Quia quod fecit eos facere praecepit quod eis distribuit hoc eos aliis distribuere voluit Ed. Erasm f. 209. Christ commands do this not another thing this which you have received to eat which you take to drink viz. My Body and Blood this say I do in memory of me That which he did he commanded them to do That which he distributed to them he would have them distribute to others Christ saith St. Bernard the Day before his Passion prescribed to his Disciples the Form of this Sacrament He gave Efficacy to it i. e. (x) Hujus Sacramenti formam praescripsit efficaciam exhibuit i. e. fieri praecepit De Caena Dom. c. qui incipit Panem Angel. f. 320. b. He commanded it to be done The Prescription of the Form was under Bread and Wine note the Order First he washes his Disciples Feet then going back to the Table He ordains the Sacrifice of his Body and Blood giving the Bread apart and the Wine apart saying thus of the Bread Take and eat this is my Body and of the Wine thus Drink ye all of this And again * De Sacramento quidem Corporis fanguinis sui nemo est qui nesciat hanc quoque tantam tam singularem alimoniam ea primum die exhibitam ea die commendatam mandatam deinceps frequentari Serm. 3. in ramis Palm fol. 30. b. Concerning the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ there is no Man who knoweth not that upon that Day That great and singular Nourishment was first exhibited on that Day commended and commanded henceforth to be frequented (y) Hoc dicimus Quod postquam Christus exhibuit corpus suum sub specie panis tunc etiam postea exhibuit sanguinem suum sub specie vini utrumque Sacramentaliter esse celebrandum praecepit in Ecclesia per statuta Apostolica ideo Ecclesia instructa actione Christi utrumque celebrat divisim conficiendo corpus sub specie panis divisim conficiendo sanguinem sub specie vini quod autem duo haec exhibuerit celebranda instituerit Christus patet Matth. 27. Ex omnibus iftis accipitur quod Christ us sub una specie panis corpus suum tradidit sub altera specie vini tradidit sanguinem fic servandum instituit cum Christi actio sit nostra instructio pro certo haec duo nobis servanda esse praecepit ideo sub una specie corpus sub alia tradimus sanguinem Sum. de Sacr. Euch. Dist 3. tr 2. c. 5. Albertus Magnus teacheth §. 11. That after Christ had exhibited his Body under the Species of Bread he afterwards exhibited his Blood under the Species of Wine and by the Apostolical Statutes commanded both to be sacramentally celebrated in the Church and having proved from the Evangelists St. Matthew Mark and Luke That Christ celebrated both apart From all these things saith he 't is known or understood that Christ under one Species of Bread delivered his Body and under the other Species of Wine his Blood and so appointed it to be observed and since Christ's Action is our Instruction Pro certo haec duo nobis servanda esse praecepit He commanded these Two things most certainly to be observed and therefore under One Species we deliver the Body and under the other the Blood. Where we see the Practice of the Church was then to deliver both Species and that the Command of Christ was then conceived to be their Motive so to do according to that saying of Durantus (z) In primitiva Ecclesia omnes qui celebrationi Missarum intererant singulis diebus communicare solebant eo quod Apostoli omnes de calice bibebant Domino dicente Bibite ex hoc omnes Rat. l. 4. c. 53. In the primitive Church all that heard Mass used to communicate because the Apostles all drank of the Cup the Lord saying Drink ye
all of this Here then §. 12. besides what hath already been observed from these Passages we farther learn 1. That every Order of Believers ought to receive of the Lords Body and of his precious Blood apart That they ought to drink this Cup with the Mouth of the Body 2. That the Tradition of our Lord is to be observed and not departed from by reason of any humane and novel Institution 3. That the Apostles commanded these things to be observed that the Doctrine of the Gospel and the Custom of the Church require the Cup should be received apart Interim autem dum ab eo in hoc mundo peregrinamur Corpore sanguine ejus in via pascimur sicut Apostolis suis hoc Mysterium in coena ultima ante mortem suam tradidit nobis sequentibus frequentandum per eos mandavit Guitm de Sacram. lib. 3. fol. 91. b. that this the universal Church believes and the Doctrine of the Apostles hath appointed this to be published throughout the world that the Blood of our Lord Jesus is to be drunk by the mouth of the Body that the Gospel commands it should be drunk that the Apostolical Statutes commanded both to be celebrated in the Church that God himself ordered that we should all drink out of one Cup and that this is required by the inspiration and command of God that Christ said Eat me Drink me that he exhorted all Men to drink of his Blood that he sent forth his Apostles and Teachers to invite them to drink of the Wine that he had mingled and to receive the Cup of his sacred Blood that he commanded these things that he so appointed it to be observed and that we drink of the blood of Christ by his command 4. That the command Drink ye all of this was by Christ directed as well unto the People as the Ministers to all without exception that what Christ did he commanded his followers to do what he distributed to them he would have them distribute to others and that in the Primitive Church all communicated because Christ said to his Apostles Drink ye all of this 5. That by receiving of both kinds they shewed forth Christ's Death and this is as much as any Protestant hath said or needs to say CHAP. II. The Contents Whereas these Councils take upon them to Decree this Sacrament shall be celebrated otherwise than by their own confession it was instituted by Christ The Fathers in the general assert That this Mystery ought not to be celebrated otherwise than it was delivered by Christ and his Apostles §. 1. When some delivered the Bread dipp'd in the consecrated Cup as a compleat Communion they condemned this practice as varying from the Institution and from the practice of the Church §. 2. They condemned the offering on the Altar other things besides Bread Wine and Water for the same Reasons §. 3. They condemned the using Wine not mixed with Water on the same account §. 4. They condemned the celebration of this Mystery in consecrated Bread and Water only from the same grounds §. 5. Inferences against Communion in one kind from the premises §. 6. SEcondly Sess 13. Sess 21. c. 3. whereas the Councils of Constance and of Trent confess That Christ instituted this venerable Sacrament under both species and so delivered it to his Apostles and that the Primitive Church did practise suitably unto this Institution and yet deny that there lies any Obligation on Christians from this Institution or this practice to administer it or to receive it in both kinds Sess 21. cap. 2. asserting they have power as dispensatores Mysteriorum Dei Dispensers of the Mysteries of God to make this change in the Administration of this Sacrament whereas I say these are the bold Assertions of the forementioned Councils in opposition to them the Sayings of the Fathers are very clear and pregnant in which they plainly shew they thought themselves and all that bare the Name of Christians obliged to observe the Institution of the Sacrament which by the Confessions of the Councils of Trent and Constance was in both kinds and in the distribution of it to do as Christ the Author of it did viz. to give both species apart to the Communicants which came to be partakers of this Holy Sacrament And § 1 1. The Author which passeth under the Name of Ambrose in his Comment on these words He that eateth this Bread or drinks this Cup unworthily c. saith thus (a) Indignum dicit esse domino qui aliter mysterium celebrat quam ab eo traditum est non enim potest devotus esse qui aliter praesumit quam datum est ab Authore In locum He pronounces him unworthy of the Lord who otherwise doth celebrate this Mystery than it was delivered by him for he cannot be devout who presumes to do it otherwise then it was given by the Author And this good Rule in after-Ages was approved of and even transcribed by the Ritualists and by the Commentators on the same place (b) Indigne dicit i. e ordine non observato viz. qui aliter Mysterium illud celebrat vel sumit quam traditum est a sanctis patribus Haym in locum p. 130. He eats unworthily saith Haymo that is not observing order who either celebrates or takes that Mystery otherwise than it was delivered by the Holy Fathers St. Anselm in his Comment on the same Chapter saith That St. Paul reproved the Corinthians because they did not well observe what he had delivered touching this matter he having delivered to them what the Lord delivered to him and therefore that which they ought to retain reverently and inviolably adding That (c) Qui aliter mysterium celebrat quam a Christo traditum est Ibid. he eats and drinks unworthily who either celebrates or receives that Mystery otherwise than it was delivered by our Lord. The Gloss cites the same words from Ambrose Aquinas from the Gloss He is unworthy saith Hugo who celebrates the Mystery otherwise than by Christ it was delivered And he saith Lyra is unworthy (d) Qui non observat ritum a Christo institutum Ibid. who observes not the Custom instituted by Christ Gregory the Third condemns the placing Two or Three Cups upon the Altar at once as being not agreeable to the practice of our Lord. For saith he (e) In missarum solenniis observandum est quod dominus noster Jesus Christus Sanctis suis distribuit discipulis accepit enim calicem dedit eis dicens Hic est calix Novi Testamenti in meo sanguine hoc facite quotiescunque sumitis Ep. ad Bonifacium In the Solemnities of the Mass that is to be observed which our Lord Jesus gave to his Disciples for he took the Cup and gave it to them saying This is the Cup of the New Testament in my Blood this do as often as you take it And (f) De
Christ's discipline must also think themselves obliged to observe the same Tradition and Example in ministring the Cup and Censure in like manner those who do it not They who teach that not the Custom of Man but the Truth of God was to be followed could never have approved of the plea from Custom used by the Church of Rome for defalcation of the Cup. And lastly they who looked upon the Institution as a Command and all these sayings of St. Cyprian as Rules to be fulfilled and followed in the whole institution of our Lord must also think it a Command to minister the Cup unto the People and that those Rules of Cyprian did bind them so to do I therefore shall conclude this Chapter with that saying of Algerus * Quis audet excipere quod ipse non excepit aut quis audit prohibere quod ipse in Sacramento suo non prohibuit sed ipse faciens nos hoc ipsum facere praecepit cum dicit Hoc facite convenienter subaudiatur quod Ego quis aeque competenter subaudire audeat sed non de hoc unde ego item si mutandum est fermentato azymum mutetur etiam quolibet alio liquore vinum si enim vinum recipitur cur azymum refutetur cum sicut ex azymo sic ex vino Christus vetus pascha finierit novum inchoaverit utrumque nobis in Sacramento suo aeque celebrandum tradiderit Algerus de Sacram. Euch. lib. 2. c. 10. fol. 84. b. 85. a. In the case of unleavened Bread. Who dares except what Christ excepted not or forbid what he in his Sacraments did not forbid but doing it himself commanded us to do the same thing when he saith do this we are conveniently to understand this which I do but who dares also to understand this but do it not of that which I do it Moreover if Vnleavened Bread be to be changed for Leavened let the Wine also be changed for any other liquor for as our Lord Christ finished the Old Passover and began the New with Vnleavened Bread so did he also do it with Wine and delivered both to us to be equally celebrated in this Sacrament CHAP. III. The Contents In opposition to the Decree of the Trent Council asserting that they who receive in one kind only are not deprived of any Grace necessary to Salvation The Fathers declare 1. That it is necessary to partake of the Cup in order to our Vnion to Christ §. 1. For the Remission of Sins §. 2. For the obtainment of Eternal Life §. 3. An inference from this last Particular to shew the falshood of one Anathema pronounced by the Trent Council §. 4. IT is sure some prejudice against this Novel Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome some ground to scruple and suspect the lawfulness of the substraction of the Cup that it bears such a manifest repugnance to our Lord's institution and to that Repetition of it which St. Paul delivered as a thing carefully to be observed a Tradition to be retained by the Church of Corinth and by attendance to which all their miscarriages in reference to the Celebration of that Mystery were to be corrected That all the Fathers of the Church above a Thousand Years conceived themselves obliged by virtue of this Institution to Minister both species to the People That they on all occasions rose up with such an holy Zeal against those persons who in lesser matters presumed to vary from this Institution condemned all humane Institutions which receded from it and punish'd all Offenders in this kind But such hath been the Providence of God in reference to this Affair such the discourses of the Antients with respect unto this subject that there is scarcely any other Position advanced by these Councils in favour of this Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome which they do not directly overthrow or in plain words condemn almost as fully as any Protestant can do For Thirdly Sess 21. cap. 3. Sess 13. Can. 3. Whereas it is defined by the Trent Council that they are not deprived of any Grace necessary to Salvation who receive one kind only and that it cannot be doubted without prejudice to the Christian Faith but that Communion in one kind only is sufficient to Salvation The Fathers do in opposition to these Assertions plainly and frequently declare That it is necessary to Salvation for Christians in the general to drink Christi's Blood in the Sacrament This will be evident 1. From these Expressions in which the Fathers do declare it necessary not only to partake of the Bread but also of the Cup in order to that Vnion with Christ which sure is necessary to Salvation and this they generally gather from those words of Christ Joh. vi 56. He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him The Doctrine of blessed Paul saith Cyril of Jerusalem is sufficient to aford us full satisfaction touching the Holy Mysteries of which being made partakers we become of the same body and blood with Christ for so he saith that our Lord Jesus taking Bread and giving Thanks he brake and gave it to his Disciples saying Take eat this is my Body and taking the Cup and giving Thanks he said Take and drink for this is my Blood for in the type of Bread the Body and in the type of Wine the Blood is given to thee (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catech. Myst 4. p. 237. That partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ thou maist be of one Body and Blood with him for so we are made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bearers of Christ his Body and Blood being received into our members (b) Haecaccepta hausta id efficiunt ut nos in Christo Christus in nobis sit De Trin. l. 8. p. 166. Those things being taken and drank saith Hilary produce this effect that Christ is in us and we in Christ and how natural this Vnity is he himself tēacheth saying He that eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him Cyril of Alexandria on these words saith That (c) In Joh 6.56 our Lord here shews the great profitableness of this work for as if one join Wax to Wax he will see one part within the other so he that receives the Flesh of our Saviour Christ and drinks his Blood is as he saith found one with him So mixed with and in him that he is found in Christ and Christ again in him Oecumenius upon these words The Cup of Blessing is it not the Communion of the Blood of Christ saith thus You know what I say (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ed. Gr. p. 444. for his Blood knits us to Christ as Members to the Head by the participation of it This Meat and Drink saith Rabanus Maurus signifies the eternal society of the Head and Members He that drinketh saith he my Blood and eateth my Flesh
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
which we drink of Worthily is not needful to conferr Life Salvation or spiritual Blessing on the worthy Receiver of it That in all the Liturgies of the Ancient Church they should pray constantly that they who worthily Received this Cup might be filled thereby with all spiritual Benediction and heavenly Grace that in their Discourses on this Subject they should exhort the People after they had received the Bread to drink this Cup for their Sanctification for the remission of Sins for the obtaining Life and tell them it was necessary to be drunk of for all the ends here mentioned and yet believe it was not needful to conferr Grace and spiritualy Blessings on them And 4ly This they do generally prove from the Fifth Century by that known passage of our Lord Except you eat the Flesh and drink the Blood of the Son of Man you have no Life in you (u) Tom. 1. p. 580. Tom. 2. p. 431. St. Basil is express unto this purpose saying That the Baptized person ought to be nourished with the food of Eternal Life and that the communication of the Body and Blood of Christ is necessary to Eternal Life And proving both from these words Verily I say unto you except you eat c. He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood hath Eternal Life St. Chrysostom upon this Text speaks thus Because they had said before it was impossible to eat his Flesh and drink his Blood. (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tom. 2. p. 748. He here shews not only that it is not impossible but that it is very necessary and therefore introduceth these words He that eateth my flesh c. He continually speaks of the Mysteries shewing the necessity of the thing and that it always ought to be done Against the Pelagians saith P. Gelasius (y) Dominus Jesus contra Pelagianos coelefti voce pronunciat Qui non manducaverit c. Ubi utique neminem videmus exemptum nec ausus est aliquis dicere parvulum sine hoc Sacramento salutari ad aeternam vitam posse produci Ep. vniv Episc per Nicaenum Concil Tom. 4. p. 1177 1178. our Lord pronounceth that he who eateth not the Flesh of the Son of Man and drinks his Blood hath no Life in him where we see none exempt nor dares any say that an Infant can obtain Eternal Life without this Sacrament It is not only said Except a Man be born again of Water c. but unelss He eat and drink c. and that this is spoken of Eternal Life none can doubt because many who receive not this Sacrament have this present Life St. Austin Asserts above Twenty times the absolute necessity that Infants should partake of Christ's Body and drink his Blood by reason of these words (z) Omnino parvulorum salvator est Christus omnino nisi ab illo redimantur peribunt quum sine carne ejus sanguine vitam habere non possunt hoc sensit hoc credidit hoc didicit hoc docuit Joannes Tom. 7. l. 1. contra Jul. Pelag. ed. Frob. p. 949. Christ saith he is altogether the Saviour of Infants and unless they be redeemed by him they will utterly perish seeing without his Flesh and Blood they cannot have Life This St. John thought and believed learned and taught And again (a) An dicente Christo Si non manducaveritis c. dicturus fueram parvulum habiturum vitam qui sine isto Sacramento finiisset hanc vitam Ibid. l. 3. c. 1. p 991. d. 992. a. when Christ saith Vnless you eat his Flesh and drink his Blood you have no life in you can I say the Child can have Life who ends his Life without that Sacrament And a third time He having said Vnless you eat c. and he that eats my Flesh and drinketh my Blood hath eternal Life (b) Quo igitur vitam regni coelorum promittitis parvulis non renatis ex aqua spiritu Sancto non cibatis carne neque potatis sanguine Christi Where the Marginal Note is Eucharistia parvulis sub utraque specie Tom. 7. contr Pelag. Hypognost c. 5. p. 1405. b. c. How is it that you Pelagians promise the Kingdom of Heaven to Children not born of Water and the Spirit not fed with the Flesh of Christ nor having drunk of his Blood which was shed for the Remission of their Sins Behold he that is not Baptized and he that is deprived of the Vital Cup and Bread is divided from the Kingdom of Heaven And of what Sacrament he conceives our Saviour to have spoken in these words he more expresly tells us saying (c) Dominum audiamus non quidem hoc de Sacramento sancti lavacri dicentem sed de Sacra mento sacrae mensae suae quo nemo nisi rite baptizatus accedit Nisi manducaveritis c. Tom. 7. l. de peccat Meritis Remiss c. 19. p. 666. Let us hear our Lord speaking not of the Sacrament of Baptism N. B. but of the Sacrament of his Holy Table to which none comes who is not rightly Baptized Except you eat and drink c. What do we farther seek for Dares any Body say this Sentence belongeth not to Children or that they can have Life in themselves without the Participation of the Body and the Blood of Christ But he that saith this doth not attend that if that Sentence comprehends not all so that they cannot have Life without the Body and the Blood of Christ those of Riper Years are not obliged to regard it And to refer you to the (d) Vide Dallaeum de Cult Latin. l. 5. cap. 3. Margin for the rest his Conclusion is this (e) Siergo ut tot tanta divina testimonia concinant nec salus nec vita aeterna fine baptismo corpore sanguine Domini cuiquam speranda est frustra fine his promittitur parvulis Lib. 1. de peccat Meritis Remiss c. 24. p. 670. If then so many divine Testimonies accord in saying That neither Salvation nor Life eternal is by any to be hoped for without Baptism and the Body and the Blood of our Lord they art in vain promised to Children without them Now here it is to be admired that Men of Sence and of Integrity should say St. Austin speaks all this of such a participation of the Flesh and Blood of Christ as may be had in Baptism when he not only speaks in divers of these places first of the Sacrament of Baptism and after of the Supper of the Lord but sometimes of this Sacrament by way of distinction from that of Baptism sometimes of the Sacrament of the Lord's Table and of that eating and drinking of Christ's Body and Blood quod per corpus geritur which is done by the Body And when this Text from the Fifth to the Twelfth Century was by the Fathers still interpreted of the Lord's Supper and Children were admitted to that Sacrament and to the drinking
of the Cup on that account Isidore Peleusiota in the same Age extolling the Sacerdotal Order saith That by their means we are regenerated (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 2. Ep. 52. and made partakers of the divine Mysteries without which no Man can attain the Heavenly rewards as is apparent from the Heavenly Oracles now saying That unless a Man be born again c. and anon Vnless we eat c. we have no life in us Which Argument he seems to have borrowed from St. Chrysostom who saith (g) Hom. 3. de Sacerd. tom 6. p. 16. l. 38. If none can enter into the Kingdom of Heaven who is not born again of Water c. If he that doth not eat the Flesh of the Lord and drink his Blood is deprived of Eternal Life and all these things are not otherwise communicated but by the Hands of the Priest who can without these Men avoid the Fire of Hell or enjoy the Crowns laid up in Heaven Amphilochius saith (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Vit. Basil c. 17. p. 221. It is impossible that any one should be saved unless he be regenerated by Baptism and made partaker of the Life-giving Antitypes of the Body and Blood of Christ (i) De Ecclesiast Officiis l. 1. de Sacrificio c. 18. Isidore Hispalensis cites and approves that passage of (k) Timendum est ne dum qui abstentus seperatur a Christi corpore procul remaneat a salute comminante ipso vel dicente Nisi ederitis carnem filii hominis biberitis sanguinem ejus non habebitis vitam in vobis Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p. 147. Et Raban Maur. de institut Cler. l. 1. c. 31. St. Cyprian in his Treatise on the Lord's Prayer It is to be feared least any one being long separated from the Body of Christ should be far from Salvation Christ having said Vnless you eat c. Hincmarus Remensis saith That Christ spoke those words of his Body and Blood inviting his Servants to his Table that l Locutus est nobis de corpore sanguine suo commendans talem escam talem potum Nisi manducaveritis c. haec sunt Sacramenta Ecclesiae sine quibus ad vitam quae vera vita est non intratur Tom. 2. p. 92. this and Baptism are the Sacraments of the Church without which we cannot enter into true Life (m) Habet vitam aeternam hanc ergo non habet qui istum panem non manducat nec istum sanguinem bibit nam temporalem vitam sine illo habere homines possunt aeternam vero omnino non possunt August Tract 26. in Joh. p. 229. Sinc isto cibo potu Raban M. de instit Cler. l. 1.31 Rabanus speaks thus The Truth saith My Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is Drink indeed Men may have temporal Life without this Meat and Drink eternal they can never have Which Words he borrowed from St. Austin's Comment on the Sixth of John. Regino cites this passage from the Capitulars of Charles the Great That (n) De Eccl. discipl l. 1. can 195. great discretion is to be used as to the Receiving of the Body and Blood of Christ for care is to be taken least being deferred too long it tend to the Destruction of the Soul our Lord having said Vnless you eat c. (o) Quasi quodam jurejurando protestatur dicens Amen Amen c. Apud Baron Tom. 11. p. 1007. Humbert in his Disputation against the Greeks saith That Christ restified with an Oath that without this refection that Life which is Christ cannot be had saying Verily I say unto you except c. The Flesh is taken by it self saith Lanfranck and the Blood by it self not without a certain Mystery though in another Sence whole Christ is said to be eaten viz. By spiritual desire of eternal Life and Meditation of his Passion (p) Utraque comestio necessaria utraque fructuosa altera indiget alterius ut boni aliquid operetur hinc in Evangelio legitur nisi manducaveritis c. De Sacr. Euch. p. 126 127. both these Comestions are necessary for hence it is read in the Gospel that unless we eat c. (q) Comment in 6. Joh. Rupertus Tuitiensis saith That least any Man should think he hath recovered by Faith alone the Life of his Body and Soul without the visible meat and drink of the Body and Blood of Christ and consequently needs not the Sacrament Christ repeats the same thing again touching the eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood by this undoubtedly testifying that he doth not truly believe whosoever despiseth to eat and to drink for although thou be a Faithful Man and profess thy self to be a Catholick if thou refusest to eat of this visible Meat and Drink even by this that thou presumest that this Meat and Drink is not necessary to thee thou cuttest thy self off from the Society of the Members of Christ which is the Church § 4 Now if that sence which the constant interpretation of the Fathers hath put upon these words from the Fifth to the Twelfth Century be owned by Romanists the consequence is unavoidable that it is necessary to Salvation to receive the Sacrament under both kinds for they who do receive the Body only may be said well to eat the Flesh of Christ because they take something by way of Meat but they cannot be said to drink his Blood as here our Lord requireth them to do since they take nothing by way of drink The privation of Life is here connected with the neglect of Drinking as much as with the neglect of Eating since therefore eating the drinking are distinct Actions he cannot properly be said to drink who only eats and therefore must neglect what by the Fathers descants on these Words is necessary to life eternal Moreover since on this sole account they constantly did minister the Cup to little Children as Roman Catholicks confess they ministred both the Bread and Cup to Children capable of receiving both as the Church History attests it follows that they held it necessary to Salvation in conformity to these Sayings of our Lord recorded by St. John that both should be received by all Christians capable of taking both Species And therefore in condemning this Doctrine Sess 21. can 4. and that with an Anathema the Fathers of the Trent Council must have virtually Anathematized the whole Church of Christ for Nine whole Centuries and by renouncing of this Interpretation so generally received the Doctors of the Roman Church must at least seem to us to violate that Oath Jaramentum professionis fidei a Pio 4. editum which they have taken never to interpret or own any sence of Scripture Nisi juxta unanimem consensum Patrum but according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers CHAP. IV. The Contents In opposition to that Determination of the Trent Council That a true or an
of our Redemption which therefore we make known to your Holiness that such Men may be known to you by these Tokens and that by the Sacerdotal Authority they may be expelled from the Communion of Saints whose Sacrilegious Simulation is thus found out for blessed Paul hath well admonished the Church of God of such Men saying We beseech you Brethren that you mark them who cause Divisions and Offences contrary to the Doctrine which you have received and avoid them Where evident it is that the Practice of the Manichees in Receiving of the Body of the Lord in the Christian Mysteries that so they might dissemble their Infidelity is called Simulation and their declining to drink the Blood of our Redemption is that which made this Simulation to be Sacrilegious 2dly Here it is also evident that in St. Leo's days to eat the Body of our Lord or to receive it and to drink his Blood were look'd upon as two distinct things one of which might be done without the other the Body being taken when the Blood of our Redemption was not which wholly overthrows the Doctrine of Concomitance on which this Sacrilege is founded 3ly Observe that Leo would have such persons expelled from the Communion of Saints for this Sacrilegious Simulation That 4ly He makes the declining of the Cup at any time a mark sufficient to discern these Sacrilegious Persons and a cause sufficient for their Exclusion from the Communion of Saints whereas had others at any time been permitted in the Church-Assemblies to Communicate in Bread alone for any other Reason this mark had been no certain indication of a Manichee to Priest or People since being caught they might pretend that they had formerly received the Cup but now abstained for some special cause approved by the Church The Faithful therefore must have then generally Communicated at all times or else the Manichee could not be certainly discovered by one Dry Communion Moreover Pope Gelasius did by a Law condemn this half Communion as a great Sacrilege (b) Non esse sumendum Corpus Domini sine Calice Gelasius Majorico Johanni Episcopis apud Ivon decret part 2. cap. 8 9. Comperimus quod quidam in eadem Regione sumpta tantum Corporis Sacri portione a Calice Sacri cruoris abstineant qui proculdubio quoniam nescio quâ superstitione docentur obstringi aut integra Sacramenta accipiant aut ab integris arceantur quia divisio unius ejusdem Mysteril sine grandi Sacrilegio non potest provenire We have found saith he that some in the same Country having taken only a portion of the Holy Body abstain from the Cup of the Holy Blood who because I know not by what Superstition they are said to be bound ought without doubt to receive the entire Mysteries or to be driven from both for the division of one and the self same Mystery cannot happen without great Sacrilege Where note 1. That this Law respecteth not Priests only for as (c) Ad A. D. 496. Sect. 20. Baronius observes This is no mention in the Law of the Priest Sacrificing or of any other of that Order whence saith he it is evident that what is generally spoken here ought not to be restrained to them Moreover Cassander doth assure us That in his Old Manuscript this was the Title of this Decree That (d) Quod nulli liceat absque sanguinis participatione solius carnis Communionem percipere P. 19. p. 1106. it was not lawful for any one N. B. to Receive the Communion of the Flesh without partaking of the Blood. In Ivo the Title of it runs thus That the Body of our Lords is not to be taken without the Cup. (e) Excommunicari illos praecipit quicunque sumpto corpore dominico a calicis participatione se abstinerent Nam ut ipse in eodem decreto asserit hujusmodi Sacramentorum divisio sine grandi Sacrilegio provenire non poterit Microl. Cap. 19. Micrologus saith That P. Gelasius commanded that they should be Excommunicated quicunque whosoever they were that having taken the Body of our Lord abstained from the Cup. (f) Prop. 23. p. 579. Radulphus de Rivo transcribes the very words of Micrologus and both of them give the same reason of this precept viz. For as he in the same Decree asserts such a division of the Sacraments cannot come to pass without great Sacrilege Now from these Testimonies it is evident 1. That from the Tenth to the Fourteenth Century it was esteemed an unlawful and Sacrilegious thing for any that were capable of both to receive the Bread without partaking of the Cup. Yea Sacrilege is by them declared to be inseparable from such a divisio of this Mystery It therefore must according to the judgment of Pope Gelasius and of the following Ages who approved of his Decree be inseparable from the constant practice of the Church of Rome since te times of the Council of Constance 2. Whereas the R. Doctors say this Decree was made against the Manichees who held Wine in abomination and therefore did refuse the Cup and so concerns them only who refuse upon a like account to drink of it It is observable that neither Gelasius himself nor any who have since that time took notice of this Law have told us that it was peculiarly made against the Manichees who abstained from drinking of the Cup for the formantioned reason but they without Exception declare that by this Law it was not lawful for any one to receive the Flesh without the Cup and that whosoever did so was by virtue of it to be Excommunicated And hence (g) L. 2. c. 8. Algerus in the Twelfth Century cites this Decree to prove that the Bread is separately to be consecrated into the Flesh and the Wine into the Blood of Christ and that both are to be received by the Faithful And they had reason to speak thus generally of it for that this Law of P. Gelasius was not directed against the Manichean Heresie may be made evident from numerous considerations For 1. had this Pope made this Law against the Manichees there can be no reason imagined why he as well as Leo should not mention them 2ly That Expression in the body of this Law that he knew not by what Superstition they were bound up cannot filty be applied to the Manichees for it was doubtless a matter well known to Gelasius why the Manichees refused the Cup and not unto Gelasius only but to all the People For Leo who preceded him had taken care that not only (h) Omnia quae tam in Scripturis quam in occultis traditionibus suis habent profana vel turpia ut nosset populus quid refugeret aut vitaret oculis Christianae plebis certa manifestatione probavimus Decret Leonis P. c. 6. Collect. à Dionysio exiguo apud Justel p. 224. All the profane and filthy things which were in their Writings but also that the things contained in their
believing Jews who heard these words and died before our Saviour's Passion Joh. vi 4. must of necessity be damned for our Lord saith with an asseveration to them Except you eat the flesh c. now this was said at least above a Year before our Saviour's Passion and so before the Institution of that Sacrament in which alone his flesh could be corporally eaten and therefore had it been intended of corporeal and sacramental eating it was impossible that any person of those Hearers could be saved who died in the ensuing year 2. These words interpreted in the corporeal Sence do plainly and inevitably inferr That they who do deprive the Laity all their whole lives of drinking of this blood expose them to inevitable damnation Christ having said Except you drink the Blood of the Son of Man you have no Life in you for though eating and drinking being taken figuratively do signifie the same thing viz. believing in a crucified Saviour yet being taken properly they cannot be reputed the same thing For albeit they who receive the body only may be well said to eat the flesh of Christ because they take something by way of Meat into their Mouths yet cannot they be said to drink his blood if they take nothing into their Mouths by way of Drink Since therefore eating and drinking are two distinct Actions so that he cannot properly be said to drink who only eats since the privation of Life is here connected with not drinking of Christ's Blood as much as with not eating of his flesh according to the corporeal Interpretation pretation of these words he must certainly be deprived of the Life here promised who doth not receive the Cup because he is deprived of drinking of the Blood of Christ 4. From Vers 54 56. the Argument runs thus whoseover eateth the Flesh and drinketh the Blood of Christ in the sence here spoken of abideth in Christ and Christ in him and therefore is a true and living Member of Christ's Body and he shall have Eternal Life and be partaker of an happy Resurrection and so no person can be either wicked here or deprived of Everlasting Life hereafter who in this sence here mentioned eats of the Flesh and drinketh of the Blood of Christ Now this is very true of eating Spiritually and by Faith as it imports believing on Christ for Vers 40 This saith Christ is the Will of him that sent me That every one who believeth on the Son may hve Everelasting Life and I will raise him up at the lat Day but then of Sacramental eating of Christ's Flesh it is as false for this was eaten by a Judas and continually is eaten by Millions who are both wicked here and will be damned hereafter this therefore cannot be the import of our Saviour's words and here observe 1. That our Lord speaks in the general whosoever eats 2. That he speaks thus not by way of Promise which might be conditional but by way of plain Assertion and declaration of a thing most certain And 3. That the Text shews the eating mentioned here can never be performed unprofitably no not without the greatest benefit for 't is opposed to the eating of Manna in the Wilderness on this account that whereas that gave only Temporal Life this would assuredly conferr Eternal whereas that was not able to preserve from Temporal this would preserve from Death Eternal 5. Moreover Vers 61 62. our Lord speaks thus Doth this offend you what if you shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before i. e. are you offended that I thus speak of giving you my Fleh to eat do you look on this Expression now as so absurd and unintelligible what then will you think of it when this Body shall be removed hence to Heaven i. e. HOw will you then be scandalized and think it still more difficult and more impossible to apprehend how you should eat my Flesh and drink my Blood provided you go on to understand my words in the gross carnal Sence For Athanasius In illud Evang Quicunque dixerit P. 979. saith well That Christ here mentioneth his ascent into Heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he might divert them from the corporeal sence and therefore argued thus Seing it will be hen impossible that you should corporally eat my Flesh when it is so far removed from you by this you may discern I speak of a spiritul eating of it Whence by the way we learn That Christ thought his Ascention into Heaven sufficient demonstration to the Jews his Flesh could not be eaten upon Earth and why it should not be so to the Christian I am yet to learn. 6. The 63. Vers affords us a more plain and certain Exposition of our Saviour's meaning in the precedent words for thus they run It is the Spirit that quickeneth the Flesh profiteth nothing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb de ecclesiaftic Theolog. l. 3. c. 12. The words that I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are Life For the import of these words is to this effect unto that eating and drinking of which in this Discourse I have still spoken I have annexed the Promise of Life saying expressly He that eateth me shall live by me he shall by me be quickned Now all Men know That 't is the Spirit in them that gives them Life and when that Spirit is taken from them the Flesh cannot live or minister to the continuance of their Life by which similitude you may plainly learn I spake not of my real Flesh when I told you that by eating it you should have Life but of my Word and Doctrine that of my Passion more especially for my words which I speak to you they are Spirit and they are Life i.e. if you will hearken to them they will make you live Spiritually here Eternally hereafter and by so doing will be Life yea where they are embraced they are that to the new Man which is the Spirit to the Flesh they give him Life Activity and Motion and therefore they are Spirit Had our Lord said it is the Spirit that quickeneth the Flesh profiteth nothing therefore the Flesh which I will give shall be still joined to my Divinity and by the virtue of it give you Life he had said somewhat like the sence which others put upon this Text but saying only The words which I speak unto you they are Spirit we cannot doubt but he speaks of eating and of drinking of his words spiritually 7. Our Saviour having said unto the Twelve Will ye also go away St. Peter Answers To whom should we go Thou hast the words of eternal Life and we believe thou art that Christ the Son of the living God. Where 1. observe that Peter here doth as it were repeat the words of Christ My words are Life saith Christ Thou hast the words of Life eternal saith St. Peter whereas if he had understood our Saviour to have spoken here of Oral Manducation his Answer
would in all probability have been to this effect Whatsoever appearance there may be of inhumanity absurdness and impossibility in eating of thy natural Flesh and drinking of thy Blood yet we believe it because thou hast said it who art Truth it self and who art able to make good thy words we therefore hearing nothing of this tendance from him we may conclude that he knew nothing of this import of them And 2. observe that he thought it sufficient to say We belive thou art the Christ which if our Lord spake here of Oral Manducation was nothing to the purpose but if he only spake of spiritual eating of him was the very thing which was designed by our Lord in this Discourse and which he spake of in those words which so much offended others We therefore conclude with Clemens of Alexandria That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Paedag. lib. 1. cap. 6. pag. 100. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. ibid. pag. 104 105. when our Lord said Eat my Flesh and drink my Blood he allegorically meant the drinking of Faith and of the Promises and that our Lord is by way of Allegory to those that believe in him Meat Flesh and Nourishment and Bread and Blood. With Tertullian That De Resur Carn cap. 36 37. our Lord all along urged his intent by Allegory calling his word flesh as being to be hungred after that we might have Life auditu devorandus ruminandus intellectu fide digerendus to be devoured by the Ear ruminated upon by the mind and by Faith digested With Origen That Bibere autem dicimur sanguinem ejus verusest citanquam mundo 73. we are said to drink his Blood when we receive his words in which Life consists that his flesh is meat indeed and his blood drink indeed because he feedeth all Mankind with the flesh and blood of his word as with pure meat and drink With Ubi supra Eusebius That his Words andDoctrines are Flesh and Blood. With Arhanasius That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tom. 1. pag. 979. the words which Christ spake were not carnal but spiritual for how many could his Body have sufficed for Meat that it should be made the Food of the whole World. With St. Austin Tract 25. in Johan Tom. 9. p. 218. Tract 26. p. 223 Vt quid paras dentes ventrem crede manducasti credere enim in eum hoc est manducare panem vivum why providest thou Teeth and a Belly believe and thou hast eaten for to believe in him is to eat the living Bread. And lastly with Licet in Myfterio possit intelligi tamen verius Corpus Chrifti sanguis ejus sermo scripturarum est In Psal 147. fol. 94. a. St. Jerom In the truest Sence the Body and the Blood of Christ is the Word and Doctrine of the Scripture Caro Christi sanguis ejus in auribus nostris infunditur the flesh and blood of Christ is poured into our Ears We say in the Language of Origen Hom. 7. in Levit. ibid. Si filii estis Ecclesiae agnoscite quia figurae sunt si enim sedundum literam sequaris If you are Sons of the Church own these things to be Figures for if you follow the Letter this very saying Except you eat the Flesh is a killing Letter In the words of Ubi supra Eusebius pronounced in the name of Christ do not think that I speak of that Flesh with which I am compassed as if you must eat of that neither imagine that I command you to drink of my sensible and bodily Blood but understand well that the words that I have spoken to you they are Spirit and Life for as St. Austin saith touching the Exposition of Scripture Phrases De Doctrin Chriftiana li. 3. cap. 16. If the saying be preceptive either forbiding a wicked Action or commanding that which is good it is no figurative Speech but if it seems to command any wickedness or to forbid what is profitable and good it is figurative This saying Except you eat c. seems to command a wicked thing it is therefore a figure enjoining us to communicate in the Passion of our Lord and sweetly and profitably to remember that his Flesh was wounded and Crucified for us 2. § 4. Luc. xxiv 30. I should proeed Secondly to shew That it doth not appear from the practice of Christ himself in breaking Bread and giving it unto Two Disciples at Emaus nor from the practice of this Disciples Acts ij 42. who are said to have continued in breaking of Bread and who were gathered together to break Bread Acts xx 7. that both our Lord and his Disciples communicated in one ikind only But these Pretensions have been so fully answered by a late excellent Discourse of Communion in one kind in Answer to the Bishop of Meaux from Pag. 22 to 28 that it is superfluous further to insist upon them especially seeing the Author of the Li 6. pag. 486. History of the Trent Council hath informed us that 't was the Judgment of some of the Fathers there That all these places must be laid aside as impertinent to this matter or insufficient to prove that for which they are produced because had they concerned the Eucharist they must have been Instances not only of taking but also of consecrating the Holy Sacrament in one kind and so by them it would be concluded that it was not sacrilege to consecrate one kind without the other which say they is contrary to all the Doctors and the meaning of the Church and overthroweth the distinction of the Eucharist as it is a Sacrifice and as it is a Sacrament 3. Waving this therefore I proceed Thirdly to shew § 5. that it was the Custom of the Church to give the Sacrament to the Sick and to Infants capable of receiving of it in both kinds And 1. Whereas J.L. doth with true Romish confidence affirm That all ancient Writers do attest that it was the custom to give this Sacrament under one kind to the Sick the contrary is extreamly evident not only by the instances collected by the learned De Cultu Lat. l. 5. c. 11. p. 641 642. Dally of Sick Persons who communicated in both kinds from the 4th to the 10th Century but also from the Canons of the whole Church of Christ for in the third Century St. Cyprian and the Presbyters of Rome inform us That they had agreed that Si urgere exitus ceperit Ep. 18. Si premi infirmitate aliqua periculo coeperint Ep. 19. si de Saeculo excederint Ep. 20. item Ep. 30 31. if the lapsed Penitents were indangered by sickness and they were nigh to Death's door they should be admitted to the peace of the Church and that they should be relieved in the thing which they desired How was it that they did relieve the infirm when death approached even the same way that they did the strong Ep. 57. Protectione sanguinis corporis Christi With the protection
Nicene Council and of the Roman Church pronouncing Anathema to those who did not worship Images he and his Council of 300 Bishops argue thus that then Infantes Car. Mag. de Imaginib l. 2. c. 27. Baptismatis unda loti corporis dominici edulio sanguinis haustu satiati pereunt Infants who have been Baptized and have received the Sacrament of our Lord's Body and Blood must perish In the 9th Century we are told by Apud Menardum Not. in Greg. Sacr. p. 107. Jesse Bishop of Amiens That the Infant was confirmed by the Body and Blood of Christ that he might be his Member By Corpore sanguine Dominico omne praecedens Sacramentm in eo confirmatur quia haec ideo accipere debet c. De Inslit Cleric l. 1. cap. 29. Rabanus Maurus who saith That the precedent Sacrament of Baptism is confirmed in the Baptized Porson by the Body and Blood of our Lord for he therefore ought to receive these things that he may be his Member who died and rose again for us and may deserve to have God dwelling in him For he who is Truth it self saith He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood abides in me and I in him and also Except you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood you shall have no Life in you By De Ord. Baptiz c. 18. Theodulph Bishop of Orleans That when any one is new born by Water and the Spirit he is nourished with the body of our Lord and drinks his Blood. By the old Statim autem confirmetur infans communicetur ab Episcopo ita dicente Corpus Sanguis Domini c. Baluz Not. in Reg. p. 551. Roman Pontisicial which saith That the Infant being Baptized he is presently confirmed and communicated by the Bishop saying The Body and the Blood of Christ c. In the 10th Century we are informed of the continuance of the same Custom from a Pontificial written about the year 980 saith Baluzius where it is commanded Statim enim confirmari oportet Chrismate poftea communicari si Episcopus deest communicetur 2 Presbytero dicante Corpus Domini Jesu Christi custodiat te in vitam aeternam Bal. not in Reg. p. 552. That the Baptized Infant should presently be Confirmed and Communicated by the Bishop or in his absence by the Priest saying The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ keep thee in Life eternal In the 14th Century we find the same Custom in Ne lactentur antequam communicent De Sabb. Pasch p. 64. Alcuin from the very same words which saith he were then used at the Communicating of the Infant after Baptism And in the Three and thirtieth Epistle of Lanfranck we find these words Credimus enim generaliter expedire omnes omnibus aetatibus tam viventes quam morientes dominici corporis sanguinis perceptionese munire Apud Baluz ibid. p. 657. We believe that it is generally very expedient for all Persons of all Ages living and dying to arm themselves with the Reception of our Lord's body and his blood Whence faith Nor. ad librum Sacram p. 298. Baluzius we gather That in his time is was the Custom to give to Children the Communion of the Lord's Body and his Blood. And Hugh Menard doth ingenuously confess That the Custom of giving the body of Christ to Children continued till the time of Paschal the Second and that they gave it to them then dipp'd in the Wine by reason of the wekness of their Age. That this was the Opinion of the Greek Church even almost to our present Age we learn from L. 3. de S. Euch. cap 40. Arcadius whose words are these They judge the Sacrament of the Eucharist to be required of necessity to Salvation both to Adult and Infants so teach Simeon Thessalonicensis Nicholaus Cabasilas and Gabriel Philadelphiensis who all say that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Communion is therefore necessary because the Lord hath said If you do not eat my Flesh and drink my Blood you have no life in you We Baptize Infants saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. cum Virtum E. 1. c. 9. p. 85. Jeremiah their Patriarch and afterwards we give them the Communion for according to St. Basil he that is regenerated wants still spiritual Food and our Lord hath said Vnless you eat c. Eccl. ord c. 9. p. 98. Metrophanes Critopulus adds That their Infants are Baptized and that then they afterwards partake as oft as their Parents will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of both Species at the Lord's Table The Georgians Circassians and Mengrelians are of the same Religion with the Greek Church in all things and therefore must be sof the same Opinion in this Matter The Armenians minister the sacrament of the Eucharist to Infants in both kinds So do the Habassines saith Viagg de Aethiop c. 22. Alvarez and the Maronites saith P. 178. Brierwood And here let it be noted that not the latter Grecians only but the Ancient Fathers did generally hold that this was necessary to be done by virtue of that Precept Except you eat my Flesh and drink my Blood you shall have no Life in you from whence it is extreamly evident that neither in the Fifth Age when Infants were by virtue of this Text admitted to the Sacrament nor in the following Ages of the Church could it be an established Custom to give to Children the Cup only Lastly That neither Leo nor Gelasius gave any new Precept to the Church touching this Matter §. 7. Chap. 5. §. 2. is partly evident from what hath been already said nor are there any Footsteps of this new imaginary Law to be found in their Decrees For the words of Leo only command That when the sacrilegious dissembling of the Manichees was discovered they should be driven by the Priests Authority from the Society of the Saints And the words of Gelasius do only say That they who in the Region of Squillaci were bound up by a Superstition unknown to him from receiving the Cup should either receive the whole sacrament or be kept back from the whole Where now I pray you is any appearance of this new pretended Law or First Ecclesiastical Precept That all the Faithful should from henceforth be obliged to receive under both Species unless those words of Gelasius import that the Receiving of the Bread without the Cup is not Receiving an entire Sacrament or unless his following Reason That the division of one and the same Mystery cannot happen without Sacrilege be a general Rule concerning all the Faithful But to dispute no longer in a case so plain both Leo and Gelasius sufficiently inform us of the practice of their times for Leo doth not only say That De pass domini Serm. 14. p. 284. participatio Corporis sanguinis Christi this participation of the Body and Blood of Christ is that by which the New Creature is fed and inebriated from the Lord himself That Ep.
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
Inftit Cler. l. 1. c. 31. Rabanus Maurus saith It is not lawfull to offer any other thing in the Sacraments than that which our Lord himself appointed and by his Example taught us to do § 2 2dly Some in the Church did frequently attempt the alteration of Christ's Institution by giving to the People the Bread dipp'd in the sacred Blood for a Compleat Communion but against these Innovators in the Fourth Century Pope Julius opposed himself laying down this for his Rule That it was by no means lawful for any to recede from our Lord's Institution Practice and Example His Words are these (g) Audivimus enim quosdam Schismatica ambitione detentos contra divinos ordines Apostolicas institutiones intinctam Eucharistiam populis pro complemento Communionis porrigere Quod quam fit Evangelicae Apostolicae doctrinae contrarium consuetudini Ecclesiasticae adversum non difficile ab ipso fonte veritatis probatur a quo ordinata ipsa Sacramentorum mysteria processerunt Ubi Apostolis corpus suum commendavit sanguinem seorsum enim panis seorsum calicis commendatio memoratur Concil Tom. 2. p. 525 526. We have heard that some persons being guilty of Schismatical Ambition do against the divine Orders and Apostolical Institution deliver to the People the Eucharist dipp'd in the Blood for an intire Communion How contrary these things are to the Evangelical and Apostolical Doctrine and opposite to the Ecclesiastical Custom it is not hard to prove from the Fountain of Truth from whom the Institution of these Sacramental Mysteries proceeded for they have no Testimony from the Gospel for this where Christ commended his Body and Blood to his Disciples for there is recorded the commendation of his Body and Blood apart The Council of (h) Eadem habet Concil Bracarense Tom. 6. p. 562 563. Braga in the Seventh Centary in the very same words condemns this Practice blaming them who for the whole Communion delivered to the People a piece of Bread dipp'd in the Consecrated Wine Which Custom how contrary say they it is to the Doctrine of the Gospel and the Practice of the Church we may learn from the Fountain of Truth who gave the Cup by it self saying Drink ye all of this as he took the Bread by it self saying Take eat c. (i) Ut populus plene possit communicare cap. 19. Micrologus saith It is not Authentick that some dip the Body of Christ and distribute it so dipp'd for a full Communion for the Roman Order contradicts it for in the day of Preparation it commands that the Wine not consecrated should be consecrated by the Lord's Prayer and the mixture of the Lord's Body with the Blood that the People may fully Communicate which would be a superfluous Command if the Lord's Body dipp'd in the Cup the day before and preserved would suffice to Communicate the People with And therefore Pope Julius * Julius quoque Papa seorsim panem seorsim calicem juxta dominicam Institutionem sumenda docet Idem ibid. writing to the Bishops of Aegypt doth wholly forbid this Intinction and teacheth that the Bread and the Cup should be both taken apart according to our Lord's Institution Humbertus in his Disputation against the Greeks saith thus That you are wont to take the Holy Bread of life eternal in a Spoon dipped in the Cup what can you offer for it (k) Neque enim ipse Dominus panem in Caiice vini intrivit sic Apostolis dedit sed sicut Sancta Romana Ecclesia usque nunc observat panem integrum benedixit fractum fingulis particulatim distribuit dicens Accipite comedite hoc est corpus meum quibus postquam coenatus est calicem porrexit dicens Bibite ex eo omnes Quam Reverendam Angelis hominibus institutionem prima scilicet Ecclefia usque ad haec moderna tempora sicut ab Apostolis recepit fideliter retinuit Apud Baron Tom. 11. p. 971. for our Lord did not thus dip Bread in the Cup of Wine and so give it to his Apostles saying Take and eat this in a Spoon This is my Body but as the Roman Church even to this day observes he blessed the whole Bread and distributed it being broken to every one apart saying Take and eat This is my Body to whom he also after Supper reached forth the Cup saying Drink ye all of this which Institution to be revered by Men and Angels Holy Zion the first Church even to this Day as it received from the Apostles so doth it faithfully retain it And then having cited a long passage from the Church of Jerusalem he adds Hence is it clearer than the light that the holy Church of Jerusalem did of old observe the same Rite of the divine Sacrifice which the holy Roman Church ceaseth not hitherto to observe for we lay upon the Holy Altars thin Cakes of Flour prepared whole and sound and Communicate with the People of them being after consecration broken and then we are made to drink of the Cup of Wine and liquid Blood for we find Bread sopp'd was delivered by Christ to none but the Traytor Judas to signifie that he was to betray him Again he having said That Christ delivered the Bread and Wine apart and that the Church of Christ religiously observed his Institution adds That (l) Nec potest fieri ut quilibet convenientius aut verius commendare praevaluisset Sacrosanctum Mysterium fidei quam ipse qui tradidit seipsum pro nobis oblationem Ibid. p. 974. it could not be that any one should prevail to commend this Holy Mystery of Faith more conveniently or truly than he who delivered himself an Oblation and a Sacrifice of a Sweet Odor to God for us the immaculate Lamb of God who taketh away the Sins of the World to whom the most perfect knowledge of any Man being compared is the highest Ignorance In the Year of our Lord 1118. Pope Paschal the Second writes an Epistle to Pontius Abbot of Clun after this wise (m) Ep. 32. de non porrigenda Communione intincta Concil Tom. 10. p. 656. Blessed Cyprian writing to Caecilian saith That when any thing is required by God's Inspiration and Command it is necessary that the faithful Servant should obey his Lord and he will be excused of all Men that he assumeth nothing arrogantly to himself nor may any other thing be done by us than what our Lord first did for us Therefore in taking the Body and the Blood of Christ according to the same St. Cyprian Let the tradition of our Lord be kept nor let us recede by any humane and novel Institution from that which our Lord both commanded and did for we know that the Bread was delivered by our Lord apart and the Wine apart which Custom we teach and require to be observed perpetually in the Church excepting only in the Case of Infants and Infirm Persons who cannot receive