A DEMONSTRATION THAT THE Church of Rome AND HER COUNCILS HAVE ERRED BY SHEWING That the COUNCILS of Constance Basil and Trent have in all their Decrees touching Communion in one Kind contradicted the Received Doctrine of the Church of Christ WITH AN APPENDIX In ANSWER to The XXI Chapter of the Author of A Papist Misrepresented and Represented LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Awnsham Churchill at the Black-Swan in Ave-Mary-Lane MDCLXXXVIII IMPRIMATUR Apr. 11. 1688. Guil. Needham THE PREFACE TO THE READER The Contents of the Preface This Discourse plainly overthrows all the Foundations of the Romish Faith shewing 1. That the Romish Councils and the Church of Rome cannot be the sole authentick Interpreters of Scripture or the true Judges of Tradition § 1. 2ly That they were not assisted by the Holy Ghost in making this Decree touching Communion in one King § 2. 3ly That the Councils of Constance Basil and Trent were not true General Councils or that such Councils must be subject unto Error § 3. 4ly That there is no Certainty of the Romish Faith by oral Tradition § 4. 5ly That these Councils ridiculously do assert That they made their Decrees touching Communion in one King consulting the Advantage and Salvation of Christian People § 5. 6ly That the Decrees of the Councils of Pisa Constance and Basil concerning the Superiority of a Genral Council over the Pope and their Authority to decree matters of Faith without him must be allowed to be valid or we can have no Assurance of the Validity and Infallibility of any of their Councils § 6. BY way of Preface to this Discourse I shall endeavour briefly and plainly to demonstrate 1. That it plainly overthroweth all the Certainty of the Romish Faith and that if they have made these Definitions and Decrees in opposition to the plain Sence of Scripture and the Interpretations of it by the Holy Fathers and to the full Tradition of the Church in former Ages these their received Councils cannot be by Gods Appointment the Judges of our Controversies the authentick Interpreters of Scripture or assisted by the Holy Ghost in making these Decisions nor can they be Assertors of or Adherers to primitive Tradition but rather plain Desertors of it And First Whereas they challenge as their undoubted Right Authority to be the sole authentick Interpreters of the Sence of Scripture and the true Judges of the Tradition of the Church of Christ Hence we may learn what excellent Interpreters they are of Scripture and Tradition For whereas the Trent Council hath in General defined that it belongeth to the Church alone (a) Sess 4. Judicare de vero sensu interpretatione Sanctarum Scripturarum To judge of the true sence and meaning of the Holy Scriptures And particularly That being taught by the Holy Spirit (b) Sess 21. c. 1. Atque ipsius Ecclesiae judicium consuetudinem secuta And following the Judgment and Custom of the Church she made the forementioned Decrees touching Communion in one Kind Secondly Whereas the Council of Constance saith That they made their Decrees concerning the same Matter (c) Sess 13. Plurium doctorum tam divini quam humani juris deliberatione praehabitâ After mature Deliberation had with many Doctors skilful both in divine and humane Laws And lastly whereas the Council of Basil hath declared That they determined the same Matter (d) Sess 30. Post diligentem perscrutationem divinarum Scripturarum sacrorumque Canonum doctrinarum à Sanctis patribus Doctoribus traditarum in hac Synodo longis temporibus habitam After a diligent Search made in this Synod for a long time of holy Scriptures of the sacred Canons and of the Doctrines delivered by the holy Fathers I say Whereas they do expresly and confidently pretend these things I think it will be evident from this Discourse That in those Matters they plainly have decreed against the clear and formerly received Sence of Scriptures against the Doctrines delivered by the Holy Fathers and by the sacred Canons and against the Judgment and Custom of the Church of God in former Ages So that if it belong unto the Church alone to judge of the true Sense and Meaning of the Holy Scriptures these Councils and those Churches which have embraced their Interpretations of the Scriptures concerned in this Dispute could not be the Church Representative or Catholick but falsly did and do pretend to these Titles If it belong unto the Church to teach us what is Tradition they who assert these things as suitable to the Doctrines delivered by the Holy Fathers and to the Judgment of the Church cannot deserve that Title § 2 Again Thirdly Whereas the Trent Council saith That in making these Decrees she was (e) Ipsa Synodus à Spiritu Sancto qui est Spiritus sapientiae intellectus Spiritus consilii pietatis edocta Sess 21. c. 1. Ibid. Instructed by the Holy Ghost who is the Spirit of Wisdom and of Understanding of Counsel and of Pieyt whereas the Council of Constance and of Basil in making their Decrees touching this Article Declare they were a Holy General Synod in Spiritu Sancto legitimè congregata Met rightly together in the holy Ghost Hence it is evident that 1. They falsly pretended to the Assistance of the Holy Spirit who being the spirit of Truth the Inditer of the Sacred Scripture would not assist them to determine contrary to the Truth delivered there and being also the Spirit promised to assist his Church and guide her true and living Members into all saving Truth could not assist them to Decree against the Practice and the Judgment of the Church of Christ for a Thousand years 2. Hence also it must follow that these Councils tho as to these Definitions they are own'd as truly General by the whole Church of Rome were not true General Councils or that true General Councils confirmed by the Pope and owned by the whole Church of Rome may erre in Matters of Faith in the Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures and in their Judgment of Tradition 3. And whereas our late Roman Disputants have laid the whole Certainty of their Faith upon the Infallibility of oral Tradition §. 4. Mr. G. Mr. M. delivering to them the same Doctrine to day which was delivered yesterday and so up to the time of our Saviour it must be as evident they have no Certainty of Roman Faith as it is evident from this and other late Treatises That they have varied from the Tradition of the Church in the Practice of latin Service the Veneration of Images and the Substraction of the Cup and we desire nothing more of the most wavering Persons than that they would not go over to that Church till they see greater Evidence that they have never varied from what was once taught and delivered in the Church of Christ than these Discourses offer to evince that they have actually done it § 5 4. Moreover hence we
as certainly true and necessary and therefore fear not any Retortions of this Nature from our Adversaries Had I designed any thing of that Nature I would more cpiously have insisted on those Arguments from Scripture whence that conclusion can alone be made and which I therefore have so briefly touched upon because I was so happily prevented in that matter by the unanswerable Treatise on this Subject against the Bishop of Meaux with which I was unwilling to interfere but finding that the forementioned Bishop had with great confidence appealed for this matter to the constant practice and to the Principles of the Primitive Church P. 160 161. and told us That the constant Practices of the Primitive Church received with universal approbation from the Origin of Christianity till the time of the Council of Constance do invincibly demonstrate that the Council did but follow the Tradition of All Ages when it defined That the Communion under one kind was as good and sufficient as under both with many other things of a like nature in which he is also followed by the late Writers of the same Communion And finding also that the once exploded Blackloists were again admitted to plead the infallibility of the Roman Church from practical Tradition and that this was done upon the strength of these two Propositions 1. J. S. That the Church of Rome hath always held close to Tradition and received still her Doctrine by Tradition from the Father to the Son from the first to the second and so to the present Age. 2. That she could not mistake the sense of Tradition in particular points In contradiction to these confident Assertions I have here shewed by confronting the Doctrines and Sayings of the Fathers to the express Determinations of their Councils 1. That the present Church of Rome hath varied in this matter from Antiquity both in Doctrine and Practice and that Tradition plainly contradicts all their Assertions and Decrees relating to it And therefore that all her late Defenders are much mistaken or which is worse would lead others into a known Error when they undertake to perswade them that the practice of their Church in denying the Cup to the Laity and to Priests non-conficient is warranted by Tradition and Primitive Practice and by the Principles on which they builded that pretended Practice 2. That in this particular Point she hath either actually mistaken the Sence of Tradition or actually devidated from Tradition And seeing whether she does not differ from or agree with the Primitive Belief and Practice in this Article is a matter of Fact and so may be determined by the Testimony of good Witnesses of what was practised and believed in their Times and by plain Allegations of matter of Fact without Infallibility In plain reason and from her own avowed Principles it follows that her Authority in saying she does not differ from the Tradition of the Ancients and much more in asserting That she hath always held to it and therefore could not mistake the Sence of it can be of no force against plain evidence of Fact to the contrary If then the difference betwixt the Belief and Practice of the Ancients and of the present Church of Rome in this matter be evident as I think I have made it it must be owned that the present received Tradition of that Church can be no certain Rule of Truth and no sure Argument that such was the Tradition of the Primitive Church since in this Controversie she hath actually varied from the Tradition of the Ancients And thus far 1. and no farther would I be thought to drive the Argument drawn from the Citations of the Ancients The Right or Authority claimed by that Church will be best judged of by other Intrinsick Arguments which ought to have the greater force when it appears that Prescription is against our Adversaries Only I cannot but admire why the Trent Council should found their Power of making such a Change in our Lord 's Institution on those words of the Aposlte 1 Cor. iv 1 (t) Id autem Apostolus non obscure visus est innuisse cum ait sic nos existimet c. Sess 21. c. 2. But let a Man account of us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dispensatores mysteriorum Dei as Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the Mysteries of God. Since in that very place it is immediately added That of a Steward it is required that he be found Faithful that is saith (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Locum Chrysostom that he do not usurp Authority over the things of his Lord but administer them as a Steward 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it belongeth to a Steward to administer or distribute well to the Family the things committed to his hands And St. Basil (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haec ipsis integra custodiat Tom. 2. de vera ac pia fide p. 385. b. saith It is the property of a faithful Minister whatsoever things are committed to him by his Lord to distribute them to his fellow Servants and to preserve them for him without Adulteration or Deceit or purely and entirely saith the Latin. 2. The Second thing which I desire may be considered is That nothing in the following Citations can be urged against the Church of England as Erroneous in this Matter Art. 6. For since she professeth to admit nothing as necessary to be believed but what is either expressed in or fairly deducible from Scripture and that it is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly alike Art. 34. How can in reflect upon her that S. Cyprian for Example held it necessary to mix the Wine with Water or that others have held it necessary to use Unleavened Bread c. All that her Sons are in this Case obliged to is only to give fair and satisfactory Reasons why these things are not necessary which they are both able and willing to do whereas if a disagreement between the present Church of Rome and the Primitive Christians be once proved against them in any of their Articles all their fine Pleas for the certainty of their Traditions Mr. M. Quest of Quest p. 395 396 397. the Infallibility of their Councils as proceeding upon Tradition and meeting only to consult about the Tradition of the Church diffused and all the Prejudices they advance against the Protestants from the present Tradition of their Church must be confessedly vain and Sophistical And the attending to this difference of Principles in each Church will shew how much the Testimonies of the Ancients do affect the one and how little they concern the other and so will prevent the Objections of an Vnwary and the Cavils of a captious Reader THE INTRODUCTION Shewing what the Councils of Constance Basil and Trent have determined touching Communion in one kind THOUGH in many other Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome she contradicteth the plainest Evidence of
may learn how excellently these Councils have consulted for the Advantage and the Salvation of Christian People The Fathers of the Council of Constance pretend to have made their Decrees in reference to this Matter (f) Sess 13. Saluti fidelium providere satagentes Endeavouring to provide for the Salvation of the Faithful The Council of Basil preface their Decree against Communion in both Kinds with a Pretence that they had honestly consulted (g) Sess 30. Quid circa perceptionem S. Eucharistiae tenendum sit agendum pro utilitate salute populi Christiani What was to be held or done about the receiving of the Eucharist for the Advantage and Salvation of Christian People The Council of Trent insinuates that she hath established this Custom because it was only such a Change in Dispensation of this Sacrament as the Church (h) Sess 21. c. 2. Utilitati suscipientium magis expedire judicaret Judged most expedient for the Benefit of the Receivers It therefore seems our Lord and his Apostles and the whole primitive Church for a Thousand Years saith their (i) Consult Art. 22. p. 981. Cassander for a Thousand and two hundred Years saith (k) Rerum liturg l. 2. c. 18. p. 862. Cardinal Bona were wickedly unmindful of the Advantage and Salvation of Christian People for our Lord instituted and in compliance with his Institution his Apostles and the whole Christian Church for the forementioned Centuries did minister the Sacrament in both Kinds till those good Souls filled with true Zeal for the Salvation of all christian People Et spiritu pietatis edocti And taught by the Spirit of true Piety forbad them to receive the Cup of Life the Apostles and all the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church were either so ignorant or heedless as that they never thought of making any Laws against Christ's Institution till the Councils of Basil Constance and Trent assisted with the Spirit of Wisdom Understanding and Counsel found it expedient so to do and for the Benefit and Salvation of the Laity to decree peremptorily that they hereafter never should receive the Cup of Blessing and Salvation That they should never drink of the Blood of the New Covenant the Blood of their Redemption the Blood shed for the Remission of their Sins They were so ignorant or so regardless of the Reverence due to the Holy Eucharist That neither the Perils which might happen to it from the long Beards of the Communicants or by growing acid or by being shed could make them think it fit to alter the Institution of our Lord or the Practice of the Church They thought so little of the Scarcity of Wine in some Countries and of the Aversation that some others had unto the tast or the smell of it that none of all these weighty Reasons though they were the same in the First Ages of the Church as in the Thirteenth and the Fourteenth Centuries could move them out of Reverence to our Lord 's Institution to forbid the Practice of it till these (l) Catech. Trid. Part. 2. c. 4. Sect. 66. Gravissimae Rationes Most weighty Reasons being deliberately considered by the Roman Catholick Church She to prevent those dreadful Perils and these Scandals introduced this new Custom and confirmed it for a Law in Opposition both to our Saviour's Institution and to the Practice of the Church in which she had continued for a Thousand Years to the great Damage and the Hindrance of the Salvation of her People till these Councils so happily bestir'd themselves for their Advantage and Salvation And Thirdly Whereas these Councils in framing these Decrees style the Practice of Communicating under one Kind (m) Concil Const Sess 13. Romanae Universalis Ecclesiae consuetuod approbata The approved Custom of the Roman and Universal Church and of the (n) Consi Trid. Sess 21. Can. 2. Holy Catholick Church and the Declaration made concerning it at Basil is called Declaratio Catholicae veritatis (o) Sess 30. The Declaration of the Catholick Truth Not to observe at present how horribly Vncharitable these Councils are in excluding out of the Catholick Church and consequently from Salvation all who had not consented to the Violation of our Lord's Institution and to the Alteration of the Practice of the Church of Christ for a whole Thousand Years That is not only all who in the West refused to make so bold with our Lord's Institution but all the Greek and Eastern Churches I say not to insist on this hence it is evident That the present Practice and Judgment of what they call the Catholick and Universal Church can be no certain or sufficient Proof of Tradition Apostolical since in this Matter she hath both practised and decreed in Opposition to the plain Judgment and Tradition of the Church of Christ for Ten whole Centuries § 6 To these Considerations which concern the Definitions of these Councils touching Communion in one Kind I add these following Remarks touching these Councils and the Decrees which they confirmed in their Assemblies 1. Therefore touching the Councils of Constance and of Basil let it be considered that they constantly declare That they were Holy Synods assembled in the Holy Ghost and representing the Church Catholick The General Council of (p) Sess 8.14 Pisa which agreed with them in their Sentiments and met about the same Affairs ascribes unto it self the same great Titles 2. Note that there were present at the Council of Pisa saith (q) Council To. 7. p. 994. binius Three Patriarchs Twenty three Cardinals Thirty Arch-Bishops Two hundred and eighty Governors of Monasteries the Divines and Legats of the Princes of Europe There were present at that Council saith (r) Hist Consil General l. 2. c. 1. p. 35. Richerius an Hundred and eighty Arch-Bishops and Bishops Three hundred Governours of Monasteries an Hundred and twenty Masters in Theology Three hundred Doctors of the canon and the civil Law the Legats of Christian Princes and the Legats and Procurators of all the Universities of Europe At the Council of Constance saith (ſ) To. 7. p. 1134. Binius there were Four Patriarchs Twenty nine Cardinals Forty seven Arch-Bishops an Hundred and sixty Bishops and of Abbots Provosts and Priors and of all sorts of Clerks a very great Number To the Council of Basil saith the same (t) To. 8. p. 525. Binius came a very great Multitude of Prelates from the whole Latin World. Having premised these things I ask whether these Councils knew themselves full and entire Representatives of the Church Catholick and Councils assisted by the Holy Ghost or they did not If they did know themselves to be true General Councils representing the Church Catholick c. then they undoubtedly were so And then why were they represented by the Fifth Lateran Council as schismatical seditious Councils Concilium Constantiense ubi definit Concilium esse supra Papam reprobatum est in Concilio Florentino
(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
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
the Bread. Hildebert Bishop of Mans doth vehemently reprove the Custom of giving the Bread sopped used in this or some other Monastery for writing to the Abbot of some Monastery he saith It is judicial obstinacy to preferr Custom before Truth And having proved this from the words of St. Cyprian and St. Austin he proceeds thus This Brother I have therefore spoken that being rouzed up thou maist awake and see that (n) Traditioni Sacramentorum Altaris quae in vestro celebris est Monasterio nec Evangelia consonant nec decreta concordant In eo enim consuetudinis est Eucharistiam nulli nisi intinctam dari quod nec ex Dominica Institutione nec ex Sanctionibus Authenticis reperiatur assumptum Epist 64. neither the Gospels nor Decrees agree with that distribution of the Sacrament of the Altar which is practised in your Monastery for there the Custom is to give the Sacrament to none but in Bread steeped in the Wine which is neither found to be taken from our Lord's Institution nor from Authentick Sanctions If you consult St. Matthew Mark and Luke you will find the Bread to have been delivered apart and the Wine apart for we read not that Christ gave Bread sopped to any but that Disciple whom he thereby shewed to be the betrayer of his Master (o) Eucharistia intincta non debet dari populo pro supplemento Communionis Sent. l. 4. Dist 11. Lit. f. The Eucharist saith Lombard ought not to be given to any Body sopped for a Supplement of the Communion for we read of no sopped Bread given to any one but Judas Lastly a Council held at London A. D. 1175. (p) Inhibemus ne quis quasi pro complemento Communionis intinctam alicui tradat Eucharistiam nam intinctum panem aliis Christum praebuisse non legimus excepto illo tantum Discipulo quem intincta buccella Magistri proditorem ostenderit Apud Binium Tom. 7. Part 2. p. 642. forbids any person to deliver the Eucharistical Bread dipped in Wine for a compleat Communion for say they we read not that our Lord gave the Bread sopped to any but to that Disciple whom he thereby declared to be the Disciple that was to betray him Now hence saith (q) De utraque specie p. 1027. Cassander it appears That they who received the Custom of dipping the Bread into the consecrated Cup did believe that both kinds were by all means to be used for an entire and full Communion For wherefore did they dip the Bread in the Mystical Cup of our Lord's Blood if one species by it self would have sufficed for a full and lawful Communion And seeing they who administred the Bread dipp'd in the consecrated Cup did this because they conceived it necessary that both kinds should be received at least together and they who reprehended this Custom did therefore reprehend it because they held that both kinds were to be received apart according to our Lord's Institution and the constant Custom of the Church It is evident hat all did then agree that both kinds were to be received and that it was not lawful to receive under the species of Bread alone 3ly § 3. Others attempted to vary from the Institution of our Lord and from the practice of the Apostles and the succeeding Ages of the Church by offering on the Altar or communion-Table not only Bread and Wine but also Milk and Honey c. which thing the Ancient Fathers and Councils do with one voice condemn as being contrary to the Institution of our Lord. The Title of the Third Canon of the Apostles runs thus That nothing is to be offered in the Sacrifice besides that which our Lord appointed and in the body of the Canon the offering Milk or Honey is condemned as being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides the Constitution of our Lord touching the Sacrifice and the Bishop or Presbyter who doth this is to be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as doing besides the Constitution of the Lord. Our Lord saith Zonaras upon this Canon delivering to his Apostles the celebration of this unbloody Sacrifice to be performed in Bread and Wine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For this cause the Apostles forbad any other thing to be brought to the Sacrifice The Church of (r) Can. 37. Africa made a Canon to the same effect viz. That it is not lawful to offer any thing in the Sacraments besides Bread and Wine mixed with Water and the reason there assigned is That nothing else is to be offered quèm quod ipse Dominus tradidit than that which our Lord himself delivered This Canon is cited and confirmed in the Fifth General Council held in (s) Can. 32. Trullo for the same Reason That in this Sacrament things ought to be performed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according as our Lord himself delivered Pope Julius in the Fourth and the Council of Braga in the Seventh Century say not as the Canons of the Eastern Church that some offered Milk besides Bread and Wine but that they offered lac pro vino Milk for Wine this practice they condemn in these words (t) Cum enim Magister veritatis verum salutis nostrae Sacrificium suis commendaret discipulis nulli lac sed panem tantum Calicem sub hoc Sacramento cognoscimus dedisse legitur enim in Evangelica veritate accepit Jesus panem Calicem c. cesset ergo lac sacrificando offerri quia manifestum evidens exemplum veritatis Evangelicae illuxit quod praeter panem vinum aliud offerri non liceat Concil To. 2. p. 525 526. Concil Brac. To. 6. p. 564. When the Master of Truth would commend to his Disciples the true Sacrifice of our Salvation he gave to none Milk but only Bread and Wine in the Sacrament let therefore Milk cease to be offered because the manifest and evident example of Evangelical Truth hath shined forth that besides Bread and Wine nothing else may be offered And again Henceforth it shall be lawful to none to offer any thing else in the divine Sacrifices but according to the Sentence of the Ancient Councils Bread and Wine only mixed with Water (u) Lib. de rebus Eccles cap. 18. Strabo informs us That though the use of the Sacraments was delivered by Christ and from the Apostles and Apostolical Men was diffused throughout the whole Catholick Church yet we understand from the Apostolical Canons that in the first Ages some were wont to offer other Oblations who therefore by the third of their Canons are to be deposed as doing contra Constitutionem Domini against the Constitution of our Lord. And these Decrees we find in (x) Decret part 2. c. 18. Ivo and in (y) Decret part 3. de consecr dist 2. c. 4 5. Gratian and do thence learn that they continued to be Authentick in their Days Now here let it be noted that all these Fathers and Councils who condemn intinction and the oblation of
other things upon the Altar besides Bread Wine and Water give this as a sufficient reason for so doing That these things were not agreeable unto that institution which was to be revered by Men and Angels from which it was by no means lawfull to depart and to which Christians were obliged to adhere and surely they who so Religiously condemned and strenuously opposed themselves against the Custom of iminction and of offering Milk and Honey because of the Repugnancy which these things bore unto the manner of and the Rule observed in our Lord's Institution of this Sacrament would have been filled with holy indignation had they known of any who wholly did with-hold from or deny the Cup unto the People Sure they who taught that to do these things against the Divine Orders and Apostolical Constitution was to be guilty of a manifest Error and of Schismatical Ambition could not have passed a milder Censure on the substraction of the Cup from all the Laity They who declared that to do these things was to act contrary to the Evangelical Doctrine and Ecclesiastical Custom or the Practice of the Church would have declared with a greater zeal against the defalcation of that Cup of which our Lord said in the Institution Drink ye all of this of which all the Apostles drank and which was in complyance with this Institution and this Example confessedly received by all Christians in the first Ages of the Church They who would not allow intinction to be sufficient for a compleat and full Communion of the People or for a Supplement of the Communion would much less have allowed that the Communion was intire and full when nothing but the Bread was given to them They who declared that nothing could be offered to justifie this variation from our Lord's Institution could much less think that any thing would justifie this greater variation from it They who affirm it could not be that any one should commend this Mystery of Faith more conveniently or truly than that Jesus to whom the most perfect knowledge of any Man being compared is the highest ignorance and that the Tradition of our Lord is to be kept and not receded from on the account of any humane or novel Institution could not imagine the Councils either of Trent or Constance could have any power given by the Author of that Institution to make a Law for the omitting one part of it with a (z) Concil Const Sess 13. non obstante to our Lord's Institution and to the practice of the Church They lastly who assert It is judicial obstinacy to preferr Custom before Truth must have abhorred that plea for half Communion used by the Council of Constance that it was a Custom reasonably introduced by the Church and by the Holy Fathers and had been long observed and therefore was to be retained as a Law. Again They who condemn the offering Milk and Honey on the Altar as being besides the Institution of our Lord and for this reason do forbid and punish it would more assuredly have condemned and punished that defalcation of the Cup which is confessedly contrary to the Institution They who took care that in this matter things should be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the lord delivered them would never have allowed that this Sacrament should be administred otherwise than he had Instituted it to be received And lastly they who argued That nothing else was to be offered because nothing else was mentioned in the Gospel would never have endured that what was mentioned in the Gospel as offered and distributed to all should not only be omitted but forbidden under the severest Penalties § 4 4ly Some varied from the practice of the Church from the beginning used with respect to the Cup and that Two Ways 1. By using in this Sacrament Wine not mixed with Water this neglect the Ancient Fathers and Councils do with one voice condemn as varying from the Institution of our Lord and from the practice of the Church and solemnly decree that in conformity to both the Wine they offered and distributed should be continually mixed with Water The Constitutions of St. clemens say That (a) L. 8. c. 12. P. 351. our Lord mixed the Cup with Wine and Water and sanctifying it he gave it to them saying Drink ye all of it and that therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to his Order or Institution they offered to him this Bread and this Cup. And this they did saith Cotelerius against Two Heresies that of the Monophysites and the Armenians who used only Wine in the Mysteries The (b) Can. 37. African Council saith that nothing is to be offered in the Sacraments but Bread merum aqua mixtum and Wine mixed with Water as our Lord delivered Pope Julius saith That (c) Calix dominicus juxta Canonum praecepta vino aqua permixtus debet offerri non enim potest Calix domini esse aqua sola aut vinum solum nisi utrumque misceatur Apud Ivon Decret part 2. c. xi the Cup of our Lord according to the commands of the Canons ought to be offered with Wine mixed with Water and that the Cup of the Lord cannot be Wine or Water alone but that both must be mixed The Councils of (d) Concil Wormatense apud eundem Cap. 12. Concil To. 2. p. 526. Worms and (e) Calix dominicus juxta quod quidam Doctor edisserit vino aqua permixtus debet offerri Concil Brac. 4. Concil To. 6. p. 563. Braga condemn the neglect of mixing Water in the very words of Pope Julius The General Council held in Trullo saith the same thing condemning the Armenians who celebrated the Eucharist with Wine not mixed with Water as acting against the Tradition of the Apostles and Decreeing That the Bishop or the Priest who did thus celebrate the Mysteries should be deposed (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 32. as imperfectly shewing forth the Mystery and innovating in things delivered Isidore saith That Wine alone cannot be offered in the Sacrifice of the Cup and that (g) Quando autem miscetur utrumque tunc spirituale Sacrificium perficitur Lib. 1. c. 18. the spiritual Sacrifice is then perfected when they are both mixed This mixture some of them held necessary because our Saviour's side being pierced with a Launce not only Blood but Water also issued thence for which cause saith (h) In Can. 32. Concil Trull Zonarus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was necessarily determined by the Church that in the holy Mysteries Wine should be mixed with Water That Wine and Water ought thus to be mixed saith (i) Quia utrumque ex latere ejus in sua passione profluxisse legitur Apud Ivon decret Part. 2. c. 15. Pope Alexander We have received from the Fathers and even reason teacheth because both flowed from our Saviour's Side in his Passion (k) 1 Cap. de celebr Miss p. 88. c. 10. 2 L. 1. c. 10.
Life Eternal for that this Decree of the Council of Tours That the Sacred Oblation given to such persons should be dipped in the Blood of Christ that so the Priest who gave it to them might truly say to the infirm Person The Body and Blood of Christ profit thee c. was observed in the Church from the Ninth to the Twelfth Century we learn from (k) Quae sacra oblatio intincta debet esse in sanguine Christi ut veraciter possit Presbyter dicere infirmo corpus sanguis domini proficiat tibi c. Regino de Eccles Discipl l. 1. cap. 70. Proficiat tibi in remissionem peccatorum vitam aeternam Jvo Decret part 2. cap. 19. Burch l. 5. c. 9. Regino Ivo and Burchardus who all make mention of this Canon as a Law which was observed in their times That this practice was used though not with Approbation in the Fourth Century even in the Administration of this Sacrament in publick is evident from the Condemnation of it by (l) Concil Tom. 2. p. 528. P. Julius A. D. 336. in these words We have heard that some possessed with a Schismatical Ambition do deliver to the people the Eucharist dip'd for a compleat Communion which thing how contrary it is to the Evangelical and Apostolical Doctrine and how repugnant to the Custom of the Church it is not hard to prove from the Fountain of Truth from whom proceeded the appointment of the Mysteries of the Sacrament For this they have not received from the Gospel where Christ commended his Body and his blood to his Disciples for there the commendation of the Bread apart and of the Cup apart is rehearsed nor do we read that Christ gave Bread dipp'd to any but to that Disciple whom he would shew to be the betrayer of his Master by the sop dip'd This saith (m) Cap. 19. Micrologus is the prohibition of Julius the Thirty fourth Pope writing to the Bishops of Egypt Thirdly This will be farther evident from this Consideration That the Fathers do certainly speak of the Consecrated Bread and Wine as of Two Sacraments and that as really distinct as are the Sacraments of Baptism and Chrism This we may learn from all those numerous passages in which they are still stiled by the Fathers of the Western Church Sacramenta Mysteria Sacramenta Coelestia divina Mysteria The Sacraments and Mysteries in the Plural the heavenly Sacraments and divine Mysteries and by the Eastern Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holy Gifts the divine Mysteries the Holy Sacraments c. Thus do the Greeks speak of them to this very day thus did the celebrated Writers of the West speak and write of them till the Eleventh Century when Transubstantiation began to be established and with it the Doctrine of Concomitance The Sacraments saith (n) Sunt autem Sacramenta Baptismum chrisma corpus sanguis Orig. l. 6. c. 19. Raban M. de Inst Cler. l. 1. c. 24. Pasch cap. 9. Isidore Hispalensis are Baptism and Chrism the Body and the Blood of Christ which are therefore called Sacraments because under the veil of Corporeal things the divine Virtue doth more secretly work the Salvation of those Sacraments Which words are borrowed from Pope Gregory and are repeated by Paschasius only with this addition These are the Sacraments of the Church of Christ Rabanus Maurus hath the same words and having discoursed of Baptism and Chrism he proceeds thus Because we above discoursed as much as God enabled us of Two Sacraments Baptism and Chrism (o) De Inst Cler. l. 1. c. 31. superest ut de reliquis duobus id est Corpore Sanguine Domini diligentius investigemus It remains that we discoi se of the Two other Sacraments viz. The Body and the Blood of Christ Whence first we learn that then the Sacraments were not accounted Seven as they are now at Rome but only Four or rather Two Chrism being held as one with Baptism and the Body and Blood of Christ being as to the Species in which it was to be celebrated double which Species were therefore called Sacraments by Gregory saith (p) In 4. Sent. dist 12. Art. 2. q. 2. Bonaventure yet are they but one Sacrament by virtue of the Institution and end for which both are design'd viz. The Vnion of the body Mystical Now they who do so often speak of both these Species as Sacraments the Sacraments of the Church and as Two Sacraments because they have their distinct operations towards the health or the Salvation of those who worthily Receive them and both conduced to the Union of the Mystical Body of the Lord could not imagine that by virtue of that Concomitance of which they never speak one word of syllable the virtue of both Species was contained in and was intirely conveighed by one alone For they must be supposed to hold the Cup a Sacrament of our Lord's Institution and therefore not superfluous that it was Sacrae rei Signum a Sign of a thing Sacred which did conveigh the Grace it signified and operated to the Salvation of those who worthily Received it after they had received the Body and which conduced unto the Union of the Body Mystical to their head Christ Jesus They lastly must conceive that to deprive Christ's Members of the Cup was to deprive them of one Sacrament And Fourthly this appears from those sayings of the Fathers which attribute a distinct effect unto the several species (q) Caro salvatoris pro salute corporis sanguis vero pro anima nostra effusus est In 1 Cor. xi p. 270. The Flesh of Christ was delivered saith St. Ambrose for the Salvation of the Body and the Blood was poured out for our Souls c. (r) Haym in 1 Cor. xi p. 129. Anselm ibid. Haymo and Anselm use the same words with a little variation saying That we receive the Sacraments for safety of the Body and Soul for the Flesh was offered for the Salvation of the Body and the Blood shed for our Souls that both our substances might receive the inheritance of Eternal Life (s) L. 4. dist 11. Quare sub duplici specie Peter Lombard (t) Decret p. 2. c. 7. Ivo Carnotensis (u) Tom. 5. c. 6. Hugo de Sancto Victore and (x) Sum. Theol. part 3. num 29. Art. 9. Alexander of Hales cite the very words of Ambrose to prove the same thing And Fifthly This will be farther evident from those Fathers who assert That the Body is given under the one the Blood under the other Species This Cyril of Jerusalem informs those whom he Catechised That (y) Catech. Myst 4. p. 237. in the Species of Bread is given the Body of Christ and in the Species of Wine his Blood. The (z) Lit. Chrysost Tom. 6. p. 998. Liturgies do in like manner pray That God would make this Bread the precious body of Christ and that which is in the Cup