and Wine whereon Prayers were made and saith expresly That this food is consecrated by Prayer Iren. l. 4. c. 34. St. Irenaeus saith the same for he also calls it The Bread upon which Prayers have been made the Bread which hath received invocation and that by this means ceaseth to be common Bread and saith that we sanctifie the Creature This is also the Language of Tertullian writing against Marcion Tertul. advers Marc. l. 1. c. 23. for he observes that if Jesus Christ had not been the Son of the Creatour as this Heretick deny'd he would not have given thanks unto another God upon a Creature that had been none of his Strom. l. 1. paedag l. 2. c. 2 It is unto Prayer and Thanksgiving that Clemens of Alexandria refers the Consecration of the Eucharist of our Lord Origen contr Cels l. 8. in Matth. c. 15. therefore Origen calls the Bread of the Sacrament the Symbol of Prayer and that he saith that it is made a sacred and sanctified Body by Prayer St. Cyrill of Jerusalem in his Mystagogical Catechisms The Bread and Wine of the Eucharist before the Invocation of the adorable Trinity is but common Bread and common Wine but Prayer being ended the Bread is the Body of Christ and the Wine the Blood of Christ Lib. 4. Juvencus a Priest of Spain in his Evangelical History which he compos'd in Latin verse Having saith he devoutly prayed Basil de Sp. Sancto c. 27. t. 2. p. 351. The great St. Basil in his Treatise of the Holy Ghost Which of the Saints hath left unto us in writing the words of Invocation for consecrating the Bread of the Sacrament and the Cup of blessing Gregory of Nyssen his Brother In Baptism Christ p. 8 22. Orat. Catech. c. 37. p. 536. The mystical Oyl as also the Wine are of no great moment before Consecration but after the Sanctification of the Holy Spirit they operate excellently both the one and the other And elsewhere The Bread is sanctified by the word of God and by Prayer And elsewhere Ibid. The nature of visible things is transelemented by the virtue of the benediction St. Ambrose Bishop of Milan L. 4. de side c. 5. t. 4. As often as we take the Sacraments which by the mystery of holy Prayer are transfigured into his flesh and blood we do shew the Lords death Optatus Bishop of Milevis in Numidia describing the cruelties and rage of the Donatists against Catholicks and marking particularly against what they shew'd it What saith he is more sacrilegious than to break tear Lib. 6. and destroy the Altars of God whereon you your selves have sometimes offered c. where the Almighty God hath been invoked where the Holy Ghost drawn down by Prayers hath descended Paschal 1. Bibl. Patr. t. 3. p. 87. Theophilus of Alexandria speaking of Origen He doth not consider saith he that the Bread of our Lord and the Holy Cup are consecrated by Prayer and by the coming of the Holy Ghost St. Gaudentius Bishop of Bress in Italy In Exod. tract 2. When our Saviour presented unto the Disciples the consecrated Bread and Wine he said This is my Body in speaking after this manner he shewed that the Bread was consecrated before the pronouncing of these words This is my Body Ephrem of Edessa if the Books published in his name were his The Lord taking Bread into his hands blessed and brake it De natura Dei curiose nonscrutandâ— in type of his immaculate Body and blessed the Cup in figure of his pretious Blood St. Chrysostom in his Homilies upon St. Matthew The Lord gave thanks shewing us how we should celebrate this Sacrament Hom. 82. Graec. And upon the first Epistle to the Corinthians Hom. 24. in 1 ad Corinth The Apostle said the Cup of Blessing because holding it in our hands we offer unto God Hymns and Praises and do praise him S. Jerom in his Letter unto Evagrius reproving the pride and vanity of the Deacons which rashly advanced themselves above the Priests Who can endure saith he Epist 83. that the Ministers of Tables and of Widows should raise themselves being swelled with pride above thofe which by prayers do make the Body and blood of Jesus Christ And elsewhere he saith That prayer is thereunto necessary St. Austin in his Letter unto Paulinus In Sophon â—3 Epist 59. We mean by prayers those which we make in celebrating the Sacraments before we begin to bless what is upon the Lords Table and by Benedictions those which are made when they are blessed and sanctified and broke in pieces to be distributed And in the Books of the Trinity We call that only the Body and blood of Jesus Christ Lib. 3. c. 4. which being taken from the fruits of the Earth is consecrated by prayer And elsewhere writing against the Donatists which rejected the Sacraments consecrated and administred by Sinners What then saith he De Baptism l. 5. c. 20. doth God hear an homicide praying either on the Water of Baptism or on the Oyl or upon the Eucharist And in fine in another place Serm. 87. de divers it is not all sorts of Bread that is made the Body of Christ but that which receives the blessing of Jesus Christ S. Cyrill of Alexandria doth very frequently call the Eucharist Glaphir in Genes Exod. Levit. in Joan. Eulogy that is Blessing because there 's no doubt but that 't is consecrated by Blessing and Prayers And that blessing is all one in St. Cyril's sense with Sanctification and Consecration he shews plainly Contra Anthropomopth c. 12. when he saith elsewhere We believe that the Oblations made in the Churches are sanctified blessed and consecrated by Jesus Christ Theodoret who was not always of St. Cyril's mind yet agrees with him fully in this matter Dialog 2. What do you call the Oblation which is offered before the Invocation of the Priest A Food made of such Seeds And what do you call it after Consecration The body of Jesus Christ St. Prosper or some body else in his name in his Treatise of Promises and Predictions Part. 2. c. 2. He affirms at his Table that the Bread is his sacred Body A fragment of a Liturgy attributed unto Proclus Bishop of Constantinople speaking of the Apostles and their Successors praying over the Bread and Wine By these Prayers saith he they looked for the coming of the Holy Ghost to make and consecrate by his Divine presence the bread offered and the Wine mingled with Water into the Body it self or to be the Body of Jesus Christ our Saviour Victor of Antioch in his Commentary upon St. Mark according to the Greek In cap. 14. It was necessary that those which presented the Bread should believe that after Consecration and Prayers it was his Body The supposed Eusebius of Emessa or rather Caesarius Bishop of Aâ—â—â—s or some other for
which is of a vast extent hath constantly unto this day observed and retained this practice James Goar of the Order of Preaching Friers who hath left us the Euchology or Ritual of the Greeks with Notes of a very sound judgment takes much pains in explaining the manner of Consecration practised by the Greek Church endeavouring to give it a sense which may not be contrary to the Latin Church he cites these words of the Liturgy which goes under St. Chrysostom's name 〈◊〉 p â—7 We also offer unto thee this reasonable and unbloody Sacrifice and we beseech thee that thou wouldest send thy holy Spirit upon us and upon the Gifts offered make this Bread the precious Body of thy Christ Upon these words and particularly upon the last Goar makes a very long observation Not. in Euchol p. 140 141. num 138 139. in the first place he observes upon these words send thy holy Spirit That there is a very great difference betwixt the new Editions of this Liturgy of St. Chrysostom's and the antient Manuscripts That some of the late Greeks have from hence drawn some kind of shew of support for their ill opinion touching Consecration Secondly upon these words make this Bread the precious Body of thy Christ That Chrysostom who is the Author of the Liturgy could not believe that Consecration was made by Prayers as some Greeks have vainly supposed seeing saith he he attributes elsewhere unto the words of Christ the vertue of changing the Elements that is the Bread and Wine into his Body and Blood That nevertheless these Prayers used by the Greeks were a Stone of stumbling and 't was by these Prayers not rightly understood that Cabasilas Simeon of Thessalonica Mark of Ephesus Gabriel of Philadelphia and some others have been deceived and have cast the ignorant into Error and 't is not to be denied but the most part of the Greeks have written darkly and dubiously and that gave way unto Error in minds that were unstedfast And in fine hath commended Arcudius and Bessarion both Greeks Latinized the latter of which was present at the Council of Florence under Eugenius the Fourth and was gained by the Latins and the other wrote a great while afterwards of the agreement betwixt the Latins and the Greeks touching the matter of the Sacraments Goar then having praised them as two persons who by their skill and pains removed all the difficulties which were found about the words and form of Consecration adds That to the end we should not labour in doing what was already done what remains is that if any farther light can be given unto other mens labours we should endeavour to do it by new inventions But that it self shews plainly that the Greeks did consecrate otherwise than the Latins Besides the Reader may easily perceive both by what we have said and by the proceeding of Bessarion Arcudius and Goar what is the manner of the Consecration of the Symboles amongst the Greeks it is true that Arcudius used all his endeavours to conform the opinion of the Greeks unto that of the Latins giving for this purpose unto the Liturgies which go in the name of St. Mark St. Clement St. James St. Basil and St. Chrysostom L. 3. de concord cap. 25. ad 33. the most favourable construction he could contrive because they attribute all the Consecration unto Prayers and doth blame Cabasilas Mark of Ephesus Simeon of Thessalonica Gabriel of Philadelphia Samonas Jeremy Patriarch of Constantinople because they taught that the Consecration of Symboles was made by Prayers But this proceeding sufficiently doth shew that the Greek Church never owned any other form of Consecration But to return unto James Goar In Euchol p. 140 141. he saith one thing which ought not to be past over in silence which is That the Greeks which assisted at the Council of Florence agreed that it was unto the words of Jesus Christ that the force and vertue of Consecration ought to be attributed and to confirm what he saith he alledges the Answer they made unto Pope Eugenius which stuck in suspense because they added unto the words of Jesus Christ certain Prayers to demand the Consecration as if it had not been otherwise compleat the Answer I say which was made him in the behalf of the whole Nation by the Bishops of Russia of Nice of Trebizond and of Mitylene as we read in the eighth Tome and 25th Session of the Council of Florence in which Answer Goar still finds some difficulty But if the learned Goar had seen before publishing his Euchology the true History of the Council of Florence by Sylvester Sguropulus great Ecclesiastick of the Church of Constantinople and one of the five Counsellors of the Patriarch and by consequence of the chiefest of the Assembly of the Greeks he would not have said that the four Bishops above-mentioned had answered Pope Eugenius in behalf of the whole Nation Hist Conc. Florent sect 10. c. 1. p. 278. for the truth is the Greek Emperor having at last agreed with the Latins upon four Articles without the knowledge and consent of those of his Nation except it were some few that had been gained by the Court of Rome the Latins demanded of the Greeks they should expunge out of their Rituals and Books of Divine Service this third Benediction in celebrating of the unbloody Sacrifice or in the invocating of the Holy Ghost which the Priest is wont to pronounce saying That these words Take eat this is my Body and drink you all did consecrate the Bread and the Cup and that the Greeks erred very much in using of Prayers and invoking the Holy Ghost after pronouncing the words of our Lord. Whereupon there were several contests between the Emperor of Constantinople and the Latins Ibid. p. 278 279. who said unto them If you would believe as the great St. Basil and the great St. Chrysostom taught thus to consecrate and sanctifie the Divine Oblations you would find in all the Eastern Churches above two thousand Liturgies which thus decide the matter After which the Historian observes That soon after by order of the Pope and the Emperor all the Greeks met at the Popes Palace excepting Mark of Ephesus the most zealous of the whole Nation and that the Question being again re-assum'd there were several debates upon it the Latins using all their endeavours to make the Greeks embrace their Opinions and that the Bishops of Russia and of Nice in behalf of the latter proposed a middle opinion which pleased neither Party which obliged the Emperor to command Mark of Ephesus to set down something in writing touching this Question which he did and he therein shewed that the Holy Fathers taught to consecrate the Divine Oblations Ibid. as saith he all our Priests do consecrate In the Eighth Chapter of the same Section the same Historian who was always present writes That after the signing of the Decree of the union the Emperor sent several
represents unto us to be purely spiritual Ep. 23. wherein he alledges the words of St. Austin It is a Figure which commands us to communicate of the Passion of our Lord and to represent unto our minds sweetly and usefully that his Body was crucified and broken for us Ep. 1. ad Adeod t. 3. Bibl. Pat. p. 438. A. B Post poeniten mulierum p. 521. E. for I do not regard the Addition that some unadvised hand hath thereunto annexed will the Heretick say And these others of the same Saint Him that dwelleth not in Jesus Christ and in whom Christ dwelleth not doth not indeed eat his Flesh although he eats and drinks the Sacrament of so great a thing unto his Damnation Ibid. p. 522. B. Unto which words in all appearance Berengarius had regard when he said in his Letter unto Richard If the thing were so how should the Doctrine of the Eucharist come to my knowledge which is in the Writings of Bishop Fulbert of glorious Memory Tom 2. Spicil d'Ach. p. 510. and which some esteem to be of this Bishop but it is of St. Austin If it be farther considered that he declares that Jesus Christ is ascended into Heaven and that he hath left us the Sacrament Ep. 1. ad Adcodat p. 437. C. as a Pledge of his Presence that he speaks of what we receive in the Sacrament as of a thing which is broken into very small bits and whereof a little portion is received and that he distinguisheth as Ratramn did Id. Epist 2. p. 440 441. and in the same words the Sacrament which he calls the body of Christ from his true Body If I say all these things be well considered it must presently be concluded that he was contrary unto Paschas Yet nevertheless I would not affirm that he exactly followed the Opinion of his Adversaries not because he speaks of the Transfusion and Change of the Bread into the substance of the Body of Jesus Christ for besides that Id. Ep. 1. p 437 438. he calls this Change a Change of Dignity that is to say of Quality which the Ancients often design by the name of Substance as hath been shewn he compares the Change which happens in the Eucharist unto that which came unto the Manna in the Wilderness and unto that which comes unto Men in Baptism and that he testifies That there is also a Transfusion of Believers into the Body of Jesus Christ Ibid. But I judge so because he seems to me to have embraced the Opinion of Remy of Auxerr which was the same of John Damascen who taught not that the substance of the Symbols was abolished but that they were united unto the Divinity to make one Body with the Natural Body of Jesus Christ as hath been fully shewed And that these were the thoughts of Fulbert it appears if I mistake not by what he saith That the Pledge which our Saviour hath left us is not the Symbol of an empty Mystery but the true Body of Jesus Christ Compaginante Spiritu Sancto Id. ibid. p. 437. or as Remy speaks Conjungente that is to say that the Holy Spirit unites joyns and knits the Sacrament unto the true Body of Jesus Christ in uniting it unto the Divinity Let the Reader judge if I use any violence unto the words of Fulbert and if I vary from his meaning About the time that Fulbert of Chartres flourished Bernon Abbot of Augy wrote his Treatise of things which concerned the Mass to wit about the Year 1030. and Fulbert died in 1027. In this Treatise he speaks of Making and confecrating the Body and Blood of the Lord Cap. 1. 2. t. 10 Bibl. Pat. but the real Body say some and the proper Blood of our Saviour not being possible to be made because it was made a thousand years before Bernon wrote nor be sanctified because it was always holy it must of necessity be understood of the Sacrament Cap. 1. And he shews it plainly when he said That this Body of Jesus Christ is broken Which cannot be understood of his true Body which is not subject unto this Accident and that moreover he declares Cap. 5. That we are refreshed with the Wine which is in the Cup in Type of the Blood of Jesus Christ Nevertheless the Opinion of Paschas establishing it self by degrees Bruno Bishop of Anger 's and Berengarius born at Tours but Arch-Deacon and Treasurer of the Church of Anger 's a Dignity which in former times was not conferred but upon persons of Worth and Learning Bruno I say and Berengarius not enduring that the Opinion of Paschas which they looked upon as an Innovation of the ancient Faith should get possession of the minds of the people opposed it publickly teaching that the Bread and Wine did not lose their substance by Consecration to become the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ but they only became by the Blessing of Sanctification the Sacrament of this Body and Blood The truth is Bruno suffering himself to be overcome with fear became silent a little after for say some it often happens upon these occasions that Men hearken to the Counsels of the Flesh rather than unto those of the Spirit But as for Berengarius he had more strength and courage and opposed himself with more Resolution and Vigour unto the setling of the Doctrine which Paschas begun to teach in the IX Century but without any great success until the XI wherein it also found a great many Opposers I am not ignorant that some Enemies of Berengarius have endeavoured to slander him to render his Belief the more odious but the truth is he was reputed to be a very learned Man grounded in Philosophy and the knowledge of the Liberal Arts and moreover of a holy and unblameable Life A fragment of the History of France from the time of King Robert Tom 4. Histor Franc. de scripror Eccles Platina in Joan. 15. Sabellic Enead 9. l. 2. Chron. tit 16. c. 1. § 20 unto the death of Philip saith That his name was famous amongst the Professors of Divine Philosophy Sigebert saith That he was illustrious for the Knowledge of the Liberal Arts and of Logick Platina and Sabellicus reckon him amongst those which rendred themselves famous by their Piety and Learning Bergomas in the Suppliment of Chronicles upon the Year 1049. observes That he passed a long time in the Judgment of Men to be eminent in Learning and in Holiness Therefore the Arch-Bishop Antonine declares Tom. 2. Spicil p. 747. That he was very learned And the Friar Clarius in his Chronicle of St. Peter of Sans gives him these two Epithets of Admirable Philosopher and Lover of the Poor But in fine the Belief which he maintained upon the Subject of the Eucharist and which was directly contrary unto that of Paschas found the people so disposed to entertain it or rather to declare openly for it so that in all
is no less important to the clearing of the matter whereof we treat It concerns the Greek Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which doth not barely signifie to Adore but also Venerate and respect the Roman Catholicks and the Protestants do confess it so yet that doth not hinder but that we will produce some Instances of the latter signification because the former findeth no Obstruction 1 Lib. 1. ep 136. lib. 4. ep 27. Isidor of Damicta speaks in this sense of the adorable Gospels a term which he useth again in speaking of the Sepulchre of Jesus Christ which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 2 Tom. 4. Concil pag. 107. E. Clergy of Apame in the lower Syria speaking of Temples in general in the 5th action of the Synod held at Constantinople under Agapetus and under Menna applieth also unto them the term now in question as also the Emperour 3 Novel 6. Justinian doth unto Baptism 4 Homil. 4. de ascens Chr. tom 6. St. Chrysostom unto the Feast of Easter 5 Homil. 49. in Matt. p. 439. and unto the person of John Baptist It is also in the same signification this word must be taken when it is applied unto Emperors and Emperesses which are sometimes called Adorable that is worthy of respect and veneration as even in the Acts of the 6 Part. 1. pag. 26.27 tom 3. Concil p. 28.29 Council of Chalcedon And even there also is mention made of the 7 Ibid. p. 26.27 adorable Altar and of the adoration of Venerable places and so in an infinite number of places which need not be recited This word then having divers significations it is but just and right when it is found in discourse to explain it according to the Nature of the subject then in hand for example if there be mention of the three persons of the blessed Trinity it must necessarily be translated by that of adoring because the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost be objects worthy of our Adoration but if things truly Sacred and Religious are spoken of but yet nevertheless are not to speak in a proper sense adorable it is to be translated by venerated and respected for by this means it will be easie to resolve and clear all the difficulties which seem to entangle this matter according unto which if any of the Ancients treating of the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist make use of the term which we examine it will not be difficult unto us to understand that his design is not that we should adore them but only that we should venerate them and that we should respect them as Sacraments which Jesus Christ hath instituted for the saving of our Souls especially if this Writer doth formally declare that the Bread and Wine do not change their Substance by Consecration In acting by this principle we need only hear Theodoret to understand what he means to say unto us Dialog â— p. â—5 The Mystical Symbols saith he do not change their own nature after Consecration but they remain in their former substance in their first Figure and in their first shape they are visible and palpable such as they were before but it is conceived by the understanding that they are what they have been made and they are believed and venerated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being what they are believed to be Theodoret doth positively testifie That the Consecration doth not take from the Symbols of the Eucharist their Substance their Form nor their Figure Besides he assureth in the same place that they be Images and mystical Symbols whereof the Body of Jesus Christ is the truth and the Original And elsewhere he saith Dialog 1. That our Saviour hath honoured the visible Symbols with calling them by the name of his Body and Blood not by changing their Nature but in adding Grace unto Nature After declarations so formal and positive say some the Greek word cannot be translated by Adore but by Venerate else it must be said that Theodoret is fallen into the highest excess of folly to adore what he confessed was but Bread in its proper nature and substance but because we are obliged to judge more favourably of him the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be translated are venerated are respected and not are adored They also think the Reader will be very much confirmed in this Opinion if these other words of this Author be considered writing in another Dialogue against the Eutychean Hereticks and speaking thus unto them Dialog 3. p. 127. If the Body of Jesus Christ seem a vile thing unto you and inconsiderable how is it that you do nevertheless esteem his Figure to be venerable and saving for how can an Original whose Type is venerable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and worthy of Honour be it self vile and despicable They observe that these words do also manifestly shew that there is not here meant a true and proper adoration but a veneration honour and respect such as is due unto holy and sacred things And that he speaks also of venerating the Symbols in the nature of Figures which he distinguisheth from the Archtype and from the Original an opposition which justifies that the words of Theodoret cannot at all be understood neither here nor in the former testimony of a relative Adoration such as some do ground in relation to Images as if this ancient Doctor did teach a real Adoration of the Symbols of the Sacrament but so as it terminated in Jesus Christ instead of terminating in the Symbols themselves And in fine there be learned men amongst the Latins which do so explain themselves But some others do think that this Explication doth require to be made more plain for say they if it be only meant that in communicating we should adore Jesus Christ prostrate and as it may be said become vile in his sight as we do with reverence take his Sacrament there is no Christian but will agree thereunto although it is not as they think the meaning of Theodoret but if they intend this relative Adoration should so terminate in Jesus Christ as that the Symbols should also have their part it is to establish the quite contrary of what is said by Theodoret who leaves only a Respect and Veneration to be given unto the Sacrament And what they say of Theodoret they say in like manner of all others which have spoken of the Adorable Mysteries of the Adorable Communion and also of adoring the heavenly Gifts for they think Contr. Hermog c. 22. that because one expression is used that therefore the same Interpretation must be given as when Tertullian said I adore the fulness of the Scriptures that is to say I reverence and admire it I have a veneration and respect for it And St. Basil of Seleucia 1 Orat. 30. in illad faciam vos piscat hom That Rome vailing her Diadem adored the preaching of the Cross 2 Tom. 3. Bibl. Pat. p.
in the main so also I thought fit to express my Gratitude unto the great Family of the Windhams in particular a Family known to be truly Noble and Great in the number of its flourishing Branches as well as in Riches Honour and approved Loyalty unto their King and Country the true happiness and lasting prosperity whereof shall ever be sincerely wished and desired by Honoured Sir Your most obedient humble Servant Jos Walker THE Author's Preface Translated from the FRENCH THE Controversies about Religion being a kind of War or if you will a sort of Law-Suit wherein both Parties plead their Cause with some heat it seems to me very difficult to write and not let fall some words that may favour the interest of that side for which we are concerned because the flesh corrupts the acts of the Understanding and the old Man never fails to vitiate the purity of the thoughts of the new I do not here speak of those angry Writers who in all their Works do shew an unlimited passion for the Cause which they defend and meditate nothing but disparaging their Adversaries to make their own Party triumph by the Calumnies which they cast upon the others I speak of mild and peaceable Spirits who write with moderation who nevertheless do it not alwaies so successfully but they let drop some things which all do not approve of because their ever remains frailty in man and the innocency of the second Adam hath not a compleat victory over the first What I say is particularly verified in examining the Tradition of the Church upon the Articles of our Faith for both the Roman Catholicks and the Protestants pretending that it is favourable to their Cause each alledge out of the holy Fathers to establish their Belief and Religion This consideration makes me think that the surest way and most edifying means for Christians would be plainly to produce what hath been from time to time received and believed in the Church upon the points in Controversie and Historically without dispute to represent the sentiments of our Ancestors upon all the Articles which are to be examined This is what I have indeavoured to do upon the matter of the Eucharist which is and will be alwaies if God prevent it not by his grace a stone of stumbling and a means which the Devil will never fail to use to keep up amongst Christians that unhappy strife wherewith they are so pleased but which ought to draw tears of blood from those good Souls that are sensibly touched for the glory of God and that without ceasing by their prayers desire that he will give unto all the grace to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace The better to succeed in my design and to represent the Sacrament at large I have divided my Work into three Parts In the first I examine the outward Form of Celebration I prove that Bread and Wine have alwaies been the matter of the Sacrament amongst Christians I hint at the mixture of Water with the Wine in the holy Cup and I endeavour to discover the Original as well as the Mysterie which the ancient Doctors of the Church since S. Cyprian have sought for in this mixture I mention sundry Sects of Hereticks whereof some have changed the matter of the Sacrament others have corrupted the Celebration and lastly others have quite rejected it not suffering that it should be celebrated at all I omit not what S. Ignatius said of certain Hereticks who condemned the celebration nor the Heresie of one called Tanchelin who also denied it but through another Principle I make some mention of the Slanders which the Jews and others cast upon Christians by reason of the Sacrament And I treat of the difference betwixt the Greek and Latin Churches about the using of levened and unlevened Bread Then I consider whence the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament was taken what was the fashion of the Bread with the innovations and changes which have thereupon hapned From thence I proceed to the consideration of the place of Consecration of the matter of the Chalices and Patins that is to say the Vessels which were used in this holy action this consideration is followed with an inquiry of the Language wherein Consecration was made and wherein all the Service was generally performed and from this Inquiry I proceed to the Examination of Ceremonies and of the Form of Consecration I mean the words of Consecration to know whether the antient Church did consecrate by Prayers Blessings and giving of Thanks or by these words This is my Body as is now the practice of the Latin Church Then I treat of the Oblation or the Form of the Sacrifice and I shew the Reasons and Motives which obliged the holy Fathers to give to the Eucharist the name of Oblation and Sacrifice I annex unto the consideration of the Oblation that of the Elevation and of the Fraction and I shew at what time the Latins began to lift up the Host to warn the people to adore it moreover I examine the Distribution and Communion and in the first place the Time the Place and the Posture of the Communicant the Persons who distributed those who communicated with the words of the one and the other and then of the Thing distributed treating at large the Question of the Communion under both kinds I also shew that for several Ages Communicants received the Eucharist with their hand that they were permitted to carry it unto their Houses and to carry it along with them in their Journeys and Travels and that the ancient Christians were so little scrupulous in this matter that sometimes they sent the Sacrament unto the Sick by Lay persons Men Women Acolytes and young Boys and not only so but they made Plaisters of it they buried it with the Dead In some Churches they burnt the remainder of the Sacrament and in others they caused it to be eaten by little Infants Sometimes they took consecrated Wine and mixed it with Ink then they dipt their Pen in these mixt Liquors the more to confirm the Acts they intended to sign In the Second Part I describe the History of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers upon this weighty Article beginning with the reflections they have made upon the words of Institution and upon the interpretation they have given of these words This is my Body and after these Reflections I represent a great number of Testimonies wherein they call the Eucharist Bread and Wine in the very act of communicating they affirm it is Bread which is broken that it is Corn Wheat the fruit of the Vine Fruits of the Earth and like terms They positively say That it is Bread and Wine Bread wherewith our Bodies are nourished the matter whereof passeth through the natural accidents of our common Food Bread which is consumed in the celebration of the Sacrament They affirm that the Bread and the Cup which we receive at the Lord's Table are things
that our Saviour having finished the solemnity of the antient Passover and intending to proceed unto the institution of the New I mean of the Eucharist to leave unto the Church an Illustrious Monument of his great Love and Charity he took Bread and having given thanks unto his Father over the Bread that is to say having blessed and consecrated it he brake it into morsels and gave it unto his Disciples saying Take eat also he took the Cup wherein was Wine and having blessed it as he had done the Bread he gave it unto them saying these words Drink ye all of it that in distributing the Bread he said unto them That it was his Body giveâ— or broken for them and giving them the Cup he said That iâ— waâ— his Blood or the New Testament in his Blood shed for many for the remission of Sins and that he would drink no more of that fruit of the Vine until he drank it new in the Kingdom of his Father commanding them expresly to celebrate this Divine Sacrament until his coming from Heaven to shew in the Celebration of it the remembrance of his Person and sufferings whereunto St. Paul doth add the preparations which Communicants ought to bring unto the Holy Table for fear lest this mystery which is intended unto the Salvation and consolation of Men should turn unto their judgment and condemnation if they partake thereof unworthily But because the actions of Jesus Christ do prescribe unto us if I may so speak the manner how we should celebrate this holy Mystery that his words instruct us what we ought to believe and that the preparations which St. Paul requires of us contain in effect all the motions of a faithful Soul that disposes it self to partake thereof motions which as I conceive are again contained either in whole or in part in the commemoration which our Saviour hath recommended to us we have thought fit to follow this Divine pattern and thereupon to erect the platform and Oeconomy of our work For besides that in so doing we shall imitate as much as possible may be the Example of our Saviour Jesus Christ which ought to be our Law and guide we shall also ease the memory of the Readers we shall facilitate the understanding of those things we have to say and we shall lead them safely by the way which in all likelihood is best and plainest unto the clear and distinct knowledge of the constant and universal tradition of the Christian Church upon this Article of our Faith To this purpose we will divide our Treatise into three Parts the first shall treat of the exteriour Worship of the Sacrament and generally of what concerns it and of what is founded as well on the actions of Jesus Christ celebrating as of the blessed Apostles communicating The second shall contain the Doctrine of the holy Fathers the true tradition of the Church which derives its Original and Authority of what our Saviour said unto his Disciples that the Bread which he gave them was his Body broken and the Cup his Blood shed and in that he commanded them to celebrate this Sacrament in remembrance of him and of his death And lastly the third shall examine the Worship I mean the dispositions which ought to precede the Communion the motions of the Soul of the Communicant whether it be in regard of God and of Jesus Christ or in regard of the Sacrament in a word all things which do relate unto it And in each of these three Parts we will observe with the help of our blessed Saviour all the exactness and sincerity that can be in shewing the Innovations and changes that have thereupon ensued THE LIFE OF Monsieur L'ARROQUE IT is with very great displeasure that I insert in my first Essay of this nature an Elogie which nevertheless will render it very acceptable I had much rather have wanted so good a Subject of Recommendation to my first undertaking than to have obtain'd it by suffering so great a loss But seeing Death will not be subject unto our desires let us acquit our selves according to the various conjunctures whether they be pleasing or not Monsieur L'ARROQVE departed this Life at Roven the 31 of January 1684 Aged 65 years born at Lairac a Town not far from Agen in Guien his Father and Mother dying almost at the same time left him very young under the Conduct of his Relations and which is the common Fate of Scholars without much Wealth but his great love for Learning comforted him in the midst of all his Troubles Having made some progress therein under several Masters he advanced the same considerably in the Academy of Montauban and having applyed himself unto the study of Divinity under Messieurs Charles and Garrisoles eminent Professors who also had at the same time the famous Monsieur Claud to be their Pupil in a short time he there made so great a progress in his studies that he was judged worthy of the Ministry He was accordingly admitted betimes and by the Synod of Guyen sent unto a little Church called Poujols He had scarce been there one year but the Gentlemen of the Church of Rome opposed his Ministry which obliged him to make a Journey to Paris He there became accquainted with Messieurs Le Faucheur and Mestrezat who from that very time prophesi'd very advantagiously of him He preached at Charanton with great Success and was so well approved by the late lady Dutchess of Tremouile that she desired he might be setl'd at the Church of Vitry in Britany where she commonly made her residence For several reasons he consented unto the demands of this Princess and went to Vitry where he liv'd 26 years so confin'd unto his Closet that he therein spent 14 or 15 hours each day The world soon became sensible of his great industry by a Treatise which Monsieur L'ARROQVE published against a Minister who having chang'd his Religion caused to be Printed the motives which induced him thereunto By this Answer it was seen the Author had already attained great knowledge in Antiquity joyned with a very solid and clear way of reasoning which was ever the character of the late Monsieur L'ARROQVES Genius Some years after scil in the year 1665 he made a very learned Answer unto the Book of the Office of the holy Sacrament written by the Gentlmen of Port Royal wherein he shewed unto those Illustrious Friars that they had alledged and translated the passages of Antient Fathers either very negligently or very falsly His History of the EVCHARIST which may well be term'd his Master-piece appeared four years after and did fully manifest the merits of this Excellent Person Having compos'd so many Learn'd Volums the Protestants of Paris looked upon him as a Subject very worthy of their choice and resolved to establish him in the midst of them this honest design had been accomplish'd had not his credit and adhering unto the Interests of two Illustrious Persons whose names are
rejected it but upon another Principle the reproaches of Jews and other Enemies and the difference betwixt the Greek and Latin Churches about Bread leaven'd or unleaven'd SAint Ignatius was a Disciple of the Apostles and particularly of St. John Bishop and Pastor of the Church of Antioch and moreover a glorious Martyr of Jesus Christ for he suffer'd Martyrdom at Rome the first of February Anno 107. or 109. in the Eleventh Year of the Emperor Trajan and if the Epistles which go in his name were truely his it were not to be questioned but that towards the end of the first age of Christianity or at farthest the beginning of the second there were Hereticks which rejected the use of the Sacrament When I mention his Epistles I speak not generally of all those which go in his name but only of the seven most antient seeing 't is above 1300 years since Eusebius saw them and after Eusebius they were cited by some of the Fathers of the Church because it is of these seven that the moderate persons both Roman Catholiks and Protestants seem to make greatest difficulty I mean the Protestants that admit them as legitimate for I find several that question them all and that cannot perswade themselves that they were the genuine Issue of that Illustrious Martyr as Messieurs de Saumaise Blondel Aubertin Daillé this latter having also examined in a particular Treatise all the marks of forgery that he could discover in these Epistles I freely confess my self to be in this Error if it be an Error and that of a long time I have therein observed several things which suffered me not to believe that S. Ignatius had writ them but as this is not the place to shew it and that besides it hath been performed by others it shall suffice to consider what he hath said of these Hereticks Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn They abstain saith he from the Eucharist and from Prayer because they believe not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins and which the Father raised up by his goodness It is a long time since Theodoret cited this passage but instead of these words they abstained from the Eucharist and Prayer he used these they admitted not Sacraments nor Oblations I think the word Oblations is more significant than that of Prayer for there 's nothing more frivolous than to represent unto us those Hereticks as abstaining from Prayer because they owned not the Eucharist to be the flesh of Jesus Christ and I see no connexion betwixt these two things nor that they have any dependance the one upon the other unless some will say that they did not mean generally all manner of Prayer but only that whereby the Symbols of the Sacrament were consecrated and which many think was the Lords Prayer which they suppose the Apostles used for the consecrating this Mystery and therefore it is probable that the Fathers called it the Mystical Prayer and that it was not permitted unto the Catechumeni to repeat it because not having yet received holy Baptism they could not as they supposed call God Father nor participate of the Sacrament whereunto they were admitted immediately after Baptism but in fine these very words make me suspect the truth of the Epistle it might be and I 'll not deny but that towards the end of the third Century there might be Hereticks which did so and that he who forged the Epistle of S. Ignatius living at that time and opposing these Enemies of Christianity hath expresly observed it not considering as it often happens to that sort of men that it was not so in the time of this glorious Martyr under whose name he would cover himself I farther confess that if those Hereticks which I suppose to be the Docetes and Putatives that is those which denyed the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and which only allow'd him an imaginary Body a fantome and shadow of a Body I say I grant that had they acted according to their Hypothesis they would not have allowed of the Eucharist seeing they could not allow it without ruining their abominable Doctrine by an infallible consequence But this is not the place to consider what they ought to have done but what they did now it is most certain that in the time of the true S. Ignatius none of these Hereticks denyed the Eucharist for none of the Antients have observed it which they would not have omitted to do as well those which have treated of Heresies as those which have written particularly against the Hereticks whereof we now treat The first which refused to celebrate the Sacrament were as we have been informed by the Holy Fathers the Ascodrupites which were a Limb of the Impostor Mark and Mark an unhappy Branch of Valentine which Valentine began not to appear till thirty years after the death of S. Ignatius and as for those concerned in the Epistle which we examine how could they abstain from the Eucharist in the time of our glorious Martyr seeing they abstained not from it a hundred years after Tertul. advers Marc. l. 1. c. 14. For Tertullian doth formally tellus that Marcion which was one of the chief of these Hereticks persisted in the use of the Sacrament seeing he declares that the God of Marcion shews his Body by the Bread otherwise the Orthodox could not have drawn from the Sacrament any advantage against them for the truth of his Body and for the incarnation of Jesus Christ for when one disputes with another they must dispute upon common principles and which are acknowled on both sides I should think then and to end the consideration of this matter that these Hereticks which opposed not so much the Sacrament of the Eucharist Lib. 1. de Euchar. c. 1. §. ne auth as the mystery of the incarnation of Christ as Cardinal Bellarmin hath well observed taking notice of the neglect of their Predecessors and seeing they admitted the use of the Sacrament they gave the Catholicks strong Arms to contradict them they abstained from celebrating it as the Ascodrupites had done a long while before them although upon another account but besides these two sorts of Hereticks both which the one after the other rejected the celebrating of the Sacrament of the Eucharist although upon different principles we shall see in the XII Century a new Heretick that towards Flanders and especially in Brabant where he spread abroad his Heresie and the poyson of his pernitious Doctrine it was one called Tanchelin who having a design to ruin the Sacrament of the Eucharist and to forbid the use of it unto all those which he could seduce did so well by his cunning and by the help of the evil Spirit under whom he had enrolled himself that he perswaded the people of Antwerp a great and populous City that the participation of the Eucharist was not necessary unto Salvation wherefore they continued several years without communicating as the
to observe every one may easily judge by what hath been hitherto said that what was offered for the celebration of the Sacrament was Bread and Wine but it may be all the world do not know that they were not the only things which were offered at first for the charitable Oblations of Believers being appointed not only for the Celebration of the Sacrament but also for the support of the Ministers and Pastours for relief of the Poor and generally for the necessity of the Church it cannot be questioned as I suppose that besides the Bread and Wine of which was taken what was convenient for the Sacrament there were also other things offered and if we should make any question of it the directions which we shall alledge will soon remove this doubt and scruple In fine the Pastours of Christian Churches having in time thought convenient to set apart the Oblation of Bread and Wine for the Celebration of the Eucharist from all the other Oblations made by Believers they absolutely prohibited that any thing else should be offered for the celebration of the Sacrament but Bread and Wine in pursuance whereof the third Canon attributed to the Apostles doth reprove and censure those who offered Honey Can. 3. Apost can 4. Milk Birds Beasts or Roots upon the Altar and in the fourth it allows of offering Oyl for the lights and incense for the times of Oblation But to prove what hath been said by a better authority recourse must be had unto more Authentick Monuments and to such as bear not the marks of Forgery as these Canons do The first of these Monuments which presents it self unto our sight is the third Council of Carthage assembled Anno 397. for in one of its Canons which is the 37. of the Code of the Church of Africa it makes this Decree That in the Sacraments Concil Carthag 3. can 24. or as Martin de Braga reads it in his Collection that in the Sanctuary nothing else be offered but the body and blood of our Lord as our Saviour hath taught that is to say Bread and Wine mingled with Water and to distinguish this Oblation which related unto the Eucharist from the others offered by the faithful people the Council adds As for the first-fruits whether it be Honey or Milk let them be offered after the usual manner upon some solemn day for the mystery of Infants and if these things especially the Milk be offered at the Altar yet let them receive their particular blessing to distinguish them from the consecration of the Body and Blood of our Lord and as to first-fruits that nothing be offered but Grapes and Wheat Martin Bishop of Braga in his Collection of Canons hath expressed in these words that of the Council of Carthage There ought nothing to be offered in the Sanctuary Collect can c. 55. but the Bread and Wine which are blessed in Type or in Figure of Jesus Christ And the fourth Council of Orleans Anno 541. makes this decree That none presume to offer in the Oblation of the holy Cup ought else but the fruit of the Vine mingled with Water Concil Aurel. 4 c 4. it is what is repeated in the VIII Canon of the Synod of Auxerre Anno. 578. The third Council of Braga in Gallicia assembled the year 675. going about to reform some Abuses crept into Spain touching this Oblation made this Decree which Gratian and others ignorantly alledge as a fragment of a Letter of Pope Julius unto the Egyptians Concil 3. Bracar c. 1. al. 2. We have been informed that certain Persons puffed up with a Schismatical ambition do offer Milk instead of Wine at the Holy Offertory contrary to the command of God and contrary to the institution of the Apostles and that there be others which do not offer at the Sacrament of the Cup of our Lord the Wine pressed out but they communicate the people with Grapes which have been offered and having alledged against this abuse the Authority and Example of Jesus Christ these Fathers add That they should therefore forbear offering Milk at the Sacrifice because the manifest and evident Example of the Evangelical truth hath appeared the which permits only that Bread and Wine should be offered This was also the method of the VI. Oecumenical Council when it transcribes in the 32. Canon that which hath been above alledged of the Synod of Carthage and in transcribing they appropriate it unto themselves and make it their own But if any ask the reason of this proceeding of the Fathers I mean wherefore they thought fit to distinguish the Oblation of the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist from all other things which in all likelihood were promiscuously offered at the same time with these things because these kinds of charitable Oblations had not for their scope the celebration of the Sacrament only I answer that by reason of the silence of Antient Writers it is very difficult to answer distinctly this question yet I will nevertheless thereupon offer my conjectures I say then in the first place I suppose the Fathers have thus done in honour and respect unto the Sacrament imagining that it was very just and reasonable that this Bread and Wine which by consecration were to be made the efficacious and Divine Symbols of the Body and blood of Jesus Christ should not be offered conjunctly with other things which indeed were to be applyed unto pious uses but less noble and considerable and methinks the Fathers of the Council of Carthage give us sufficient ground to conclude so from their Decree Secondly I think that having made this distinction they provided some other way for the maintenance of Church-men and for the relief of the Poor and so there being nothing else wanting but for the Sacrament the holy Fathers judged fit to limit the Oblations only to the species of Bread and Wine the two only things necessary for the celebration of the Divine Mystery Whereunto possibly it might be added that by this wise conduct they would prevent a growing superstition the multitude being but too much inclined to abuse the most innocent ceremonies being always sensual and carnal they might imagin that the Oblations made at the Altar being called First-fruits were of the same kind with the first-fruits of the Law whereof the Oblation sanctified the whole Lump so that the Fruits of the Earth might not be lawfully used until the first-fruits had been first offered unto God upon the holy Table as if without this Sanctification the use had been unlawful I cannot see but it may be so inferr'd from the words of Theodoret who speaking of the Oblation which the Church makes of the Symbols of the Body and Blood of the Lord saith That it sanctifieth the whole Lump by the first-fruits Theod. in Psalm 109. And what renders this conjecture the more probable is what S. Austin observed Aug. de Civit. Del l. 8. c. ult That many amongst the Christians
the Armenian Tongue by Chrysostom at the beginning of the fifth Century as many do believe and we do find Theodoret to affirm that in his time the Armenians had a Translation of the Holy Scriptures in their Language now Theodoret flourished about 40 years after the death of the great Chrysostom Into that of the Dalmatians by S. Jerom who dyed in the year of our Lord 420. In the Arabick Tongue Anno. 717. by John Archbishop of Sevil in Spain In Saxon by King Alfred who reigned in England in the VIII Century as is affirmed by those who have transferr'd unto us Bede's Ecclesiastical History in Anglo-Saxon and in Latin in the Preface to the Reader and Bede himself translated the Gospel of S. John into the vulgar Tongue as is to be seen in his life partly written by himself and partly by one of his Disciples Into the Slavonian Tongue by Methodius in the IX Century And I do not think that ever any body amongst the Christians ever thought of condemning this wise conduct of the Church until the year 1228 that a certain Council of Tholouse Tom. 2. Spicil c. 4. p. â— 24. assembled against the Albigenses and Waldenses made this Decree We also forbid to give unto the Lay-people permission to have the Books of the Old and of the New Testament except that probably some for devotion sake desire to have the Psalter or the Breviary for the Divine Service or the blessed Virgins Prayer-Book neither are they to have these Books in the Vulgar Tongue But this Decree did not hinder but that James de Voragine Translated the Bible into Italian about the year 1290. Nicholas Orem into French under Charles the fifth called the wise Son of King John and Father of Charles the sixth and at the beginning of the XV. Century an anonymous Author made an Apology in England for the Translation of the Holy Scriptures into the Language of the Country Dâ— Christian Eccl. succes p. 81. as is related by Vsher Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of Ireland At this time saith that Author our Bishops burn the Law of God because it hath been translated into our Mother Tongue But in fine the Council of Trent Session the fourth Anno. 1546. doth sufficiently give to understand that they tacitly condemn all the Translations of the Holy Scriptures in the Vulgar Languages allowing only the Latin Translation It is true say the Protestants that whilst the use of the Latin Tongue subsisted in the West and that that Language was common and frequent unto the Nations of the Western Empire there were a great many Latin Translations of the Bible but when the use of that Language ceased it was necessary to translate it into other Languages for the edification of the people and Nations which there inhabited as it had been translated elsewhere into Greek and Syriack and generally into all Languages used by all the Nations in the World Now it is very difficult say they to imagine that care could be taken to make all these Versions in the Vulgar Tongues if at the same time the people had been obliged to serve God in an unknown Tongue Besides may a man say I would desire to know wherefore the Holy Fathers have so frequently and carefully recommended the reading of the Scriptures unto the people if it had not been translated into their Language It is credible yea certain that the exhortations which are to be found in the works of S. Jerom and S. Chrysostom only for injoining the reading of them would make a just Volume and what need so many exhortations to read it but only that by so doing People might learn to serve God after a right manner But we must make a stricter inquiry into the Celebration of the Eucharist and the whole Divine Service to know more particularly if it were performed as hath been said in a Language understood by the People All men will agree if I mistake not that Prayers Invocation and giving praises unto God are the essential parts of the Worship and Service of God now Origen in his excellent work against Celsus doth formally declare that every Nation did praise and pray unto God in their own Language Lib. 8. ult Edit p. 402. The Christians saith he answering unto an objection of Celsus even in their Prayers do not make use of the names attributed unto God in the Holy Scriptures but the Greeks make use of Greek words the Romans of Roman words each one praying unto God in their own Language and celebrate his praise as they are able and the glory of all Languages doth hearken unto those which pray unto him in what Language soever it be as easily understanding those which pray so differently unto him as if it were as may be said all one voice For the Great God is not like those which have but one Language committed unto them whether Greek or Barbarian and are ignorant of all others and care not for those which speak in other Languages Thence also is it that S. Gaudentius Bishop of Bress exhorts his Neophytes Tract 4. t. 2. Bibl. Pat. p. 20. Regul brevior q. â—78 t. 2. to attend diligently with him unto Prayer S. Basil making this demand to himself How the Spirit of any one should pray and that his understanding should receive no fruit he thus answers That is said of those which made Prayers in an unknown Tongue with regard to those which heard them for the Apostle saith if I pray in an unknown Tongue I pray in the Spirit or by the Spirit but my understanding profiteth not for when the words of Prayer are not known by those which are present then the understanding of him which prayeth is without fruit no body being the better for it but when those which are present understand a prayer which may be profitable for the hearers then he who prayeth hath the benefit of the progress of those which profit by the prayer it is the same at all times when the word of God is proposed for it is written that it might be profitable to the edifying of Faith De Catechis rudib c. 9. t. 4. S. Austin Care must be taken to warn those which come from Schools that being cloathed with Christian humility they should learn not to despise those which endeavour rather to shun evil actions than words c. by so doing they will not jeer if by chance they perceive that some Bishops or Ministers of the Church use some Barbarisms or Soloecisms in praying to God or that they be not aware or understand not the words they pronounce and that they deliver confusedly not but that these things should be amended to the end the people might say Amen unto what they plainly understand But because it may be tolerated in those which have learned that blessings are given by Prayers in the Church as one doth bless in the publick place with the sound of the voice De divin offic l.
1. c. 10. Isidore of Sevil The reading of the word of God is of no small profit unto those which hearken unto it therefore when one sings all must sing and when one prays all must pray when one reads let all hearken It is the same thing in keeping silence for although some one supply at reading let him be cuntent to worship God and having made the sign of the Cross let him hearken attentively there is a time to pray when all do pray to pray in private there is also a time do not lose the reading under pretext of prayer because one cannot always have the opportunity of reading whereas one may pray when they will therefore the Deacon with a loud voice commands silence to the end that whether we sing or read unity may be kept by all and that what is preached unto all may equally be heard by all Lib. 3. c. 9. Amalarius treating of Divine offices The prayer of the Priest is called by the one and the other name that is by the name of Blessing and by the name of Prayer the Apostle saith of blessing if thou bless in the spirit how shall the ignorant know to say Amen seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest S. Ambrose calls this Benediction a prayer saying for the ignorant hearing what he understandeth not knoweth not the scope of the prayer and saith not Amen that is so be it to the end the benediction should be confirmed for the confirmation of the prayer is compleated by those which say Amen Cassander in his Liturgies cites these words out of an antient Manuscript of the Roman order Cap. 36. of the Ordination of Readers The benediction of Readers O Lord Holy Father O eternal omnipotent God be pleased to bless these thy servants N.N. to perform the office of Readers to the end that being diligent in reading they may be fit to declare the word of Life and to instruct the people in things to be understood by the distinction of the Spirit and of the Voice And the Roman Pontifical Imprinted at Venice Anno 1582. speaking of the Ordination of Readers Pontif. Rom. p. 8. The Reader must read what he doth preach and that he sing the Lessons c. Study therefore to pronounce distinctly and clearly without Lying or any fraud the Words of God that is to say the holy Lessons for the Instruction and Edification of Believers to the end that the verity of Divine Lessons may not be corrupted through your negligence to the prejudice of those who hear and believe with the heart what you read with the mouth to the end you may teach your Hearers both by your word and example Now let us come to the Celebration of the Eucharist to see also if it was not done in a Language understood by the Communicants In the first place all the antient Liturgies are full of the Answers of the people who could not have answered if they had not understood what the Priest said in officiating and in celebrating and the thing is so evident that there is no need to produce many Proofs of it there 's no need but to look into the Liturgies which we have to see if the people do not therein often speak for instance St. Cyprian informs us and all the Liturgies after him That the people were prepared unto the Communion by this warning Lift up your hearts and the people answered We lift them up unto thee O Lord. From thence it was that Gregory of Nazianzen said of Nonna his Mother in his 13th Oration That her voice was never heard in the holy Assemblies excepting at the necessary and mystical words Secondly Tertullian Cornelius Bishop of Rome St. Cyrill of Jerusalem and several others do teach That the Communicants answered Amen in receiving the Sacrament therefore of necessity it must needs be that they spake to them in a Language which was understood by them In the third place it was antiently the custom amongst Christians that when the Pastor had made an end of the Prayer wherewith he consecrated the Eucharist all the people joyning their Vows were wont to say with a loud voice Amen that is to say So be it So be it done an evident sign that the Prayer of him who consecrated was understood by them This is what may be seen in Justin Martyr's second Apology whose Testimony shall suffice in so evident a matter to add another which not only justifies the Language to be understood of the people in the Celebration of the Eucharist but also in the Administration of Baptism It is of Denys of Alexandria in a Letter which he wrote unto Sixtus Bishop of Rome wherein he speaks of one of the Brethren who was present with others at the Assemblies of the Church and who was supposed of a long time to have been a Believer that is to say to have been Baptized Apud Euseb hist Eccles l. 7. c. 9. he saith then of him That he had assisted at the Baptism of those which had of late been Baptised and that he had heard their Questions and their Answers afterwards speaking of the Eucharist He had saith he often heard the Prayers and answered Amen with the rest And I am apt to believe that St. Paul alluded unto this custom when he saith in the fourteenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians In Cap. 14.1 ad Coriâ—â—h If you bless with the Spirit how shall the Ignorant say Amen unto your Prayers for he knoweth not what you say And I find that the Deacon Hilary in St. Ambrose his Works doth judge that the Apostle doth there hint at some amongst the Jews who to make themselves the more considerable sometimes used the Syriack Tongue and oftener the Hebrew in Sermons and at the Oblations in presence of the Greeks Venerable Bede observes in his Ecclesiastical History That the unity of the Faith was kept in England in five Languages by five several Nations the English Britans Scotch that is Irish the Picts and the Latins And what he saith of the unity of the Faith ought if I mistake not to be understood also of the unity of Worship in essential things for as each of those Nations retained the unity of the Faith in their own Language which was very different from each other so they had the service and Worship in their own Language The Reader may take notice if he please That Bede departed this Life about the middle of the Eighth Century and if from the Eighth we pass to the Ninth Century we shall find the Sclavonians celebrating Divine Service in their Mother-Tongue which was allowed them by the Pope at the request of one Cyrill who had been instrumental in their Conversion Aeneas Sylvius afterwards Pope under the name of Pius the second thus relates it in his History of Bohemia Hist Bohem. c. 13. It is said that Cyrill being at Rome desired the Pope that he might be suffered to say Divine Service
't is very uncertain whose the Sermon is the words whereof we intend to cite They are consecrated by the invocation of Almighty God De Pasch Hom. 5. Lib. 9. p. 405. and in the same Sermon he attributes it unto sanctification The Sanctification saith he being pronounced he saith Take and drink Facundus of Hermiane The Lord called his Body and Blood the Bread which he had blessed and the Cup which he gave unto his Disciples Gregory the first Bishop of Rome Epist l. 7. What we say of the Lords Prayer presently after invocation it is because the Apostles were wont to consecrate the host of the Oblation Epist 63. by that Prayer only Which some have observed after him that have written of Ecclesiastical Offices as Amalarius Lib. 4. Cap. 26. Walafridus Strabo cap. 20 and Berno cap. 1. Isidore of Sevill De Eccles offic l. 1. c. 15. St. Peter first of all instituted the order of Prayers by the which are consecrated the Sacrifices offered unto God And elsewhere it is called a Sacrifice as a holy action because it is consecrated by mystical Prayer in remembrance of the passion which our Lord suffered for us The Books of Charlemain touching Images The Sacrament of the Body and blood of our Lord c. is consecrated by the Priest by the invocation of the name of God De Instit Cler. l. 1. c. 32. Rabanus Maurus The Lord first of all consecrated by Prayers and Thanksgiving the Sacraments of his Body and Blood and gave them unto his Disciples which his Apostles imitating practised afterwards and taught their Successors to do so likewise which the whole Church doth now practise all the World over Ibid. c. 33. And again As the Body of Jesus Christ was embalmed with sweet Spices was duely put into a new Sepulchre so in like manner in his Church his mystical Body being prepared with the perfumes of Holy Prayer it is administred in sacred Vessels by the Ministry of Priests Serm. 11 t. 4. Bibl. Patr. part 2. to the end Believers might receive it Egberâ— against the Cathari in the XII Century seems also to refer the Consecration unto the Benediction although his Doctrine is quite different from that of Rabanus Had we no other testimonies but these above-mentioned and which are frequently alledged they were doubtless sufficient to prove that in the Primitive Church the Consecration of the Symbols of the Eucharist was performed by Prayers and giving of Thanks but because the thing is of great importance the Reader will not be displeased if I joyn the following testimonies unto the former To begin with St. Fulgentius who in the Fragments of his Books against Fabian saith Ex libro 8. p. 202. You have imagined touching the Prayer by the which at the time of Sacrifice the Descent of the Holy Ghost is implored that it would seem to imply that he is locally present and a little after The Holy Spirit doth sanctifie the Sacrifice and Baptism by his Divine Vertue Macarius Bishop of Antioch in the eighth Act of the VI. general Council We saith he Tom. 5. Concil p. 99. E. draw near unto the mystical Blessings and are sanctified being made partakers of the holy Body and of the precious blood of Jesus Christ the Saviour of all The XVI Council of Toledo assembled Anno. 693. saith Can. 6. t. 5. Concil p. 430. C. That the Apostle taught us to take a whole loaf and to put it upon the Table or Altar to be blessed And again Our assembly hath appointed by a general consent that there should be presented at the Lords Table an intire and good loaf to be consecrated by the Ministerial benediction A Council of Constantinople composed of 338. Bishops assembled Anno. 754. said That the Lord would that the Bread of the Eucharist Act 6. Concil 2. Niceni t. 5. Concil p. 756. as a true figure or image of his natural Body being sanctified by the coming of the Holy Ghost did become his Divine Body and would you know how The Priest which makes the Oblation say the Fathers interposing to make it Holy whereas it was common to wit by his Prayers whereby he begs of God the presence of the Holy Ghost George Pachimer In Epist 9. t. 1. p. 290. Paraphraser of the pretended Denys the Areopagite declares That the mysteries are consecrated upon the Holy Table by Blessing the Bread and the Holy Cup. In the antient Formularies of an uncertain Author published by the late Monsieur Bignon C. 8. p. 121. ult edit the Author whereof lived in the days of Louis the Debonnair we find that this Prince to honour the Church ordered that all those should be set free and at liberty that were admitted into holy Orders and saith he who consecrate by the intervention of their Prayers De ordine baptism tit 18. the Body and Blood of our Lord. Theodulph Bishop of Orleans by the invisible Consecration of the Holy Ghost Pope Nicolas the first writing unto the Emperor of Constantinople Tom. 6. Concil p. 489. attributes the Consecration unto the benediction and Sanctification of the Holy Ghost Which words are found cited in the IV. Act of the Council assembled against Photius Ibid. p 738. which the Latins call the VIII Oecumenical Council The Council of Cressy assembled Anno. 858. saith Tom. 3. Conc. Gall. p. 129. That Consecratton is made by Prayer and by the sign of the Cross Charles the Bald King of France and Emperour of the West writing unto Pope Adrian the second complaining of some sharp and bitter words which this Pope used against him writes unto him amongst other things We cannot think that such words can proceed out of your mouth Supplem Conc. Gal. p. 265. as make the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ by devout and holy Prayer Hugh Maynard a Benedictine Frier alledges in his notes upon the Books of the Sacraments of Gregory the first two Manuscripts of the Library of Corby viz an old explication of the Canon of the Mass and an ancient Treatise of the Mass in both which the Consecration is attributed unto Prayers In the former of these Manuscripts are found these words by Maynard's relation The Sacrifices are those which are consecrated with Prayers P. 12. P. 13. and in the other Sacrifices that is things made holy because they are consecrated by mistical Prayer Which words as is observed by this learned Frier were upon a matter taken out of S. Isidore lib. 6. Orig. c. 19. Ratherius Bishop of Verona in Italy in the tenth Century in his Treatise of the contempt of Canons Tom. 2. Spicil p. 183. first Part. The Oblation saith he which is to be presented and distributed unto the People is consecrated chiefly by the Prayer wherein we say unto God Our Father which art in Heaven Which in all likelihood he borrowed from Gregory the first In fine the whole Greek Church
Greeks unto the Pope to see after what manner he was to sign it and that he commanded them to hear the discourse which the Bishop of Nice would make and that he no sooner began to speak but Cardinal Julian bid the Protonotary write and as this Bishop spake by order of the Emperor and drew near the end of his discourse he bid him speak touching the mystical Sacrifice saying Id. ibid. c. 8. p. 293. What the Roman Church believeth touching the Consecration of Divine Gifts or Oblations we believe also viz. That the Divine words of our Saviour Take eat This is my Body drink ye all of this This is my Blood are those which sanctifie and consecrate them herein we agree with you yet we say also that the Priest doth contribute thereunto as the Husband-man by his Labour contributes unto the production of the Fruits of the Earth but we refer the whole unto these words of our Saviour and are therein of the same opinion with you Let us now hear what the Historian saith unto this discourse of the Bishop of Nice who spoke so well that he obtained a Cardinals Cap and was afterwards sufficiently known by the name of Cardinal Bessarion Ibid. p. 293 294. It was saith the Historian the design and scope of the Cardinal of Nice to deliver himself in the Eloquence of a great Orator as if he had spoke in the name of all although we knew nothing of it and that we had not given our consent unto what he had spoke for it was all made up of Artifice and cunning and the Latins demanded this speech might be inserted in the Decree of the union which the Emperor refused absolutely to yield unto he feared that being returned unto Constantinople he should give occasion unto those that had a mind to talk that he had overthrown the Divine Liturgy which the great St. Basil and the Divine Chrysostom had left having received it of James the Brother of the Lord. But the Latins being earnest and desiring to have our consent in writing touching this Article the Emperor so ordered the matter that the Bishop of Nice should repeat these matters before the Pope some of our men being also present as if they had been come from the whole Assembly of the Greeks which being written by the Latins were published in all their Provinces which was done by force and surprise and contrary unto our knowledge see here with what sincerity what advice liberty and concord things were carried It was then after this manner things passed at Florence upon the Article of the manner of consecrating of the Eucharist which makes good what we have said That the Greek Church hath retained unto this day the custom of consecrating by Prayers and Supplications Let us now to reassume our discourse say That if some of the antient Doctors of the Church made the Consecration of the Symboles depend on the pronouncing of these words This is my Body it is of the number of those which have declared in favour of the Consecration by Prayer as for Instance St. Chrysostome and some others with him and in this case that they should not jar amongst themselves it may be said they have not attributed the Consecration unto these words This is my Body but as unto words declaring what was before befaln unto the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist for it is often said that a thing is done when it is declared that it hath been done or it may also be said That they considered these words as containing a promise of God whereby he tacitly accompanies with his Blessing and his Grace the Prayers which are addressed unto him for the Consecration of the Sacrament But if the Fathers who attributed the Consecration unto these words This is my Body are not of the number of those who have already declared in favour of a Consecration by the vertue of Prayer of necessity their thoughts must be interpreted after the manner as hath been said or freely confess that they have digressed from the common Road and that so their testimonies are not to be received nor allowed against so constant and so universal a tradition For in these rencounters we ought to follow the advice given unto us by Vincentius Lerinensis Common If sometimes the different opinion of one or a few more that are deceived rise up and thwart the received opinion of all or of a greater number of Catholicks the rashness of one or of a few ought to be opposed in the first place by the general Decrees of an universal Council if there be any in the second place if there be none That the Opinion of several great Doctors be followed who agree together For as he saith a little after Ibid. Whatsoever a private person believes more than others or against others were he Doctor Bishop Confessor Martyr let them be accounted as low opinions proper to himself hidden and private and let it not be owned to have the authority of an opinion commonly publickly and generally received Arcudius a Greek Latinized doth not differ much from the thoughts of Vincentius when speaking of the manner and form of Consecration L. 3. de concoâ—d c. 31. he saith It seems indeed there is some discord amongst the holy Fathers but those which seem obscure must be explained by those which are clear joyn the lesser number unto the greater and follow the judgment of the most considerable the most learned and of those which are much of the greatest number which words Goar finds much to his liking In Euchol p. 140. saying That Arcudius gave an advice which indeed was short but very discreet and convenient But that nothing might be wanting unto this Observation and that we may the better understand the nature of this Consecration and the great consequence of it let us compare the Consecration of Pagans unto that of Christians for many times these sorts of Comparisons do tend very much to the clearing of matters in question The Pagans called Consecration a certain Formulary whereby their Priests caused the Divinity which they adored to be present in his Image and this Formulary was nothing but certain precise and formal words whereby they thought to operate this presence in the Images which were made for that purpose Wherefore Tertullian told them in his Apology These Images are of the same matter with our Pans and Kettles Apol. c. 12. Minut. in Oct. but they change their fate by Consecration And Minutius Felix See it is melted forged wrought and is not yet a God see it is polished built erected and is no God see here it is beautified consecrated invoked and then 't is God when Men would have it so and do dedicate it Origen in his Books against Celsus upon these words of the 95th Psalm and according to the Hebrew the 96th L. 7. p. 378 ult Edit All the Gods of the Nations are but Devils That appears saith
unto the blessing communication 1 Peter 2. and praises of God St. Peter considers good works as spiritual sacrifices agreeable unto God through Jesus Christ Rom. 12. Rom. 15. Philip. 2. and St. Paul the sanctification of a faithful Christian as a sacrifice of his Body The preaching of the Doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ as the sacrifice of the Gospel to offer the Gentiles And elsewhere he fears not to say that our Faith is a Sacrifice 2 Timoth. 4. And the blood which he was to shed for his blessed Master a sprinkling which was to be made upon this Sacrifice Therefore 't is that St. Peter and S. 1 Peter 2. Rev. 1. 5. John call all Believers in general Sacrificers according to what had been prophesied under the Old Testament The Holy Fathers being accustomed unto the stile of the Scriptures have also termed Sacrifices all the works of Piety Devotion Charity Alms-deeds Prayer giving Thanks and in a word all things which any way related unto the Worship and Service of Religion so far as St. Cyprian saith to sacrifice a Child Cypr. Ep. 59. in making it to communicate after Baptism And in another place He gives the name of Sacrifice unto a Present that was sent unto him in his banishment because it proceeded from a motive of Charity and that it was a kind of contributing towards his maintenance so Justin Martyr saith Just Mart. contr Tryph. p. 345. Strom. l. 7. p. 717. That Prayers and Thanksgivings are the only perfect and agreeable sacrifices well-pleasing unto God Clement of Alexandria speaketh of Prayer as of a very good and holy Sacrifice and saith That the Sacrifice of the Church is the words which proceed from devout Souls as by exaltation And Tertullian doth not he assure Ad Scap. c. 2. That the Christians sacrifice unto God for the safety of the Emperor by pure prayer only and that prayer-made by chast flesh of an innocent Soul and of a holy mind is the fattest and most excellent Sacrifice that God hath required Doth not he also explain the pure Oblation of Malachy Apol. c. 30. of Glorification of Benediction Praise Hymns Contr. Marc. l. 3. c. 22. 4. c. 1. De pat c. 13. de jejun c. 26. de usur c. 8. Minut. in Oct. and of Prayer proceeding from a pure heart and in fine doth he not reckon amongst the propitiatory Sacrifices and Oblations Mortifications Humiliations Contritions Fastings and strictness of life Minutius Felix makes the Sacrifices of the Christian Church to consist in good works and in the works of sanctification and holiness in an upright heart in a pure conscience and in faith unfeigned It is whereof Origen gives us several instances in one of his Homilies upon Levitious and I do not see what other interpretation can be given unto what is said by the Divine of the antient Church Greg. Naz. orat 20. I mean Gregory of Naziunzen when he saith That S. Basil is in Heaven offering Sacrifices and Praying explaining the Sacrifices to be Prayers which the Saints offer unto God in Heaven and that he saith of himself Id. orat 42. That he sacrificeth his discourse of Easter and that when he is in Heaven he will there sacrifice unto God upon his Altar Chrysost in Gen. hom 9. Sacrifices well pleasing in his sight It was also the Language of Chrysostom who looks upon Prayer as a very great Sacrifice and a perfect Oblation Id. in Mart. hom 16. And in one of his Homilies upon St. Matthew he saith that those who are not yet initiated do offer an Oblation and Sacrifice which is prayer and Alms-deeds And St. Ambrose Ambros de fug saec c. 8. t. 1. That wisdom is a very good Sacrifice and Faith and Vertue a good Oblation that Prayer it self is a Sacrifice Id. Ep. 59. Aurel. c. 29. c. 3. collect Mart. Bracar Conc. Carth. 3. c. 29. in cod 41. Aug. de civit l. 10. c. 4. Ep. 95. Id. Hom. 50. de poenit t. 10. Also we find in some Canons of Councils that the Prayers and Service of Morning and Evening are called Morning and Evening Sacrifices and that 't is commanded That if a dead Person is to be recommended in the afternoon it is to be by Prayers only if it be found that those who do it have dined According to which St. Austin speaks of Sacrificing unto God a Sacrifice of Praise and Humility and saith That we offer unto him Bloody Sacrifices when we suffer unto Blood for his Truth And in one of his Letters he opposeth the Sacrifice of Prayer offered by Christians unto the Sacrifices of the Law which were offered for the sins of Men. And elsewhere he requires That every one as he is able do not cease to offer for the Sins which he commits every day the Sacrifice of Alms-deeds Fasting Prayers and Supplications wherefore he gives us this definition of the true Sacrifice having regard not to its Essence but to its end and effect which is to direct us unto the enjoyment of Blessedness and Felicity The true Sacrifice saith he is every work which we do Id. de Civit. l. 10. c. 6. to be nearer united unto God by a holy Fellowship viz. by referring him unto the end of that good which may render us truly happy It cannot then be thought strange that the antient Doctors of the Church having given the name of Sacrifice unto all the Acts of Piety unto all the Works of Sanctification and unto all that we do for the Glory of God and for his Service should also qualifie the holy Eucharist with the same Title seeing that it makes one of the essential parts of the Worship of Christian Religion and that it even comprehends in substance the greatest part of the things relating thereunto and whereof it is composed as Prayers giving of Thanks the offering up of our Goods and our Persons Repentance Compunction Faith Hope and Charity and to speak in a word all the Holy and Divine Dispositions which we should bring unto the holy Table and without which one cannot worthily partake of this adorable Mystery of our Salvation But because these things which we have touched and which the Holy Fathers frequently call Sacrifices are not nevertheless Sacrifices properly so called to take Sacrifice in its proper and true signification I observe that these same Fathers in answering the Jews and Pagans who found fault that there were not in the Christian Religion any true external Sacrifices as there were in theirs agreed with them That in very truth they had none but that instead of those outward and external Sacrifices which were as it were the Soul and Essence of the Jews Religion and of all the Pagans they had a worship wholly spiritual a service Heavenly and wholly Divine without touching in this place the silence of all those who in the first Ages of Christianity undertook the defence of
this holy Religion of the Son of God for in all their Apologies they spake not one word of the external Sacrifices of Christians though they were not ignorant that it had been the fittest and most effectual way to have invited the Pagans and Jews unto the Profession of the Gospel on the contrary they explain themselves so clearly on this matter that it is not to be wondered at that their Enemies should shun a Religion wherein by the confession and owning of those very persons who defended it by the purity and innocency of their writings there were no such Sacrifices as those whom they desired to convert did look for and expect for instance St Justin Martry retorting the calumny of Atheism and Impiety wherewith the Jews and Pagans endeavoured to slander our holy Religion by reason thereof is content to say Just Marr. Apol. 2. vel 1. p. 58 60. That there are no other Sacrifices to be made but Prayers and giving Thanks which sweeten all the other Oblations which we make unto God to honour him as we are bound and according to his Merit Id. Ep. ad Diogn p. 495 496. And in another part of his Works he rejects the Sacrifices of Jews and Pagans but without assigning unto Christians any which to speak properly may be so called He also doth almost the very same in disputing against Tryphon the Jew Id. contr Tryph. p. 238 239 240. wherein he sheweth that the Service of God doth not consist in their Sacrifices and that therefore is the reason Christians do not offer any without saying they have others different from theirs he indeed confesseth in the same Dialogue That the Christians offer unto God an Oblation well pleasing in his sight according to the Prophecy of Malachy when they do celebrate their Eucharist of Bread and Wine And when his Adversary explains these Oblations and Sacrifices of Malachy of Prayers and Invocations which those of the Jewish Nation who were in Captivity addressed unto our Lord for removing their Calamity and Misery St. Justin makes this Answer Ibid. p. 344 345. I fay also That the Prayers and Thanksgivings of Saints and Believers are the only Sacrifices perfect and well pleasing unto God and that they be the only Sacrifices which Christians have learned to make even then it self when they celebrate the Sacrament It is what he designs by the wet and dry Food and it is therein he saith that they shew forth a commemoration of the Death of the Lord. Afterwards this holy Doctor observes That in the days of Malachy there were no Jews scattered abroad over the World whereas amongst all Nations and all Countries of the World at the time our glorious Martyr wrote there were offered unto God the Creator of all things Prayers and Thanksgivings in the Name of Christ Jesus whence it is that he saith of Christians in general Ibid. p. 314. C. That they are a Royal Priesthood offering unto God holy and agreeable Sacrifices God not accepting any but of his own Priests Athenagoras in his Apology for the Christians making himself the same objection that Justin Martyr did on the behalf of the Enemies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ answereth no otherwise than he had done he represents That God who made all things hath no need of Blood of Odors Flowers nor Perfumes That the great Sacrifice which he desires is That we should know him That we should be instructed in the greatness of his power whereby he hath stretched out the Heavens gathered the Waters together in the Sea divided betwixt Light and Darkness beautified the Sky with Stars caused the Earth to encrease created Beasts and made Man That it sufficeth to lift up pure hands to him who standeth not in need of any other Oblation or more splendid Sacrifice Athenag pro Christ p. 13. Minut. in Octav. Whereunto he adds But what need have I to be troubled for Offerings and Sacrifices seeing God careth not for them he requires an unbloody Sacrifice a reasonable Service and when the Pagan asks this Question of the Christian in Minutius Felix Wherefore the Christians have no Temples nor Altars the Christian answers Do you think that we do conceal what we worship under a shew that we have no Temples nor Altars and thereupon he makes this excellent reflection worthy of the School of Jesus Christ That the Sacrifice which ought to be offered unto God is a good Soul a pure Conscience and Faith unfeigned That to live uprightly do Justice abstain from Evil and hinder his Neighbour from hurt is to offer a fat Sacrifice These are our Sacrifices Orig. contr Cels l. 8. p. 389. ult Edit saith he this is our Service The Philosopher Celsus in Origen reproaching Christians that they have no Altars this learned Man agrees with the Pagan and confesseth that by consequence they also had no Sacrifice because there is a strict relation betwixt a a true Altar and a Sacrifice properly so called And in the same Book Ibid. p. 487. he opposeth unto the Sacrifices offered by the Pagans for the Emperours the Prayers which Christians made for the conservation of their persons the prosperity of their souls and the establishing of their Empire and saith That by them they fought like Priests of God which made Tertullian say as was before mentioned Tertul. Apol. C. 30. That the fairest and fattest Sacrifice which God requires is prayer from a pure heart an innocent soul and a holy mind and that 't is that also which they offer for the preservation of the Emperours It is of prayer also that he explains in the same work Ibid. c. 39. this excellent Oblation and that he saith elsewhere That that is done by prayer only which God hath commanded Ibid. ad Scap. c. 2. Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 7. p. 707. because the Creator of the Vniverse hath no need of Blood and of Incense And Clement of Alexandria doth not he make this Declaration That we do not sacrifice unto God who standeth in need of nothing but that we do glorifie him that was sacrificed for us in sacrificing of our own selves that we honour him by prayers Ibid. p. 717. that we do justly offer unto him this most excellent and most holy Sacrifice Ibid. that the Altar which we have upon Earth is the Assembly of those which are dedicated unto prayer as if they had but one heart and one mind Ibid. p. 719. That the Sacrifice of the Church is the Word which like sweet Incense proceeds from devout souls That the truly sound Altar is the just upright soul That not sumptuous Sacrifices should be offered unto God but such as may be acceptable unto him That the Sacrifices of Christians are prayers praises Ibid. p. 728. the reading the holy Scriptures Hymns and Psalms the instructing the ignorant and liberality to the Poor But nothing can be seen clearer and more positive than what is
standing at the Altar of God that is to say at the Sacrament Table and St. Chrysostom informs us in one of his Homilies that it was so practised even in his time Chrysost t. 1. Hom. 22. de Simult ira p. 260. when he exhorts the Communicants or at least when he observes That they presented themselves at the Holy Table and that they there assisted standing on their legs But because this Sacrament is an Object worthy the respect of a Christian because it is the Memorial of the death of his Saviour and at the same time of his love and charity a bond of his Communion with him and an efficacious means savingly to apply unto him the holy Fruits of his bitter death and sufferings St. Cyrill of Jerusalem Cyrill Hiâ—roâ— Mystag 5. at the end of the IV. Century will have his Communicant approach unto the Holy Table not with the hand open and the fingers stretched out but in supporting the right hand with the left that he receive in the hollow of his hand the Body of Christ or as he says some lines before the Antitype of the Body of Christ that he takes care not to suffer any crum to fall to the ground and that having in this manner Communicated of the Body of Christ he draws near unto the Cup having the Body a little bowed in way of Adoration or Veneration to shew the religious respect with which we should participate of these Holy Mysteries The VI. Can. 101 t. 5. Concil Goarâ— in Euchol p. 150. Oecumenical Council ordained something of this kind to wit that one should present himself at the Communion holding his hands in form of a Cross which the Greeks observed a long while after and their Clergy observe it still at this day but as for the people for some time past they receive the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament both together in a spoon but I do not find that the people which came to the Communion were obliged to set themselves in Posture or Gesture of those which adore until that in the XIII Century the Adoration of the Sacrament was established in the Latin Church for this bowing of the Body which St. Cyrill desires is not properly the posture of him who really doth adore because he which adores prostrates himself on his knees before the Object of his Adoration to shew the motions of the profound humility of his Soul and his self-denial before him unto whom by this action he confesseth that he is but dust and ashes But as for St. Cyrill he only desires a little inclination of the Body in approaching unto the Mystical Table to shew the sentiments of veneration and respect which one ought to have for so great a Sacrament not to insist upon what the Eastern Council above mentioned was content to ordain three hundred years after St. Cyrill that we should go unto the Communion with the hands in form of a Cross without mentioning the bowing of the Body which St. Cyrill himself doth not prescribe unto the Communicant but for the reception of the Holy Cup. John Damaseen who borrowed of St. Cyrill and of the VI. Council what he saith of the posture of the Communicant in his time that is in the VIII Century doth not speak a word of this inclination of the Body Goar in Enchoi p. 1â—0 in Goars Notes upon the Ritual of the Greeks And what yet perswades me that Believers communicated standing in the antient Church and that this custom was always practised in the greatest Christian Communions excepting the Latin which changed this custom in the XIII Century is that besides the Greek Church which is of a very large extent and wherein they Communicate standing the Abassins who also make a very considerable Christian Communion do no otherwise receive the Sacrament Alvar. ubi supr During the time the Communion is distributed saith the same Priest Alvarez they are all standing Now it is most certain that the Christians which are fallen into ignorance as for example the Abassins and the Greeks have not taken away any antient customs but rather have added to the number of those observed by the antient Church which is the usual practice of ignorance so to do and if the custom of Communicating standing be still kept in the Eastern Churches it may also be affirmed it was observed in the West seeing that before the Latin Church had introduced in its service the Elevation of the Host to oblige the people to adore it and by consequence before the people were obliged to receive the Communion kneeling a considerable Body of Christians had separated from her and broke off which Body retained and practised the custom of Communicating standing as do at this time the Protestants of Europe called Calvinists excepting those of Holland who Communicate sitting and those of England who kneel in receiving the Communion but their Doctrine declaring sufficiently what they believe of the Sacrament it is easy to see that their kneeling is not addressed unto what they receive from the hands of the Priest at the Holy Table but only unto Jesus Christ who is in Heaven and whom they profoundly adore in the Act of the Communion as him who hath purchased for them this great Salvation whereof they are about to Communicate in receiving his Divine Sacrament and of himself by means of his Sacrament who dyed for their Sins and is risen again for their justification The same may also be said of the Protestants called Lutherans although their belief in this point is different from the belief of those in England for in that they kneel at receiving the Communion it is a token of the Adoration which they give unto Jesus Christ but it cannot be said without injustice that they address this Adoration unto the Sacrament because they hold and believe that it is the substance of Bread and Wine after Consecration and farther they do not render this Act of Adoration unto Jesus Christ in vertue of what they believe of his presence in the Sacrament because if so then all those in the assembly should kneel during the Celebration of the Mystery and yet it is only him that Communicates that kneels in the moment that he receives the Sacrament But before I leave this circumstance it may not probably be unnecessary to instance some customs that were practised in the antient Church in the act of the Communion for I find that Lay persons after having received the Sacrament at the hands of the Bishop or Pastour did kiss it It is what St. Jorom mentioneth in his Book against John Bishop of Jerusalem Hieron Ep. 62 Is there any one that hath Communion with you by force is there any one that after having stretched out his hand turns away his face and that in receiving the Holy Food gives you a Judas kiss Monsieur de Valois in his Notes upon Eusebiâ—s his History cites these words of Paul the Deacon speaking of the
seriously thought on these things they would at least have avoided receiving holy things from the hand of him whom they hated fearing lest they should so openly have imitated Judas And in the third Sermon he alledgeth these words of the seventy seventh Ibid. p. 316. and according to the Hebrews the seventy eighth Psalm The meat was still in their mouth and the anger of God waxed hot against them And he continues It is because Sathan who of a long time possessed them by a most wicked and evil intention entred into them by an evil operation after the Morsel as if they had heard say by him that gave them the Morsel What thou dost do quickly Ibid. p. 317. And in the same Sermon When I gave unto them who were such the sacred Morsel with the hand which they wished cut off And in the first Sermon of the Ascension If before we come to speak of his Judgment Ibid. p. 325. we truly accuse our selves with what neglect and carelesness do we Consecrate the Bread which we are to distribute or present Methinks from all this it may be concluded that in the Tenth Century they began in some places to introduce the custom of putting the Sacrament in the mouth of Communicants yet without blaming the ancient practice which required that it should be received with the hand notwithstanding what is alledged by Regino of a Council of Rouan in Cassander Apud Cassand in Liturg p. 80. and the President Duranti in one of his Books of the Ceremonies of the Catholick Church l. 1. cap. 16. n. 12. In fine Molanus Doctor and Divine of Louvain hath made a kind of Martyrology peculiar for the Saints of Flanders that is of the Countreys formerly inhabited by the people of Belgia and upon the 6th of June speaking of Norbert Founder of the Order of the Premonstre he relates this out of Robert du Mont Continuator of Sigebert's Chronicle of the Year 1124. which is still to be seen Supplem Chron. Sigeb ad an 1184. Natal Belg. p. 110. Norbert preaching the Men and Women being pricked at the heart brought the Body of our Lord which for ten Years and upwards they had hid in Chests and corners from which things saith Molanus Pontac in his Chronology doth conclude That Christians at that time did receive the Body of Christ with their hand And in truth Pontac who was one of the most Learned men of his time had reason so to judge being necessarily inferr'd from the words of the Continuator of Sigebert Those poor people of whom he speaks were seduced by a certain Heretick called Tanchelin or as 't is in the Edition I have Tandem who had perswaded the Inhabitants of Antwerp which was a very populous City That the participation of the Body of Jesus Christ was not necessary unto Salvation therefore they had hid in certain places the Body of our Lord until such time as they were disabused by Norbert unto whom both Men and Women after ten years time and more brought what each had hid but in the main it appears that in the Twelfth Century Communicants received the Sacrament in their hand for otherwise those we speak of could not have done what hath been mentioned and I know not whether unto this purpose may not be referred the fifth Canon of the Council of Tholouse Assembled in the Year of our Lord 1228. which ordains T. 2. Spicil p. 624. That when any sick person hath received from the hand of the Priest the holy Communion it should be carefully kept until the day of his death or of his recovery c. For to take and receive is an act of the hand rather than of the mouth However it be we have justified by the Tradition of the Church from Age to Age that even in the Western Church Christians received the Sacrament with their hand until the Tenth Century excepting it may be some particular occasion which cannot prejudice the established Law and generally received custom that in the Tenth Century they began to introduce in some places the custom of receiving with the mouth without condemning the other practice which required it to be received with the hand whereof we have seen examples in the Twelfth Century and even in the Thirteenth which justifies that the manner of receiving the Eucharist with the hand was ever practised in the West ever since Christianity had been first established because that before the Latin Church had abolished this custom the Albigenses and Waldenses had separated themselves from its Communion and carefully practised it amongst them until the time the Protestants separated themselves who continue to practise it at this time As for the Greeks James Goar a Frier of the Order of preaching Friers observes upon the Euchologie or Ritual of that Nation In Euchol p. 149. n. 170. That the Priest or Bishop gives the holy Eucharist into the hand according to the ancient practice And he represents the gesture wherein the Clergy set their hands to communicate which is almost the same required by S. Cyrill of Jerusalem and 300. years after him the Council in Trullo which was common also unto the people a long time as well as to the Clergy but at present saith the same Goar in the same place The Laity receive the Bread and Wine together in a Spoon CHAP. XIV Of the Liberty of carrying home the Sacrament after having received it in the Church and of carrying of it in Journeys and Voyages UNto this antient custom of receiving the Sacrament with the hand must be joined that of carrying it home to their house and keeping it after having received it De Orat. c. 14. Tertullian intimates it sufficiently when he speaks of receiving the Body of our Lord and keeping it for although he speaks of keeping it to the end of the station only nevertheless it was at every ones free choice to keep it longer if he pleased or to carry it home along with him and in another place in his Writings he plainly establisheth this custom for writing unto his Wife and informing her of the inconveniencies which attend the Marriage of a Believing Woman unto an Infidel Lib. 2. ad Ux. c. 5. he saith unto her The Husband will not know what you eat in private before any other Meat and if he know 't is Bread will he not believe that 't is that which is so call'd Cypr. de laps p. 176. S. Cyprian also teacheth the same when he saith A certain Woman having endeavoured with her unworthy hands to open her Chest where the holy thing of the Lord was she was affrighted at the Fire which came out so that she durst not touch it and elsewhere speaking of him that run to the Theatre and Shews of Pagans Id. de Spect. p. 292. Who saith he runs unto a Show after having been dismissed that is to say after the Celebration of Divine Service and also carryeth
potest t. 5. p. 125 6. We must not saith he look only upon the Terms but the Scope of him that speaks the cause and occasion of his Discourse and comparing all together find out the sense and meaning of what is therein contained Nevertheless it must be noted this Rule hath its particular use when the Expressions are doubtful and difficult and when by staying at the Terms and following the rigour of the Letter a convenient Sense cannot be given unto what is said or heard except in such a case nothing hinders but looking unto the scope of him that speaks stress may be laid on his Words and much light taken from his Expressions Thus have the Holy Fathers proceeded in examining the Words used by our Saviour in instituting the Sacrament because all they have told us hitherto are only so many Reflections which they have made upon the Words and Expressions of this Merciful Saviour but because they were verily persuaded that Jesus Christ which is Wisdom it self had an end in instituting this Divine Mystery they would know the end and design which he proposed in leaving this precious earnest of his Love unto his Church Do this saith our Lord in remembrance of me for as often as ye eat this Bread and drink of this Cup saith St. Paul you shew the Lord's Death till he come From whence they concluded that the Intention of Jesus Christ in instituting the Sacrament and that of the Church in celebrating it by his Command was by this means to preserve amongst Christians the remembrance of his Death and Sufferings but because his Death doth suppose his Incarnation and Birth and that moreover his blessed Resurrection and Exaltation into Glory ensued thereupon I find they have included in this Commemoration commanded us by Christ the consideration of his Incarnation bitter Death of his Resurrection and of his Ascension into Heaven According to which some of them join unto the consideration of his Death that of his Incarnation as St. Justin Martyr which saith Just Martyr contra Tryph. p. 296. That the Lord commanded us to make the Bread of the Eucharist in remembrance that he made himself Man for those which believe in him and for whom he made himself Mortal and the Cup in remembrance of his Blood But sometimes also considering the Death of Christ as the end of his Conception and of his Birth because he took not our Nature and was born of a Virgin but to die they are content to consider the Sacrament as a Memorial of his Death only Id. ibid. p. 259. In this regard the same St. Justin said That Jesus Christ commanded us to make the Bread of the Sacrament in remembrance of the Death which he suffered for the Souls of those which have been cleansed from all Malice This was also the meaning of Tatian his Disciple Tat. Diates t. 7. Bibl. Pat. when he said The Lord commanded his Disciples to eat the Bread and drink the Cup of the Sacrament because it was the memorial of his approaching Affliction and of his Death There were others who making this Reflection in themselves that the Death of Christ would be of no benefit unto us without his Resurrection which assures us of his Victory over the Enemies of our Salvation and of the Eternal Father's accepting of the Satisfaction he made unto his Justice in our stead and in consideration whereof he delivers us from the Slavery of Sin and the Devil have considered the celebration of the Sacrament as the commemoration of his Death and Resurrection Such was the Reflection of St. Basil Basil de Bapt. c. 2. p. 581. when he observed that What we eat and drink to wit of the Bread and Wine it is to the end we should always remember him who died and is risen again for us Others in fine considering that Jesus Christ was ascended into Heaven and that he had left us the Sacrament as a pledg of his Presence to comfort us in expectation of his glorious Return they thought the consideration of his Death ought not to be separated from that of his Ascension and that as they should think of his Humiliation and Sufferings they should also think of his Exaltation and Glory This was in all likelihood the meaning of St. Gaudent tr 2. l. 2. Bibl. Patr. Gaudentius when he taught That the Sacrament is our Viaticum or Provision for our Journey whereby we are strengthned in the Way until by departing out of this Life we go to him that it is an earnest of his Presence and the portract of his Passion until he come again from Heaven but an earnest and a resemblance which he will have us take in our Hands and receive with the Mouth and Heart to the end we may have engraven in our Memories the great Benefit of our Redemption To thus much also amounts what is said by the Author of the Commentaries In Cap. 11.1 ad Cor. attributed unto St. Jerome That Jesus Christ hath left us the last Commemoration or the last Remembrance as if one taking a Voyage into a far Country would leave a Token with his Friend to the end that when-ever he look'd on it he should be mindful of his Love and Kindness which he cannot do without shedding Tears if he perfectly loved him and that he gave us this Sacrament to the end that by this means we should always remember the Death which he suffered for us Sedulius hath only transcribed this Testimony in his Commentaries upon the same Epistle and upon the same Chapter Primatius an African Bishop declares in the VIth Century that it was his Judgment and he explained himself almost as the other two had done and Christian Druthmer will say the same in the IXth Century as for the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions Constit Apost l. 8. c. 12. he hath joined all these considerations together For he will have us to remember his Passion his Death Resurrection Ascension into Heaven and his second Coming which will be when he comes with Power and Glory to judge the quick and the dead and to reward every one according to his Works The same thing is to be read in the Liturgy of St. Mark and what is found in that which the Latins use at present comes very near it But the Fathers rest not there for I have observ'd that when they speak of the Eucharist as of a Pledge and Memorial they set it in opposition not only of the Truth but even also of the Truth absent so it hath been understood by Gaudentius Sedulius Primasius the Author of the Commentaries attributed unto St. Jerome in the Passages we have alledged whereunto may be joined these Words of the latter In 1 ad Cor. Cap. 11. That we have need of this Memorial all the time which shall continue until he be pleased to come again It is in the same sense Theodoret said Theodoret in 1 ad Cor. c.
11. After his coming we shall have no need of Signs or Symbols of his Body because the Body it self shall appear It was also the meaning of St. Austin if I mistake not when he said Aug. Serm. 9. de divers Id. in Psal 37. That we shall not receive the Eucharist when we are come unto Christ himself and that we have begun to reign Eternally with him he said also elsewhere That no Body remembers what is not present A Maxim grounded upon the Light of Reason De memor reminisc c. 1. De Invent. l. 2. for 't is by this Principle the Philosopher said that the Memory is not of things present and the Prince of Eloquence That the Memory is that whereby one remembers things which are past I never think of these Words of the Institution of the Sacrament This is my Body but I deplore with grief and sorrow of Heart the State of Christians which have made the Sacrament which our Saviour instituted to be the Bond of their Love and Union the occasion of their Hatred and the sorrowful matter of their sad Divisions and as I should be over-joy'd to contribute any thing to disabuse those which are in Errour by giving the Words the Explication which they ought to have I thought one of the best means to effect it was diligently to search in what sense the Holy Fathers have taken them and in what manner they understood them for I make no question but a belief agreed upon by Christians at all times and universally received at all times in all the Climates of the Christian World is Catholick Orthodox and by consequence worthy to be retained in the Church as an Apostolical Truth Therefore I have applied my self unto this Inquiry to endeavour to find in their Works their true and real Thoughts and because for the most part in their Homilies and popular Exhortations they are transported with the fervour of Zeal and the motions of Piety which often made them use Hyperbolical Expressions fit for the Pulpit and suitable unto Orators which should be pathetical and feeling I have not stopt at these sorts of Works I have chiefly examined Commentaries and Expositions where for the most part they speak Dogmatically and in cold Blood and the true and genuine Thoughts of those which write or expound may be seen And but that I mean exactly to keep within the Bounds prescribed at the beginning of this second Part I might continue my Inquiry unto the XIIth Century which would give us the Testimonies of Zonaras a Greek Canonist and of Rupert de Duitz as the IXth doth those of Raban of Christian Druthmar and of Bertram Laying then aside these five Testimonies not to infringe the Law I willingly imposed on my self I 'le begin vvith Clement of Alexandria Clem. Alex. Paedag. l. 2. c. 2. who lived at the end of the second Century Jesus Christ said he blessed Wine saying Take drink this is my Blood the Blood of the Vine the holy Liquor of Joy represents by Alegory the Word to wit with regard to his Blood which was shed for many for the Remission of Sins From Clement of Alexandria I will pass unto Theophilus of Antioch Theoph. Anti. och in Matth. who wrote in the same Age When Jesus Christ saith he said This is my Body he called Bread which is made of many Grains his Body whereby he would represent the People which he hath taken unto himself Tertul. l. 4. contr Marc. c. 40. Cyprian ep 76. The third shall be Tertullian which saith That Jesus Christ having taken Bread and distributed it unto his Disciples he made it his Body saying This is my Body that is to say the Figure of my Body The fourth is St. Cyprian When the Lord saith he doth call the Bread made of several grains of Wheat his Body he signifieth thereby the faithful People whose Sins he bore inasmuch as it was but one Body The fifth is St. Jerome Hieron Com. in Matth. c. 26. who dyed in the year of our Lord 420 As they were at Supper saith he Jesus took Bread blessed it and brake it and gave it to his Disciples and said Take eat this is my Body And taking the Cup he gave Thanks and gave it unto them saying Drink ye all of it for this is my Blood of the New Testament for the remission of Sins When the Typical Passover was accomplished and that Jesus Christ had eaten with the Apostles the Flesh of the Lamb he took Bread which strengthneth Man's Heart and proceeds on to the true Sacrament of the Passover to the end that as Melchisedek Priest of the most High God had offered Bread and Wine to represent him so he also should represent the Truth of his Body and of his Blood The sixth is St. Austin contemporary with St. Jerome and dyed about eleven years after him The Lord made no difficulty to say August contr Adim c. 12. This is my Body when he gave the Symbol of his Body The seventh is Theodoret Our Lord saith he made an Exchange of Names Theod Dial. 1. and gave unto his Body the Name of the Symbol and unto the Symbol the Name of his Body and in the same place tells us in Truth whereof the Holy Food is the Sign and Figure Is it of the Divinity of Jesus Christ or of his Body and Blood Id. ibid. It is evident 't is of the things whereof they have their Names for the Lord having taken the Sign said not This is my Divinity but This is my Body and afterwards This is my Blood The eighth is Facundus Bishop of Hermiana in Africa who assisted at the Fifth Oecumenical Council about the middle of the sixth Century Facund l. 9. p. 404 405. We do call saith he the Sacrament of the Body and Blood which is in the Bread and consecrated Cup the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ not that the Bread is properly his Body and the Cup his Blood but because they contain in them the Mystery or the Sacrament of his Body and Blood From whence it is also that the Lord himself called the Bread and the Cup which he blessed and gave unto his Disciples his Body and his Blood The ninth is St. Isidor Bishop of Sevill in Spain Isid Hist oâ—igin l 6. c 19. We call saith he by the Command of Christ himself his Body and Blood that which being sanctified of the Fruits of the Earth is consecrated and made a Sacrament The tenth is Bede that bright Star of the English Church which finished his Course Anno 735. Beda Commâ— in Marc. 14. Jesus Christ saith he said unto his Disciples This is my Body because Bread strengthens the Heart of Man and Wine doth increase Blood in the Body it is for this reason that Bread represents mystically the Body of Jesus Christ and the Wine his Blood The eleventh is a Council of 338 Bishops Concil Constantinop in act
Concil Nicaen 2 act 6. assembled at Constantinople against Images in the year 754. Jesus Christ say these Fathers having taken Bread blessed it and having given Thanks he brake it and giving it to his Disciples he said Take eat for the Remission of Sins This is my Body in like manner having given the Cup he said This is my Blood do this in remembrance of me there being no other kind of Thing nor Figure chosen by him that could so fitly represent his Incarnation See then the Image of his quickning Body made honourably and gloriously Here are eleven substantial Witnesses which being added unto the five others which we passed over and shall appear in due time make up the number of sixteen without touching those which may by evident and necessary Consequences be drawn unto the same Testimonyâ— for I have made choice only of those which seemed most evident and of those also some speak in more express Terms than others The Reader may judg if all these Witnesses which speak of Bread Wine Fruit of the Vine of Figure Sign Type Symbol Sacrament of Representation of Fruits of the Earth do not give a figurative sense unto these Words This is my Body This is my Blood And to do it the better let him exactly see if any of these antient Commentators have spoken of Reality of bodily Conversion and of local Presence in interpreting them for say the Protestants they could not pass over in silence so important a Doctrine as that in an occasion which indispensably obliged them to say something of it without rendring themselves guilty of horrid Hypocrisy and Injustice So that if they have not done it and that there appears no such thing in what hath been produced and examined as indeed say they whatever Scrutiny we could make no such thing nor like it doth appear it may be safely and lawfully concluded that all these Fathers have taken these Words not in a proper and literal Sense but in a figurative and metaphorical Sense Moreover all these Reflections of the Ancients upon these Words of the Institution of the Sacrament amount just to the manner of understanding them commanded by the Council of Trent when it forbids to interpret the holy Scriptures Sess 4. contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers Because as 't is explained by Melchior Canus Locor l 7. c. 3. num 10. Bishop of the Canaries who assisted at the Council The Sense of all the Saints is the Sense of the Holy Ghost CHAP. II. Of what the Father 's believed concerning what we receive in the Sacrament and what they have said of it BEsides the many Reflections made by the ancient Doctors upon the Words used by our Saviour in the instituting this most august Sacrament which we have sufficiently enumerated and set down in the foregoing Chapter I find they have said many other things which may direct us unto the true understanding of their Belief which we will enquire into in this second Chapter In the first place they have called the Eucharist Bread and Wine in the very act of communicating There is given unto each of these present Just Mart. Apol. 2. vol. 1. Iâ—en l. 4. c 34. saith Justin Martyr the Bread the Wine and the Water which have been consecrated St. Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons gives it the same Name calling it The Bread upon which Prayers and Thanks have been made And I make no question Contr. Tryph. p. 260. Orig. contr Cels l. 8. Id. ibid. Id. Homil. 5. in Levitic Cyprian Ep. 76. 63 Apud Euseb Hist l. 6 c. 43. prope fin but 't is also for the same reason that our Christian Philosopher I mean St. Justin speaks of the Eucharist of Bread and Wine Origen against Celsus The Bread which is called the Eucharist the Symbol of our Duty towards God And in the same Book The Bread offered with Thanksgivings and Prayers made for the Mercies bestowed on us And in his Homilies upon Leviticus The Bread which the Lord gave unto his Disciples St. Cyprian was of the same Judgment when he called it The Bread of the Lord And in his Treatise of the Cup or in his Epistle to Cecilius he very often calls it Bread and Wine mix'd with Water and saith That the Body of the Lord is not Flower only nor Water only but a composition of these two things kneaded and moulded together and made into the substance of Bread And Cornelius Bishop of Rome writing unto Fabian Bishop of Antioch of what passed in the undue Ordination of Novatian unto the Episcopacy and speaking of the Sacrament in the act of distribution and reception he calls it That Bread From hence 't is that Tertullian disputing against the Marcionites Tertul. contr Marc. l. 1. c. 23. who taught that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ was not the Creator he reproaches them That they were baptized in the name of another God upon anothers Earth and with anothers Water and that they made Prayers and gave Thanks unto another God upon the Bread of another It is easy to understand that in speaking in that manner to Marcion he presupposed that the Orthodox made their Prayers unto God the Creator upon this Bread that is to say The Bread of the Eucharist And the Author of the Epistle to the Philadelphians under Ignatius's Name Ep. ad Philad saith That there is one Bread broken unto all If we descend lower Conc. Ancyr c. 2. Conc. Neoces c. 13. we shall find that the Council of Ancyrus in the year 314 forbids Deacons that had sacrificed unto Idols To present the Bread and the Cup. And that of Neocesarea of the same Year saith That the Country-Priests cannot offer nor give the Bread in Prayer nor the Cup in the chief Church in the City if the Bishop or the Priests of the City are present Euseb dem l. 5. c. 3. Eusebius Bishop of Cesarea wrote about the year 328. That the Ministers of the Christian Church express darkly by the Bread and Wine the Mysteries of the Body and Blood of Christ It was also the opinion of St. Hilary Bishop of Poictiers Bil. in Matth. c. 30. when he said That the Passover of our Lord was made the Lord having taken the Cup and broke the Bread Macar Hom. 27. St. Macarius followed the same Steps in saying That in the Church one participates of visible Bread to eat spiritually the Flesh of our Lord. Concil Laod. c. 25. The Council of Laodicea assembled about the year 360 ordains That Ministers ought not that is to say the Deacons or rather Sub-Deacons to administer the Bread nor bless the Cup. A Council of Carthage made this Decree Concil Carth. c. 24. That in the Sacraments of the Body and Blood of our Lord nothing else should be offered but what the Lord himself had done to wit Bread and Wine mingled with Water This Decree is the 37th in the Code
he plainly shewed his own self in saying unto his Disciples I will no more drink of this Fruit of the Vine until I drink it with you in my Father's Kingdom St. Cyprian said the same for having repeated these same Words of our Saviour he saith s Cypr. ep 63. That we find that what our Saviour offered was a Cup mingled with Water and that what he said to be his Blood was Wine Nothing can be seen more formal to this purpose than what is read in t Aug. ad Infan apud Fulg. de Bapt. Aet c. ult Theod. Dial. 1. Prosp de promis praed part 1. c. 2. Facund l. 9. c. ult St. Austin's Sermon unto the new Baptized related intirely by St. Fulgentius where speaking unto them of the Sacrament which they saw upon the holy Table What you have seen saith he is Bread and a Cup as your Eyes do testify Theodoret who was present at the Council of Calcedon The Lord saith he in distributing the Mysteries did call the Bread his Body and the Wine his Blood We may also say the same thing of the counterfeit Prosper which saith That the Lord did declare at his Table that the consecrated Bread was his sacred Body Of Facundus which saith The Lord himself called the Bread which he had blessed and the Cup which he gave his Disciples his Body and his Blood And in fine of Maxentius a Religious Person and afterwards Priest of the Church of Antioch in whose Dialogues we read That the Bread whereof the Universal Church doth participate Maxent cont Nest dial 2. in remembrance of the Death of our Lord is his Body But this is not yet all they have to say unto us there is found in their excellent Works several other things which lead us as it were by the hand unto the Knowledg of what we search for In the first place they declare our Bodies are nourished with what we receive at the Lord's Table as Justin Martyr who speaks of the Eucharist Just Mart. Apol. 2. Iren. l. 4 c. 34. l. 5. c. 2. Aug. serm 9. de divers Isid Hispal apud Bertram de Corp. Sang. Dom. Ibid. as of a Food wherewith our Flesh and Blood are nourished by Transmutation St. Irenaeus doth depose that our Flesh is fed with it that our Blood our Body and Flesh are nourished increased and do subsist by it St. Austin saith that it is Bread which fills the Belly St. Isidore Arch-bishop of Sevill that the Substance of this visible Bread doth nourish the outward Man and satisfies it Or as Ratran who hath transferr'd to us his Words not any more to be found in Isidore's Works now printed that all that is outwardly received in the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Lord is fit to feed the Body The Fathers of the sixteenth Council of Toledo in the Year 693 Conc. Tolet. 16. c. 6. speak of the Remainders of the Sacrament as of a thing that a quantity of it may incommode the Stomach That was also the Belief of Raban Arch bishop of Mayence in the ninth Century and of the Taborites in Bohemia in the fifteenth as shall be demonstrated in time and place convenient Secondly there are some of them that positively affirm that what is distributed at the holy Table is Bread the Matter whereof after we have taken and eat it doth pass by the common way of our ordinary Food Origen teacheth so in plain terms when expounding these Words of the 15th Chap. of St. Mathew Origen in Math. 15. That it is not what entreth into the Mouth defileth the Man he saith If what enters in the Mouth goes into the Belly and is cast into the Draft the Meat which is sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer goeth also into the Belly according to the gross part of it and afterwards into the Draft but by reason of Prayer made over it it is profitable according to the proportion of Faith and is the cause that the Understanding is enlightned and attentive unto what is profitable and 't is not the Substance of Bread but the Word pronounced upon it which is profitable unto him that eateth it not in a way unworthy of the Lord. This Doctrine was also taught in the ninth Century by Raban Arch-bishop of Mayence and by Heribold Arch-bishop of Auxerre and I think I lately hinted that Amalarius Fortunatus who liv'd in the same Century was of this Judgment which shall be examined when we come to inquire into the Belief of the ninth Century Father Cellot the Jesuit attributes the same Doctrine unto the Greeks Append. Miscel op 7. p. 564 It is true this Doctrine was not the Opinion of all the antient Fathers of the Church therefore I said at the beginning of this Observation that there were some of them that did believe so in effect St. Cyril of Jerusalem saith Cyril Hieros Mystag 5. That the Bread of the Sacrament doth not go into the Belly and is not cast out into the Draft but that it is disperst throughout the Substance of the Communicant for the good of his Body and Soul The Author of the Homily of the Eucharist for the Dedication in St. Chrysostom's Works saith almost the same with St. Cyril Serm. de Euchar in Encoen apud Chrysost t. 5. pa. 596. Take no heed that it is Bread think not that it is Wine for they are not cast out as other Meat God forbid you should once think so for as when Wax is cast into the Fire nothing of its Substance doth remain or there remains no superfluity or it leaves not behind it neither soot nor cinders in like manner here imagine that the Mysteries are consumed with the Substance of the Body We may add John Damascen unto these two Authors Damasc l. 4. Orthodox fid cap. 14. who speaks thus The Shew-bread did represent this Bread and it is this pure Oblation and without Blood which the Lord fore-told by the Prophet which should be offer'd unto him from the East unto the West to wit the Body and Blood of Christ which should pass into the Substance of our Soul and Body without being consumed without being corrupted or passing into the Draft O God forbid but passing into our Substance for our Preservation These three Testimonies as every one doth see differ from Origen which indeed was also the Opinion of Raban Heribold and Amalarius but if they were not of the Opinion of Origen they were of that of St. Justin Martyr Irenaeus St. Austin St. Isidore of Sevil of the sixteenth Council of Toledo Ratran and others I mean that if they believed not with Origen that the Bread of the Eucharist as to its material Substance was subject unto the shameful necessity of other common Food they believed with the others that it turned it self into our Substance that our Bodies were nourished by it and that they were increased and strengthned by it and so
their Difference with Origen was only in the Circumstance whether or no the holy Bread went unto the Place of Excrements Origen holding the Affirmative the others the Negative but as to the Ground of the Doctrine I find them all agreed and that all of them teach that what we receive at the Lord's Table is the Substance of Bread which some subject to the same fate of our common Food that goes into the Belly and from thence into the Draft others think this Bread doth pass into our Substance and if it feed our Souls by the virtue wherewith God accompanies it after Consecration and lawful Use of the Sacrament it also nourisheth and increaseth the Body by its proper Nature without turning into Excrements And the latter as I conceive are inclin'd unto this Opinion the rather because receiving but very little Bread and Wine in the Sacrament they made no difficulty to believe that it all turns into our Substance In the third place the holy Fathers testify that this Sacrament is consumed Aug. de Trin. lib. 3. c. 10. The Bread saith St. Austin which is made for that purpose is consumed in taking the Sacrament And again in the same Chapter What is put upon the Table is consumed the holy Colebration being ended Commonly there was no more alledged but this Passage of St. Austin to prove that the antient Christians believed that what was received at the Sacrament was of such a nature as to be in effect consumed Wherefore I hope the Reader will not be displeas'd if I lead him farther and make it appear this manner of Speech was us'd in the Church a long time after St. Austin's Death These Considerations we make upon the Doctrine of the holy Fathers are of such importance that we endeavour to find out in all Ages of the Christian Church what Foot-steps they have left us of it in their Writings Hugh Maynard in his Notes upon the Books of Sacraments of Gregory the first alledgeth and wholly transcribes a Pontifical Manuscript which is kept in the Church of Rouen and is as far as I can guess near to the eighth Century and probably of later times in this Pontifical the whole Ceremony of holy Thursday is represented and amongst many other Observations this is to be read When the Bishop washeth his Hands In Not. Menar in Sacram. Greg. p. 84. and the Deacons go unto the Altar to uncover the holy Things and that the Bishop comes to the Altar separates the Oblations to break them that he takes some of the whole ones to keep until next day the Day of Preparation and that they communicated without the Blood of the Lord because the Blood was wholly consumed the same Day It may be easily seen that the Blood mentioned by the Pontifical is not the proper Blood of Jesus Christ for all Christians unanimously confess that the real Blood of our Lord which was shed upon the Cross for the Salvation of Mankind is shed no more and is not in a state of being consumed in the Celebration of the Sacrament then saith the Protestant he must needs speak of a Typical and Figurative Blood I mean of the Mystical and Sanctified Wine which Believers drink at the holy Table and which is subject unto the fate of being consumed No other Explication can be given unto the Words of the Pontifical above-mentioned which doth not ill suit with those of St. Austin and I promise my self that the tenth Century however dark and ignorant it be represented by Historians will furnish us with another Witness an Abbot of a famous Monastery which will speak of the other Symbol what the Pontifical hath said of the Symbol of Wine In the fourth Place They avow that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is an inanimate Subject as Theophilus Arch-bishop of Alexandria for refuting the Opinion of Origen who denied that the holy Ghost exercised any Operation upon Things that have no Soul he speaks thus In affirming this he doth not consider Theop. Alex. Pasch 1. Bibl. Pat. t. 3. p. 87. that in Baptism the Mystical Waters are consecrated by the holy Ghost which descends and that the Bread of the Lord whereby the Body of the Lord is shewn forth and which we break for our Sanctification and the holy Cup which with the Bread is set upon the Table of the Church and which are things inanimate are sanctified by Prayers and by the coming of the holy Ghost St. Epiphanius was not far from this Belief when comparing the Bread after Consecration with the Body it self of our Saviour he said Epiphan in Anchor That the one is round as to its Form and insensible as to its Power but the other hath the Features and Lineaments of a Body and is all Life Motion and Action To thus much also amounts their Belief that the Change in the Sacrament concerned not the Nature of the Bread and Wine to change them into another thing but only to add unto them the Grace which they had not before that is to say a quickning and sanctifying virtue in the right use of the Sacrament Theod. dial 1. Jesus Christ saith Theodoret hath honoured the visible Symbols with the Name of his Body and Blood not in changing their Nature but in adding the Grace In the fifth place These same Fathers affirm that the substance of Bread and Wine remain after Consecration it is the Judgment ment of St. Chrysostom Chrysost ep ad Caesar The Bread of the Sacrament saith he is called Bread before it is sanctified but Divine Grace having sanctified it by the Ministry of the Priest it is no longer called Bread but it is judged worthy to be called the Body of Christ although the Nature of Bread remains Monsr de Marca in his French Treatise of the Eucharist Pag. 12 13. of the last Edit pag. 9. doth agree That until St. Chrysostom the Fathers believed that the Bread did not change its Nature after Consecration Moreover he confesseth for truth the Letter of St. Chrysostom unto Caesarius As also the Abbot Faggot doth in his Letter unto Monsr de Marca Son to that Illustrious Prelat and President of the Parliament of Paris he therein further informs us that this Letter of St. Chrysostom is in the custody of Monsr Bigot who in his Voyage into Italy found it in the Library whence Peter Martyr of Florence formerly procur'd it I mean in the Library of the Duke of Florence so that for the future there ought not to be any farther Contest of the validity of this Letter because the true Author of it cannot be unknown Theodoret a great admirer of St. Chrysostom Theod. dial 2. tells us That the Nature of the Symbols is not changed And in another of his Dialogues The Mystical Symbols saith he after Consecration do not change their proper Nature for they continue in their former Substance Gelas de duab in Christ natur ad Nestor â—ueych in
of this likeness that they often take the Names of the things themselves as then the Sacrament of the Body of Jesus Christ and the Sacrament of his Blood are after some sort his Body and Blood so the Sacrament of Faith is Faith He means that the Eucharist should be the Body and Blood of Christ by reason of the resemblance which there is betwixt them as the Sacrament of Faith that is to say Baptism is called Faith and as the Fridays before Easter are called the Passion of our Lord and the representation of his Death which is made in the celebration of the Sacrament his Death it self He instanced these two Examples of this kind of Speech in what preceded that which hath been cited I will not here stand to shew that the Fathers ground this resemblance some in the composition of Bread and Wine and others in their Effects because we have done it in the first Chapter of the first part Secondly they say that they are so called because They are the Sacraments the Signs and the Figures which do contain the Mystery I find it was formerly the reason of the Learned Tertullian Tertul. contr Marc. l. 3. c. 19. God saith he hath called the Bread his Body that you might know that he whom the Prophet had anciently represented by the Bread hath now given unto Bread the Figure of his Body And I cannot see that any other meaning can be given unto these Words of St. Austin Our Saviour made no difficulty to say this is my Body August contr Adim c. 12. when he gave the Figure of his Body It is necessary to observe that this Holy Doctor having alledged the Words of Jesus Christ This is my Body at the end of the Chapter he cites these Words of the Apostle The Rock was Christ to shew that what is said in the Old Testament that the Blood is the Life of Beasts ought to be understood significatively to signify that it is the Sign as the Bread is called the Body of Christ because it is the Figure and the Rock Christ because it was the Symbol of Christ The same St. Austin speaks thus elsewhere How is the Bread his Body and the Cup Id. ad Infant apud Fulgent Bed or that which is in the Cup his Blood Brethren these things are called Sacraments because one thing is seen and another thing is understood that which is seen is of a bodily Substance that which is understood hath a spiritual Fruit. I judge it was also the sense of Theodoret when he wrote Theod. dial 1. that our Lord who called his natural Body Wheat and Bread and who also called himself a Vine hath also called the visible Symbols by the Name of his Body and Blood not by changing their Nature but adding Grace unto their Nature Fac. l. 9. â— ult It is in the same sense Facundus said The Bread is not really his Body nor the Cup his Blood but they be so called because they contain the Mystery and for this reason our Lord called them his Body and Blood This is the Explication which St. Ireneus gives unto the Names of Body and Blood wherewith Jesus Christ honoured the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament Iren. l. 5 adver haeres c. 4. It is saith he the Eucharist of the Body and Blood And I know not but St. Eloy Bishop of Noyon Eligii vit l. 2. c. 15. t. 5. Spicileg borrowed this kind of Expression from St. Iraeneus for he makes use of it in the VIIth Century Let him saith he that is sick trust in the sole Mercy of God and let him receive with Faith and Devotion the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ Orig. in Matth. c. 15. Chrysost t. 5. Homil. 33. It is also in this sense that Origen calls the Bread the symbolical and typical Body Also St. Chrysostom the mystical Body and Blood Eusebius Bishop of Caesaria doth positively make a difference betwixt the Mystical Body of our Lord be it what it will and his true Body when going to explain what Jesus Christ saith in the 6th Chapter of St. John â—useb de Eccles Theol. l. 3. c. 12. Hiâ—ron in Ezech. c. 41. Bed in c. 14. Mar. 2â— Luc. of the eating his Flesh and Blood he observes That he spake not of the Flesh which he had taken but of his Mystical Body and Blood St. Jerom calls it the Mystery of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ And Venerable Bede thus explains himself The Bread and Wine do Mystically relate unto the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ In the third place they give us for a Reason of this Denomination that the Sacrament is a memorial of Jesus Christ and of his Death but for this third Reason we refer the Reader unto what we have said in the first Chapter of this second Part where we have examined the Reflection which the Holy Fathers have made upon these Words of the Institution Do this in remembrance of me We must then pass unto their fourth Reason which consists as they tell us in that the Bread and Wine are in the place and stead of the Body and Blood of Christ It is very likely Tertullian thought so when he said The Body of Jesus Christ is reputed to be in the Bread Tertul. de Orat. c. 6. This is my Body Corpus ejus in pane câ—nsetur hot est corpus meum Mr. Rigaut is not far from this Opinion when he makes this Observation upon the Words of Tertullian It appears that they may be thus explained by the Sacrament of Bread he recommends his Body as St. Austin lib. 1. quaest Evang. 43. hath said by the Sacrament of Wine he recommends his Blood But whatever Mr. Aug. in Joan. Tract 45. Rigaut's Explication may be St. Austin speaks as I think cleanly enough in one of his Treatises upon St. John where he makes this difference Id. de Civit. Dei l. 18. c. 45. betwixt the ancient People which lived under the Law and those now who live under the Gospel See how the Faith continuing the same Faith the Signs have been changed the Rock was Christ unto us what is put upon God's Table is Jesus Christ He also elsewhere establisheth this Maxim That all those things which do signify seem in some sort to hold the place of the things signified as when the Apostle saith that the Rock was Christ because without doubt it signified Jesus Christ It is in the same sense St. Cyril Hierosol Mystag 4. Cyril of Jerusalem said Let us receive these things with full assurance as the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ for in the Type of Bread the Body is given unto you and the Blood in the Type of Wine Bullinger writing against Casaubon alledges a Greek Text out of a Passage of Victor of Antioch taken out of his Commentary upon St. Mark wherein we find the same Doctrine Victor
for Jesus Christs coming from Heaven whereas according to the Word Id. contra Arr. c. l. 2. c. 17. we believe that he is present with us on Earth And again explaining these Words of Jesus Christ unto his Apostles I go unto my Father He spake certainly saith he of the human Nature which he had taken in regard whereof he was to go to his Father from whence he was to come to judg the quick and the dead but as for his Divinity which filleth all things and which is comprehended in no space as it leaves no Place so neither goeth it to any Place Bed Hemil. 3. aestiv de temp feria 6. Pasâ—h Id. in Joan. cap. 9 Venerable Bede in the eighth Century is no less positive herein than others for he assures That Jesus Christ was received into Heaven as to his Humanity which he took from the Earth and that he remaineth with the Saints upon Earth by his Divinity which equally filleth Heaven and Earth And upon these Words Behold I am with you always until the End of the World Id. in Marc. c. 13. Hom. 4. de Confes Him saith he that was then in the World by his bodily Presence is now every where present by his Divity And elsewhere he saith That Jesus Christ ascending triumphantly unto his Father after his Resurrection Id. Homil. aestiv de temp Dem. Jubilit hath left the Church in regard of his bodily Presence the which nevertheless he never for sook as to the Protection of his Divine Presence continuing with her unto the End of the World And explaining these Words of Jesus Christ unto his Apostles You shall see me a little while because I go to my Father c. It is saith he as if he had plainly said the Reason that you see me a little while after I am risen from the dead Id. Domin cantate is because I am not to tarry always upon Earth in respect of my Body but I must go into Heaven in regard of the human Nature which I have taken And again When I am ascended into Heaven Id. Dom vocem jucunditatis you shall not see me such as you were wont to see me now invironed with mortal and corruptible Flesh but you shall see me coming with Glory to judge the World and appearing to the Saints after Judgement with greater Majesty Id. Hom. hyem de temp Dom. 3. post Epiphan Id. in Festiv Pentecostes Id. ibid. He himself again testifies That he hath left the World and is gone to the Father because he hath withdrawn from the sight of those which loved the World that which they had seen and had carried by his Ascension unto the invisible things the human Nature which he had assumed He saith farther We amongst the Gentiles which have believed cannot our selves go unto the Lord whom we cannot now see in the Flesh but those amongst us which confess the Frailties of our Servitude we should now draw near by Faith unto him which is sate down on the right Hand of the Father In St. Matth. c. 28. In fine he declares That the Lord ascending into Heaven after his Resurrection hath left the Apostles as to the Presence of his Body but that he never left them as to the Presence of his Divine Majesty that we have for a Comforter Jesus Christ our Lord whom though we cannot see bodily yet we have contained in the Evangelists all that he did and said during the Time that he was in the Flesh This same Language was used in the IXth Century as shall be seen afterwards and we shall also make one of the Prelates of the Gallican Church despose in the XIIth Century to learn from his Mouth that it waâ— not then forgotten in our France but in the mean while it will not be amiss to observe that according to the Belief which we have established the holy Fathers have only taken notice of two comings of Jesus Christ the one attended with Shame and Ignominy the other with Glory and Majesty but both visible without ever telling us that there was a third which holds the middle betwixt both whereby Christ descends daily upon the Earth On the contrary the Protestants affirm That Tertullian declares the Nature of a true Descent in a manner which sheweth as they say That neither him nor the Church in his Time believed that a Body could descend from one Place to another without being seen Phantome Tertull. contra Marc. l. 4. c. 7. For saith he writing against the Ghost of Marcion when 't is made it is seen the Eys perceive it it is done gradually and so it requires to ask in what Posture with what Retinue Is it with Violence or moderately Or also in what Hour of the Day or Night it came down Moreover who see it come down who gave an account of it who affirm'd it And again saith he Is it a thing which is not easily to be believed when it is affirmed I declare saith the Protestant that I could never adjust this Declaration of Tertullian's with the invisible Descent of the Body of Jesus Christ in an infinite number of Places and that I should be obliged unto those which would help me to the means to do it For if what the Latins teach be true that the Body of Christ descends every Day upon the Communion-Table in an invisible manner I must be obliged to accuse Tertullian not only of Negligence but also of Stupidity to have spoken so absolutely and without excepting what happens in the Eucharist although I have otherwise a singular Esteem for his great Wisdom and Learning But on the other Hand seeing Tertullian is agreed with the other Doctors of the Church and that he saith nothing contrary to their Testimonies wherein they constantly oppose the Presence of the Divine Nature of our Lord unto that of his human Nature the Presence whereof they formally deny upon Earth I cannot forbear saith he to conclude that they have owned but one sole Presence of the Body of Jesus Christ I mean one visible Presence and that the Invisible Presence of that holy Body never entred into their Thoughts In fine say they it is whereunto amounts all the Declarations which hitherto have been made and whereunto we may also add these excellent Words of St. Austin Aug. in Joan. tract 50. Iâ— in Ps 46. He is gone and he is present he is returned and he departed not from us for he carried his Body unto Heaven but he withdrew not his Majesty from the Earth and these he took away his Body from our Sight but as God he departed not from your Hearts contemplate him ascending believe in him absent expect him as to come but feel him always present by his secret Mercy From hence doth proceed sundry Doctrines that if I mistake not deserve to be considered In the first place when the holy Fathers make a Difference betwixt the corporal Presence
besides what they have already told us of the local presence of Christ in Heaven and his absence from Earth in regard of his Body and his Human Nature the presence whereof they have constantly opposed unto the Presence of his Divine Nature they have formally declared themselves against the Polutopie of his Divine Body I mean against his presence in divers places at one and the same time Fulgent ad Trasim l. 2. c. 17. for they positively say That the Human Nature of Jesus Christ is local absent from Heaven when he is upon Earth leaving Earth when it goes up to Heaven that he is every where as God but that he is in Heaven as Man and that he is in a certain place in Heaven Aug. Fp. 57. sub finem Ep. Id de Civ Dei l. 22. c. 29. Id. tract 31. in Joan. Vigil contr Eutyck l. 4. c. 14. after the manner of being of a true Body That there is no corporal Nature that can be wholly and intirely in Heaven and wholly upon Earth at once That Jesus Christ as Man according to the Body is in one place and that he so departs from a place that he is no longer in the place from whence he parted when he is gone to another place That when the Body of the Lord was upon Earth it was not in Heaven and in like manner being now in Heaven doubtless it is not upon Earth and that 't is so certain it is not there that in regard of it we look that Christ shall come from Heaven Bertram de Nativ Christ c. 3. t. 1. Spicileg Dacher p. 323. That altho Jesus Christ is every where present according to the property of his Divinity he is but in one place according to the dimensions of his Body because that which is local is not in all places but it goes unto some other place when it hath left the place where it was before Just Mart. Apolog. 2. p. 82. Therefore St. Justin Martyr proved it as an Article of the Faith of Christians in his time That the Father Creator of the World having raised the Christ from the Dead was to raise him up to Heaven and there to keep or retain him until he had slain the Devils his Enemies and that the number of the good and vertuous which he foreknew should be accomplished that is to say until the day of the general Resurrection this is what the Protestants say Secondly according to the Doctrine of the Latins the Body of Jesus Christ must exist in the Sacrament after the manner of a Spirit invisibly and without occupying any space if the Fathers were of this Opinion they would not have failed to have left us proofs in their Writings or if they were obliged to say the contrary of Bodies in general and when they considered them in the Order of Nature they would doubtless have brought some exception touching the glorious Body of our Lord Jesus they were too prudent and too wise to forget so considerable a Circumstance the silence whereof might have been of very dangerous consequence and have done notable prejudice unto their Doctrine so that having exactly considered what they have said of Bodies in general and in regarding what they be naturally it appears they have made no Exception for the Body of Christ it follows then of necessity as the Protestants say that they believed not that it could exist after the manner of a Spirit that is to say invisibly and without filling a space according to the measure of its dimensions this is what I could discover in the Monuments of Ecclesiastical Antiquity which we have remaining touching this Question which is that the Holy Fathers testify That 't is impossible that that which hath neither Bounds Cyril Alexan. de Trinit c. 3. t. 6. Aug. l. 83. quaest q. 51. t. 4. alibi Fulgent deâ— de ad Pet. c. 3. nor Limits nor Figure and which cannot be handled nor seen can be a Body That all Bodies be they what they will take up space and place by its compass And that every thing continues in the state wherein God put it when he made it it not being the property of a Body to exist after the manner of Spirits The Protestants think it was in these kinds of Occasions that the ancient Doctors of the Church ought to have 〈◊〉 if they had any other Opinion of the Body of Christ and that altho they so determined the manner of existing of Bodies yet that they acknowledged another wholly peculiar unto the Body of Christ after the Resurrection after the which he may be in the Sacrament after the manner of a Spirit invisibly and without taking up of any space and without that each part of this Divine Body should answer unto each part of the place which should be proportioned unto its greatness and compass Nevertheless the Truth is say they that no such thing hath ever been found in their Writings and that no exception can be found for the Body of our glorious Redeemer Shall we say that they have therein wanted Wisdom and Conduct but they think this would be to stop the course of their Glory and to slander the great Reputation they have acquired in the Church of God that it would render them useless in the Controversies which divide Christians in the West because upon each point in dispute some of either side may tax them with the like thing and make them Parties It were much better say they to confess sincerely that they believed not that the Body of Jesus Christ could exist after the manner of a Spirit nor any other manner than as Bodies are wont to exist because that after his Resurrection he would have his Apostles know by seeing and feeling that he had a true Body In the third place it is another Consequence of the Belief of the Latin Church that the Body of Jesus Christ which was formed so long agoe in the Womb of the Virgin by the Power of the Holy Ghost is made every day by pronouncing these Words unto which the Latins attribute the Consecration of the Sacrament I will not here examine the divers Means by which it is pretended to be done my design not permitting it because I compose an Historical Treatise as far as the Subject will permit me and do endeavour as much as possible may be to avoid any thing that savours of Dispute and Controversy I will then only say that if the Holy Fathers were of the belief of the Latin Church touching the Sacrament of the Eucharist they could not avoid allowing as true this third Consequence which necessarily depends of it Yet nevertheless having read their Works I find they held for an undoubted Maxim Athenag legat pro Christ Tertul. contr Hermog c. 19. Just Martyr sect 17.23.43.59 p. 44. Orig. in Exod. Hom 6. Hilar. l. 12. de Trin. in Psal 138. Athanas contr Aâ—riau orat 3. That what is made was not
disputing formerly against the Catholicks and Orthodox would oblige the Catholicks to prove their Doctrine and Belief in so many express Words In the Dialogue against Arrius Sabellius and Photinus under the Name of St. Athanasius Vigil l. 1. contra Arr. c. l. 1. c. 23. ult Eâ—it p. 140. but whose true Author is Vigilius of Tapsus an African Bishop The Arrian demands of the Orthodox that he will shew him in the Scriptures the Word Homousion which signifies of one Substance or that he may read it properly that is to say in so many Syllables or that he should cease making use of it It is also the Proceedings of the Arrians against the true Athanasius in his Treatise of the Synods of Arimini and Seleutia Athanas de Synod Arim. pag. 911. Id. ibid. p. 913. Id. de decret Syn. Nicaen p. 270. But the Holy Fathers laughed at this ridiculous and impertinent Method It matters not said St. Athanasius if any make use of Terms not contained in the Holy Scriptures provided his Thoughts are Orthodox And elsewhere he saith That although these Words are not found in the Scriptures it sufficeth they contain a Doctrine agreeable to the Scriptures And Vigilius Homousion Vigil ubi supra cap. 26. p. 143. That it must be collected from the Authority of Scripture by a reasonable consequence and that it is not just to quarrel about a Name which may be firmly established by a great many Testimonies It is so several other Doctors have done and indeed they did wisely for there is nothing more unreasonable than to reduce Man to the Degree of Beasts in depriving him of the Use of Reasoning whereby he draws certain Conclusions from necessary Principles No body then ought to wonder if besides the direct Doctrine of the Fathers upon the Point of the Eucharist I here insert the indirect which consists in necessary Inductions because the Part of an Historian which I assume in this Work doth oblige me faithfully to represent unto the Reader the Inductions which others are wont to draw from their Testimonies for the better understanding their Doctrine leaving it unto the Liberty of every one to judge of their Value or Weakness I will therefore continue these Sorts of Proofs already begun in this Chapter What hath been already said containing the direct Proofs of their Belief with the Consequences which are inseparable from it Athenag de Resurrect mort ad ealcem oper Just p. 46. Athenagoras in his Treatise of the Resurrection of the Dead saith something if I mistake not worthy of Consideration Neither the Blood nor Phlegm nor Choller nor Spirits that is to say as well Vital as Animal shall be raised with our Bodies in the blessed Resurrection being no longer necessary unto the Life which we shall then live If the quickned Body of Jesus Christ be the Model and Pattern of the Resurrection of Believers as all Christians Universally agree Athenagoras say they could not believe that the Bodies of Believers after the Resurrection should have no Blood but that he believed also that the glorified Body of Christ had none also and if he believed it had none how could it be thought that he believed that it should be drank in the Eucharist but figuratively because we there make a Commemoration of that Blood which he shed upon the Cross for the Expiation of our Sins A Commemoration which we could not make as St. Paul commands us unless we participate of the Fruits and Benefits of his bitter Death A Participation which as the Protestants say is the Effect of the spiritual and mystical Eating or if you will Drinking Hieron Ep. 61. c. 8 9 c. 1.2 but also at the same time a real and true Eating which is done by our Faith The same may be said by Origen as appears by St. Jerom's sixty first Letter unto Pammachius touching the Errors of John Bishop of Jerusalem and it may be he proceeded farther at least he was not only suspected but taxed with it Moreover in the fifth Century it was not fully determin'd if the Body of our Lord in the State of Glory wherein it is Aug. Epist 146. ad Cons init had Blood For we find by one of the Letters of St. Austin which one Consentius wrote unto him to be inform'd if the Body of Christ now hath Blood and Bones This Consentius was not an Ordinary Believer or common Christian he seems to be a Bishop or at least a Priest worthy of St. Austin's Respect and Friendship for in the Beginning of the Letter he gives him the Title of most dear or most beloved And elsewhere he saith unto him That he is beloved in the Bowels of Jesus Christ I freely confess Ep. 222. saith the Protestant I cannot read these Words without thinking of the Belief of the Latin Church in the Point of the Sacrament for it is not to be conceived that one of the Conducters of the Christian Churches should propose unto the great St. Austin so ridiculous and impertinent a Question if it was believed in his Time of the Sacrament as is now believed by the Roman Catholicks In fine if it was the Belief of the fifth Century I cannot see how that Man can be excus'd of Folly and Extravagance Nevertheless on the other hand St. Austin deals by him in such a manner which suffers us not to judge so disadvantagiously of him What shall we then say Continues he to excuse the Simplicity of this Man and to give some Colour to his Demand Had he never participated of the Eucharist had he never approached unto the holy Table and had he never drank of the Cup of our Redemption Wherefore then doth he ask of St. Austin to know if the glorified Body of our Lord hath Blood if it were true that the Church at that time held for an Article of Faith That it was drank really and truly every time as they communicated of the holy Cup Or wherefore doth not St. Austin refer him back unto the Sacrament the only Consideration whereof might have satisfied Consentius if the Belief of the Latins had been the Belief of that Age. Let us proceed St. Austin proves unto his Friend by the Words of the Scriptures That the Body of Jesus Christ hath yet now Flesh and Bones but because in the Scripture he cites there is no mention of Blood he leaves this Point in the Terms Consentius left it that is to say in suspense saying That because Jesus Christ only said That he had Flesh and Bones without adding Blood we should not also extend our Question any farther nor add that of his Blood unto the other of his Flesh and Bones Fearing saith he there should come some other more inquisiâ—ive Disputer which taking occasion from the Blood should press us in saying If he hath Blood why not then Spleen why not Choller and Melancholly the four Humours which compose the Nature of the Body
as the Science of Physick it self doth testifie Let the Reader be pleased to consider the Demand of Consentius and the modest Answer of St. Austin to infer what he shall judge convenient For methinks saith the Protestant that there is but two Sides to hold the one is to say That the Question of Consentius was extravagant and the Answer wholly unworthy the great St. Austin which cannot be said without want of Charity towards the one and abusing the Memory of the other The other is to own That neither St. Austin nor Consentius could have spoken as they did and believe what is now believed by the Latin Church There is scatter'd here and there in the Writings of the Ancients several Things of this Nature from whence may be drawn Evidences for the Knowledge of what they believed In this Rank may be placed the Reproach made against the Orthodox in St. Austin August contra Faust l. 20. c. 13. which we touched in Chap. III. Part 1. That they served Ceres and Bacchus under a Pretext of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament but because the Accusations of Enemies are not always certain Proofs of the Truth of what they charge Ignorance and Malice having for the most part a great Share in these Sorts of Reproaches and Accusations I would lay no great Stress upon this Reproach but now mentioned if St. Austin's Answer did not thereunto ingage me For instead of returning back this Accusation as a bitter Slander and Calumny and to say unto these Enemies of Catholicks that they were deceived in thinking that their Eucharist was Bread and Wine and in building this erroneous Opinion on this wrong Foundation that they served these false Gods of the Heathens He contents himself with telling them that it is true that the Catholicks did celebrate their Eucharist with Bread and Wine Id. ibid. but that this Bread and Wine did not regard nor relate unto Ceres and Bacchus Although saith he it is Bread and Wine yet they have no Relation unto those Heathen Idols I add unto this Reproach the Accusation of Rabbi Benjamin in St. Isidor of Damieta mentioned by us in the same Place Isid Pelus l. 1. Ep. 401. for he accuseth the Christians to have invented a new and strange Oblation in consecrating Bread unto God whereas the Law commanded bloody Sacrifices Some think St. Isidore ought to have answered this Accusation with the Lye in plainly denying the Thing If the Oblation of the Church had been not an Oblation of Bread but an Oblation of the real Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ that it was the only Way this ancient Doctor could take to stop the Mouth of this insolent Jew if the Belief of Christians of his Time had been truly so there needs only common Sense to conclude thus But St. Isidore very far from so doing he agrees with Rabbi Benjamin Id. ibid. that the Oblation of Christians is an Oblation of Bread He only tells him That he doth ill to call it New because it was practised even under the Dispensation of the Law during which they offered the Shew-bread and he reproaches him of not knowing That the Law it self did consecrate the Shew-bread Hieron Ep. 22. ad Eustoch cap. 5. St. Jerom relates of several religious Persons of his Time in that they excused themselves for drinking Wine and with the more plausible Pretext to cloke this Liberty of drinking many Times unto excess they were wont to say in adding Sacriledge to their Drunkenness Ah! God forbid that I should abstain from the Blood of Jesus Christ This Excuse is as they think as weak and ridiculous as could be if these religious Persons and the Christians of that Time had not believed that what was contained in the Holy Cup and which they called the Blood of Jesus Christ was truly Wine For to what purpose say they was it to insist upon what the Communicants drank at the Holy Table to authorise the Liberty they took of drinking Wine if it had not been Wine in effect So that they believed no other Explication could be given to these Words which I submit to the Judgment of those which shall read this History Moreover the Protestants say That the same St. Jerom furnisheth them again in his Dispute against Jovinian with a Proof of the Belief of the ancient Church It was about Wine Hi. ron advers Jâ—vin l. 2. c. 4. which St. Jerom would have forbidden especially unto Maids and young People Jovinian on the contrary proves That we should use it and one of the Reasons he alledges is That Jesus Christ offered Wine and not Water in the Type and Figure of his Blood This Reason of Jovinian's is of no Force if it be not supposed that what is in the Chalice is Wine it may be Jovinian was mistaken some may say and not knowing the Belief of the Church in his Time he reasoned on a wrong Ground But what appearance is there that although he was not so Eminent as his Adversary yet he had his Talents and Gifts How could he be ignorant of what was not hidden from the most Simple and Ignorant amongst the People Besides St. Jerom's Answer gives us sufficiently to understand that Jovinian's Reasoning was well and solidly grounded and that he supposed a Principle universally received by all Christians In fine however considerable a Man St. Jerom was and whatever Respect we owe unto his Memory yet we may say without wronging him that he had his Failings seeing there 's no Man without his Faults and happy is he that hath fewest as saith the Poet. The most remarkable Fault in St. Jerom was his Passion against his Adversaries and too great Earnestness in disputing which sometimes transporting him beyond the Bounds of Reason inspired him with very injurious and outragious Expressions Id. ibid c. 11. It is then very likely he would not have spared Jovinian if his Opinion had been contrary unto that of the Church and but that he would presently have cried Ah the Heretick Nevertheless he doth not do so On the contrary he answers after a manner which plainly shews that in this Point he was of the same Opinion with Jovinian Although that Jesus Christ saith he was hungry and thirsty and that he was many times at Feasts yet it is not written that he pleased his Mouth nor his Belly if you except the Mystery which he shewed in Type of his Passion We have spoken in the second Chapter of our first Part of two sorts of Christians which used only Water in the Eucharist besides the Encratites of whom we will say nothing in this Place The former in the Morning Assemblies abstained from the Use of Wine in the Celebration of the Sacrament because they feared least the Smell of it should discover them to be Christians and People which came from participating of the Eucharist and that discovering them to be such Cyprian Ep. 63. it might expose them
to the Scorn of the Enemies of Christianity and have given them Occasion to have derided the Holiness of our Mysteries I could add unto all that we have said in the first place the Simplicity with which the primitive Christians celebrated the Sacrament as we shall perceive by Justin Martyr and the Liturgy of the pretended Dennis the Areopagite for it is very like if they had believed that the Sacrament is the real Body of Jesus Christ they would have used more Ceremony in the Celebration Secondly The Form of Consecration used in the ancient Church as well in the East as the West by Prayers Invocations and giving Thanks as hath been shewn in the seventh Chapter of the first Part doth shew in all likelihood that the Doctrine of the substantial Conversion was not believed because this Conversion could not be made without the abolishing the Substances of Bread and Wine and that Prayers and Benedictions never destroy the Creatures Moreover if what was consecrated were not Holy before Consecration as the Holy Fathers informed us in the same Chapter this Consecration could not happen unto Jesus Christ neither as God nor as Man not as God for in this regard he is Holiness it self not as Man because in this Regard he was ever Holy Besides if this Consecration only retired the Elements of Bread and Wine from their common natural Use to employ them in a religious and holy Use as they have also declared unto us it cannot be seen that this Effect of Consecration can subsist with the Ruin and Abolishment of these Elements For the Use of any Thing be it Prophane or Holy doth always presuppose its Truth and Existency otherwise it were useless in Religion and Nature The Latin Church hath also laid aside this Form of Consecration which she attributed some Ages past unto these Words This is my Body wisely foreseeing that whilst Consecration was made to depend upon Prayers and giving Thanks the substantial Conversion would scarcely be believed I will end this Chapter by another Consideration drawn from the Reasons and Motives which obliged the Holy Fathers to give unto the Sacrament the Name of Sacrifice according to the Enquiry we made in Chap. VIII of the first Part where we have at large proved by their proper Testimonies that they have given it this Title by reason of the Bread and Wine which Communicants presented upon the Holy Table of the Church for the Celebration of the Sacrament and by reason of the Oblation which was made unto God of this Bread and Wine at the instant of Consecration and afterwards Moreover they also called it so because we there render Thanks unto God for bestowing upon us his well beloved Son so that it is an Act of our Thankfulness unto the Father and the Son for the admirable and ineffable benefit of his Death because the Sacrament serves us now instead of the Legal Sacrifices being our external Worship under the Dispensation of the Gospel as Sacrifices was that of the Jews under the Oeconomy of the Law And in sine because it is the Memorial of the truly Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Cross These are the Reasons and Motives of this Name of Sacrifice which the ancient Doctors have given to the Sacrament and which we have largely insisted upon in the before-mentioned Chapter The Protestants hence infer two Things first That all these Reasons and Motives remove from the Minds of Christians the Idea of a real Sacrifice and makes them conceive that of a Sacrifice improperly so called Thence it is that when the Jews and Pagans reproached them that they had neither Altars nor Sacrifices they freely confessed it shewing thereby that if they had given unto the Eucharist the Name of Sacrifice and unto the Holy Table the Name of Altar it was but improperly and by abuse of Language Thence also it is that when they instruct those within and that they teach them what hath succeeded unto the Sacrifices of the Law they contented themselves to oppose unto the Mosaical Sacrifices either the Spiritual Sacrifices which we offer unto God under the Gospel or the Sacrifice of the Cross or both of them together and that there should rest no Scruple in the Minds of the People which they instructed touching the Nature and Quality of the Sacrifice of the Christian Church they unanimously depose at all Times and in all Places that it is an Oblation of Bread and Wine It is also what they were induced to believe because there was but one Altar or one Eucharistical Table in each Church and that the Sacrament was celebrated but once a Day For had they considered the Sacrament as a real Sacrifice they could not have had too many Altars nor too often offer the Sacrifice because in the often doing it there came the greater Benefit and Comfort unto their Souls It is also the Instruction which they drew from Believers being obliged to communicate and that those were made to depart out of the Church which did not communicate in that they never celebrated the Eucharist without Communicants and that Oblations were not received but from those which were admitted unto the holy Sacrament Why should that be if it had been a real Sacrifice seeing one might have assisted with Profit although one communicated not as is now practised in the Latin Church The second thing they infer is That seeing they have not looked upon the Eucharist as a Propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of the Quick and the Dead they have looked upon it as a Sacrament of Communion only and a Sacrament which is the Memorial of Jesus Christ and of his Death and where there is distributed unto the Communicants Bread and Wine for a Pledge of their Salvation For therein is distributed what is there offered unto God after Consecration Now the Holy Fathers testifie That there is offered unto God Bread and Wine Gifts and Fruits of the Earth the first Fruits of his Creatures Food which he bestows upon us the same things which Melchizedeck offered the Symbols and Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. So it is they have formally expressed themselves in this eighth Chapter which I desire the Reader to peruse over again to see if these two Inductions are lawful and natural CHAP. VII Continuation of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers and the Inferences of Protestants BEsides what hath been hitherto said it is observ'd that there be certain Occasions wherein the Holy Fathers should have omitted the Names of Figure Antitype Sacrament if they had believed that it had been the real Body of Christ himself nevertheless they have done the quite contrary For instance The Author of Apostolical Constitutions Constit Apost l. 7. c. 26. gives us a Form of Prayer and Thanksgiving for the Communion where he makes the Communicants say We give thee Thanks O Father for the precious Blood of Jesus Christ which was shed for us and for his precious Body whereof we
Promotion to the Episcopacy with any secular Oath whatever it did before Ordination In the first place I advertise the Reader there is in the Text Conficit corpus Christi sanguinis Sacramentum but it may plainly be seen it should be read Corporis Christi sanguinis Sacramentum and translated as we have done The Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ otherwise it would be Nonsense for what signifies make the Body and the Sacrament of the Blood of Christ From all which they conclude That the Fathers of the Council should have spoken in much stronger Terms if that instead of saying that they made the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ they had said that they made the Body and Blood They think that the Occasion also required it and that their Denial would have been better grounded and they affirm that if an Assembly of Prelates of the Latin Church were in the like Conjuncture they would make no mention and that justly of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ they would speak directly of the Glorious Priviledge of making the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ Whence is it then that these Prelates of the Synod of Cressy did not do so it is in all likelihood because they were not of the same Belief Optatus Bishop of Mileva in Numidia aggravating the Crime of the Donatists which had with horrible Impiety thrown down the Sacrament of the Orthodox unto the Dogs speaks of it after a manner which would not be easily pardoned had he believed as the Latins do that it is the very Body of Christ himself What saith he is there more sinful and impious than to throw the Eucharist unto Beasts But what could be weaker than this Expression if this Eucharist were the real Body of the Son of God ought he not to have thundred after another manner against these wicked Wretches Should he not have exaggerated with stronger and more Emphatical Terms the Horror of so fearful an Abomination In a Word ought he not have given it a blacker Term than that of Impious and have painted the enormous Sin of these wicked Wretches with other Colours Can it be thought that a Bishop of the Latin Church should be contented with such a kind of Expression in the like Occasion not at all Wherefore then was Optatus content They can conceive no other Reason but the Difference of their Belief Let the Reader judge if there be any other more probable In the mean while I must tell you that having sometimes meditated of St. Chrysostom's Books touching the Evangelical Priesthood to see how he advanced its Dignity and having applied my self in reading them to endeavour to discover wherein he makes the greatest Priviledge of this Order to consist which with his Eloquence he exalts as much as he thought fit I find that he only attributes unto it the Function of Prayer to obtain by their Prayers the Grace of the Holy Spirit upon the Sacrament Chrysost l. 3. de Sacerdot c. 4 p. 32. vid. p. 31. The Priest saith he is present not bearing Fire but the Holy Ghost he makes long Prayers not to the end that Fire should come down from Heaven to burn the Things offered but to the end that Grace descending upon the Sacrifice should by that means inflame the Spirits of those which are present and make them purer and more bright than Silver tried in the Fire And he saieth this in Opposition to the Sacrifice of the Prophet Elias 1 Reg. 18. when he assembled all the Prophets of Baal to prefer the Evangelical Priesthood 1 Reg. 18. and what is done in the Celebration of the Sacrament much before and above the Priesthood of the Law How is it that this excellent Genius had not bethought himself of saying that though the mystical Sacrificers of the New Testament did not cause to come down from Heaven a material Fire by their Prayers as Elias did to consume the Oblations offered upon the Holy Table but the Heavenly and Divine Fire of the Holy Ghost for the purifying of our Souls They do make moreover the true Body of Jesus Christ by the Force and Vertue of these Words This is my Body Was there ever a more proper and favourable Means and Occasion to advance this Evangelical Dignity and to place what it doth daily do in the Celebration of the Sacrament by converting the Substance of Bread and Wine into the Substance of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ which is infinitely more than what Elias did against Baals false Prophets Every Body knows in what manner the Romish Catholick Doctors do exalt this Dignity and that they never forget when they treat of its Advantages and Priviledges to attribute unto their Priests the Priviledge of making the real Body of the Son of God And I don't wonder any Body should think strange of it if they consider the Doctrine and Belief of the Latin Church how is it possible then that the great St. Chrysostom should have forgotten it that he hath not said a Word of it and that in so presing an Occasion he passed over in silence a Circumstance so remarkable and essential to his Subject Men may say what they please but for my part saith the Protestant I find no other Reason for it but their Difference of Belief St. Austin in his Books against Faustus the Manichean undertaking to advance the Honour and Excellency of our Sacraments above the ancient Sacraments so far as to exhort us to suffer for them with more Vigour and Courage than the three Hebrew Children or Daniel and the Maccabees did for theirs contents himself to say August l. 19. contra Faust c. 14. That it is the Eucharist of Jesus Christ the Signs of things accomplished whereas the ancient Sacraments were promises of things to come Had he believed that our Eucharist is not a Sacrament only but also the Substance of the Body of Jesus Christ and his Flesh also wherefore did he conceal and was silent in this essential Difference from the old Sacraments because his Reputation alone had been sufficiently capable of inflaming our Zeal and of more effectually disposing us unto Martyrdom for its Defence rather than any thing else which he said unto us When we censure we endeavour to represent to the Offender the Greatness of his Fault to make him the more to loath it and all means is used to let him see the Enormity of it especially in raising and advancing the Excellency of the Object which he offended for it is commonly according to the Nature and Quality of the Object offended that the Degree and Greatness of the Offence is proportioned let us then see after what manner the Holy Fathers have demeaned themselves towards them which have offended against the Sacrament of the Eucharist For doubtless considerable Informations may be drawn from these kinds of Censures A Council of Carthage assembled Anno 419.
it and in saying of the Wine that it is his Blood who will question it and who will say it is not his Blood Ibid. He teacheth him that the Bread is the Body of Jesus Christ and the Wine his Blood but to the end that he should not stagger at it Ibid. he conducts him unto the Metaphorical and Figurative Sense when he saith in the same place The Body is given unto you in the Figure of Bread and the Blood in the Type of Wine And if he saith unto him besides That we shall be Bearers of Christ when we have his Body and Blood distributed into our Members See here what he adds to let him see how that is done Jesus Christ said unto the Jews If you eat not my Flesh and drink my Blood you have no Life in you But they not understanding it spiritually were offended and forsook him thinking that he would have them eat human Flesh The old Law also had Shew-bread which are not now used because they appertained unto the ancient Dispensation but under the new the heavenly Bread and the Cup of Salvation sanctifieth both Body and Soul for as the Bread regards the Body so also the Word doth regard the Soul In fine he gives also this other Instruction unto his Neophyte Hold for certain that the Bread which is seen Id. ibid. p. 2â—9 is not Bread although the Relish judgeth it to be Bread but believe that it is the Body of Jesus Christ and that the Wine which is seen is not Wine although the Taste think so but that it is the Blood of Jesus Christ These Words already begin to inform him That there is Bread and Wine in the Sacrament and that the Sight and Taste do both testifie the same the Infallibility and Certainty of which Testimony the Fathers have asserted But because St. Cyril's Design in so speaking unto him was to instruct him that he should not look upon them as bare Bread and bare Wine but as the efficacious Sacraments of the Divine Body and Blood of Jesus Christ Id. P. 237. which they fail not to communicate unto those who worthily participate of them He told him a little before Do not consider them as bare Bread and Wine for by these Words he plainly presupposeth that it is Bread and Wine as he presupposeth elsewhere that it is Water and Oyl when he saith of Baptism Do not look at the bare Water Id. Catech. 3. illum p. 16. Mystag 3. p. 235. consider not this Washing as of common Water beware of thinking that it is common Oyl Thence it is that he likens the Change which happens unto the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist by Consecration unto what befals the Oyl of Chrism by Benediction to the end his Catechumeny may be perswaded that it is a Change of the same Nature Id. Mystag 3. p. 235. As saith he the Bread of the Sacrament after the Invocation of the Holy Ghost is no longer common Bread but the Body of Jesus Christ So also this holy Chrism is not bare Oyl or if it may be so said common after Invocation but it is a Gift and Grace of Jesus Christ And to compleat this Instruction Id. Mystag 5. p. 244. he tells him in the fifth Catechism you hear a Divine Melody which to invite you to the Communion of the holy Mysteries sings these Words Taste and see how good the Lord is Think you that you are commanded to make this Tryal with the Mouth of the Body not at all but rather with an undoubted Faith which changeth not for you are not bid to taste the Bread and Wine but the Antitype or the Figure of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ As St. Cyril ended his Course St. Gaudentius was called to the Bishoprick of Bressia in Italy he also composed a kind of Catechism for his Neophytes Gaudent tract 2. de rat Sacram Bibl. Patr. t. 2. p. 14. wherein he speaks unto them after this manner In the shadow of the Legal Passover there was not one but several Lambs slain there was one slain for every House one alone not being sufficient for all the People because it was the Figure and not the Passion it self of our Lord. The Figure is not the Substance but the Imitation of the Truth In this Truth then whereof we are perswaded one died for all and the same being offered in all the Churches doth nourish in or by the Mystery of Bread and Wine being believed he vivifies and being consecrated he sanctifies those which consecrate it is the Flesh of the Lamb it is his Blood for the Bread which came down from Heaven said the Bread which I will give is my Flesh and I will give it for the Life of the World and his Blood is also well expressed by the Species of Wine because when himself saith in the Gospel I am the true Vine he sufficiently declares that all the Wine offered in the Figure of his Passion is his Blood In this whole Discourse he teacheth them in the Death of Jesus Christ to search the Body and Substance of what had been prefigured by the Lambs of the Jews and if he speaks unto them of offering it again he intended not to understand it of a real Immolation because all Christians have always believed and all do still believe that Jesus Christ was never truly sacrificed but upon the Cross and that he cannot be any more sacrificed because he cannot die again They might then easily understand that St. Gandentius spake unto them of an improper Sacrifice which consists in the Representation of that which was made on the Cross For 't is in this Sense St. Aug. Ep. 23. Gaud. Serm. 19. p. 72. Austin saith That he is every day offered in Sacrament and in Figure And Gaudentius himself That we offer the Sufferings of the Passion of Jesus Christ in Figure of his Body and of his Blood Besides in telling them that he is immolated who was consecrated He plainly shews them that it is done not in the Person of Jesus Christ but in his Sacrament else he should have instilled into these Catechumenes two Doctrines which would directly contradict Christian Piety one is That Jesus Christ is less than him that consecrates him Cyril Alex. de Trin. dial 6. p. 558 t. 5. Heb 7.7 For as St. Cyril of Alexandria saith What is sanctified is sanctified by a greater and more excellent thing than it is by Nature according to what is said by the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews that which is less is blessed by the greater The other is That Jesus Christ should not have been always holy For as the same Cyril again saith Id. ibid. p. 595. Reason will absolutely perswade us to say That that which is said to be sanctified hath not ever been holy Therefore our Gaudentius declares unto them in the same Catechism That Jesus Christ commanded to offer the
you cannot understand then you may now say unto me seeing you have commanded us to believe explain unto us what it is to the end we might understand for this Thought may be in every body's Mind We know of whom Jesus Christ our Lord took Flesh to wit of the Virgin Mary we know he was nursed in his Infancy that he was fed that he grew that he attained the Age of Manhood that he suffered Persecution of the Jews that he was nailed to the Cross that he there died and was buried that he rose the third Day that he ascended into Heaven when he was pleased to go thither that he lifted up his Body from whence he shall come to judg the quick and the dead and that he is now sitting on the right Hand of the Father How then is the Bread his Body and the Cup his Blood Brethren these things are called Sacraments because one thing is what we see and another is that we understand that which is seen is a bodily Species that which we understand hath a spiritual Fruit If then you would know what the Body of Jesus Christ is hearken to St. Paul the Apostle which said unto Believers You are the Body of Jesus Christ and his Members your Sacrament is laid upon the Lord's Table and you there receive your Mystery You say Amen unto what you are and you thereto subscribe by your Answer It is said unto you The Body of Jesus Christ and you answer Amen be Members then of Jesus Christ that your Amen may be true But why all this to the Bread let us not add here nothing of our own but let us farther hear the same Apostle speaking of this Sacrament We which are many are one Bread and one Body understand this and rejoice for here is nothing but Unity Piety Charity one Bread and one Body although we be many Observe that the Bread is not made of one Grain but of many When you were exorcised you passed as it were under the Mill when you were baptised you were as it were kneaded and when you received the fire of the Holy Ghost you were baked like Bread Be then what you see and receive what you are See here what the Apostle hath said of Bread whereby he sufficiently shews without repeating it what we should believe in regard of the Cup for as to make this visible Species of Bread several Grains are reduced into one Body to represent what the Scripture saith of Believers they were but one Heart and one Soul in God It is also the same of Wine consider how it is one several Grapes are in a Bunch but their Liquor is mingled all into one Body so it is Christ hath represented us so it is he hath made us his and that he hath consecrated upon the holy Table the Mystery of Unity and of our Peace So it was they instructed in the ancient Church the new Baptised they were told that what they see upon the Holy Table was Bread and their own Eyes were called to witness this Truth They were taught that this Bread was the natural Body of Jesus Christ as it was his mystical and moral Body that is to say his Church because it is the Sacrament both of the one and the other and that in the Sacrament must carefully be distinguished the Substance of the Symbols which are visible and corporeal from the Benefit which accrues unto the believing Soul and which is a Thing invisible and spiritual that faithful Believers are although for mystical Reasons the very same thing which they see upon the mystical Table that is to say Bread according to what the Apostle saith we are one Bread and that they do receive truly that which they see mystically Now let the Reader judg if these Catechisms and these Instructions are for the Use of Roman Catholicks or for the Use of Protestants as for my particular I 'le pass unto a new Consideration CHAP. VIII Proofs of the Doctrines of the Holy Fathers drawn by Protestants from some Customs of the Ancient Church THere are two sorts of Language used in the Society and Commerce of Men to communicate unto each other their Thoughts and Intentions I mean Words and Actions The Language of Actions is silent indeed yet nevertheless very intelligible because Actions I speak of those authorized by publick Use are for the most part as significant as Words It is not then to be thought strange if we do relate what Inferences the Protestants draw from certain Customs which were practised by the ancient Church and which we have at large established in the first Part Therefore we will look upon them in this as established and will content our selves in barely mentioning them one after another to infer from each of them what may lawfully be deduced In Africa in St. Austin's time they communicated after Meat Thursday before Easter and in several Churches in Egypt every Saturday in the Year at Evening after having made a good Meal Without speaking of the Church of Corinth in St. Paul's time where some think the same was practis'd what Belief could those People have of the Sacrament of the Eucharist It is no very easie matter to think that they believed it to be the Substance of the Body of Jesus Christ and his Flesh it self else it must be confessed that they were guilty of an horrible Profanation to lodg in a Stomach full of Meats and it may be sometimes even to excess the precious Body of the Saviour of Mankind the only Object of their Worship and Adoration Nevertheless none of the ancient Writers have condemned this Practice those which have treated of it have spoken as of an innocent Custom which had no hurt in it and which moreover was authorized by the Example of Jesus Christ himself Therefore when the third Council of Carthage commanded to celebrate the Sacrament fasting it excepted the Thursday before Easter whereon it permitted to participate every Year after the Meal An evident Proof say some that there was no Crime in this Custom whereas it would have been intolerable if they had believed then the same of the Sacrament as the Latin Church now doth belive of it Therefore no Body can justly blame the Severity of its Laws when it is so strictly prohibited to communicate otherwise than Fasting The ancient Church for a long time used Patens and Chalices of Glass and we do not find that these first Christians ever made any difficulty of putting the Sacrament in Glass-Chalices nor that they were ever blamed that did it On the contrary some of those which used this Practice were commended for it nevertheless we cannot say that these ancient Believers were less circumspect than we are in the Celebration of the Sacrament Wherefore then was it that they feared not so much spilling of it in that Occasion as the Latin Church hath done some Ages past Let this Difference be well considered for saith the Protestant I am much deceived if
the Sun which sheweth it self in spreading its Light over all Things And afterwards directing his Words unto Christians he saith unto them That having said the Word was the Son of God they declare instead of the pure and holy Word of God a Man shamefully punished whipt and nailed to a Cross He makes a Jest Id. ibid. l. 6. p. 3 5. that we should believe that God is born of a Virgin saying that God intending to send a Spirit had no need to form it by his Breath in the Womb of a Woman because knowing before how to make a Body he could have made one for himself without sending his Spirit in so filthy a place And to render the more ridiculous this great Mystery of our holy Religion he compares it unto the Fables of Danae Id. lib. 1. p. 30. Id. l. 3. p. 131. 8. p 385. of Menalippe of Auge and of Antiope He could not suffer they should adore and as he saies elsewhere that they should honour with a Worship religious above all Religion a Man that had been a Prisoner and was dead As also for that Reason justifies the Plurality of his Gods as if Christians contented not themselves in worshipping one alone under a Shadow that they worshipped Jesus Christ Id. l. 8. p. 385. If Christians saith he worshipped but one only God they might it may be have some Pretext of despising all others but they render infinite Honours unto this which hath appeared but of late nevertheless they think they do not offend God when they serve and honour his Minister What St. Cyril of Alexandria hath written against Julian the Apostate sufficiently informs us of all the Blasphemies which this Back slider from the Christian Religion spewed out against all that was most Holy and Sacred in the most important and essential Mysteries of our Religion He denied the Incarnation of the Divinity of Jesus Christ which is the Ground and Foundation of all our Hopes the Salvation he hath purchased for us with the Price of his Blood he reviles us with the glorious Title of Mother of God which we give unto the holy Virgin Julian Ap Cyril Alex. l. 8. p. 262. t. 6. You cease not saith he to call Mary Mother of God He refutes the Mystery of the Trinity of Persons in the Unity of Essence accusing us of contradicting Moses who saith there is but one God whereas we admit of Father Son and Holy Ghost Id l. 9. p. 290 291. Moses saith he taught there is but one God but you have invented Things which agree not with what Moses said for you teach that the Son is God with the Father Id. l. 8. p. 262. And in the foregoing Book They will tell me it may be they admit not of two nor three but I 'le shew that they do admit of it by the Testimony of John when he saith In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God Id. ibid. p. 276. If the Word is God saith he again as you assure it is begotten of the Substance of the Father wherefore say you that the Virgin is the Mother of God For how can a Woman of the same human Nature with us bring forth a God And morover seeing God said positively It is I and there is no Saviour but me how then dare you call him your Saviour which is born of a Woman Accordingly we read in the Acts of the Martyrdom of Terachus of Probus and Andronicus which Cardinal Baronius inserts in his Annals but which Mr. Emery Bigot unto whom the whole Republick of Learning is obliged hath given us more entire in Latin two or three Years since and from whom we daily expect it in Greek we there read it I say that the Judg Maximius a Pagan hearing Terachus which he caused to be tormented say That he trusted in the Name of God and of his Christ failed not from thence to take Occasion to treat him with Unjust and Cursed and to tax him with the Plurality of Gods Pâ—ass SS Tarachi c. p. 7. False and wicked that thou art said he thou adorest then two Gods which thou confessest with the Mouth and thou deniest those which we do serve But to return to the great Enemy of the Christian Name I mean Julian the Apostate he also hath vilified our holy Baptism reproaching us with what we believe of the Vertue and Efficacy of these mystical and healing Waters See saith he what St. Paul saies unto them Julian Ap. Cyril Alex. l. 7. p. 245. that they have been cleansed and sanctified through the washing of Water as if Water penetrated unto the Soul to wash and to purifie it But Baptism cannot heal a Leper non a Scurf nor a Scab nor a Gout nor a Dysentery nor a Dropsie nor the least Sickness of the Body and then how much more unable is it to remove Adulteries Rapines and all other Impurities of the Soul This wretched Apostate hath ever undertaken to condemn the wise and just Conduct of the God which we adore in punishing of some for the Sins of others and for the same Reason he makes some Attempt against the Doctrine of Original Sin he urgeth what is written That God visiteth the Iniquities of the Fathers upon the Children and insolently condemns what God said in the Book of Numbers touching Phineas who ran a Javelin through the Israelitish Man which defiled himself with the Midianitish Woman till that he had turned away his Anger from the Children of Israel and hindred that he had not consumed them Id ibid l. 5. p. 160 161. Suppose saith he there had been a Thousand which had undertaken to transgress the Laws of God ought six hundred thousand been destroyed for the Sin of one thousand It seemes to me saith he it had been much better to save one wicked Man with so many thousands of Good than to have destroyed so many thousands of good Men in the Destruction of one wicked Man There is scarce one of all our Mysteries but have been attacqued by the Jews or the Gentiles and have been censured by them which doth evidently shew that they had Knowledg of them and that they were not ignorant of what was believed and practised in the Christian Religion either by reading our Books or by the Relation of some Apostates that fell away what we have hitherto said sufficiently testifies it Lactant. Instit l. 5. c 2. and what Lactantius saith of a Heathen which wrote against the Religion of Jesus Christ doth fully confirm it He related saith he so many Things and Things so secret and private that he seemed to have formerly been of the same Belief That which causeth Admiration in a great many is that amongst so many Things as they have said of our Religion amongst so many Reproaches which they have made against Christians touching the Nature of their Mysteries amongst so many Accusations
have been horrible Lyers in denying that they did eat Human Flesh without ever excepting the Sacrament they betrayed their own Judgment and erring shamefully in this Point they rendred themselves unworthy of being believed in what they have transmitted unto us touching the Faith and Belief of the Church But when on the other Hand I consider their Candor and Sincerity their Piety Zeal and the great Inclinations they had to glorifie God by their Death and the little Account they made of their Lives I dare not accuse them of Prevarication nor of Hypocrisie I too much honour their Memory and have too great a Love for their Vertue God forbid saith he that I should ever do them so great Injury or have any evil Thoughts of them because I own their Proceedings to be sincere and always accompanied with Truth as for my particular I leave it unto indifferent Persons to judge of the Consequence that hath been made of their Conduct But if the Silence of the Fathers hath served to shew what was the Belief of the ancient Church touching the Point of the Eucharist what the Holy Fathers have spoken against the Gods of the Gentiles will no less discover it In the first place they reproach them that by Consecration which consisted in certain precise Words and Formalities they rendred the Divinity which they adored present in the Image and inclosed him as one may say in his Statue as hath been shewed in the 7th Chapter of the first Part whereunto I will only add these Words of St. Chrysostom Chrysost Hom. in Christ nat t. 5. p. 477. Is it not an exceeding great Folly to introduce their Gods into Wood and Stone and into Statues of a low Price and to shut them up as it were in Prison and yet to think that they do nor say nothing that is amiss Let the Reader judge if the Fathers would have spoke after this manner if they had been of the same Belief the Latin Church is of and if they had not given their Enemies some Advantage over them In the second place 1 Apol. 2. p. 69. St. Justin Martyr 2 L. 5. p. 91. the Author of the Recognitions 3 Ad Demeâ— p. 201. St. Cyprian 4 Arnob. l. 6. p. 89. Arnobius 5 Inst l. 2. c. 4. Lactantius 6 Homil. 57. in Genes t. 2. Tertul. Apol. c. 13. St. Chrysostom do tell them their Gods may be stollen and that they should watch them and lock them up safe In truth saith the Protestant it would be hard to excuse them of Impudence and want of Judgment for these holy Doctors to have insulted after this manner over the Vanities of the Gods of the Heathen if they had believed of the Sacrament what is believed by the Latin Church because it is most certain that the Host of the Roman Catholicks which they look upon as their God and Saviour is carefully kept under Lock and Key and is subject and in danger to be stollen In fine Tertullian deriding the Domestick Heathen Gods saith amongst other things That sometimes they gave them in pawn Every particular Christian might have done the same by the Sacrament because at that time they were permitted to carry it home to their Houses and keep it And Cardinal Du Perron saith Du Perr de l' Euch. l. 3. c. 29. p. 918. upon the Report of Paul Jovius and Gennebrard That for certain St. Lewis King of France left an Host for Pledg of the Ransom which he had promised the Sultan of Egypt for granting him his Liberty There be others which have observed Obsâ—rvat upon the History of Chalcondyle that Vladislaus King of Hungary who was slain at the Battel of Varn Ann. 1444 also gave one unto Amurath the second Emperor of the Turks for a Pledg of his Faith upon the concluding of peace with him It is not very likely that Tertullian who was of a wise and very solid Judgment should make Reproaches against his Enemies which they might have retorted upon himself if he had believed that the Eucharist is our God and our Redeemer he sheweth then in doing so that he believed not so as the Latin Church believes at this present These are the Inferences which the Protestants draw from what hath been written in this Chapter CHAP. X. The last Proof drawn from what hath passed in regard of Hereticks either referring unto the Customs of some of them or in reference to their Silence or in fine of the Holy Fathers disputing against them THE Emperors Valentinian and Marcian Collect. Rom. bipart i. p. 104. speaking of Hereticks said thus The Enemies of our Religion have obliged us to seek God more carefully to find him more manifestly for the Light that shineth after Darkness seems to be greater and drink is most pleasant unto those that are a thirst as rest is most agreeable unto those which be weary In effect Hereticks have formerly as it were challenged the Holy Fathers unto the Combate and have invited them unto the occasion of meditating more particularly of the Truth of the Mysteries which they attacked therefore as they were obliged to stand the closer upon their Guard having to do with Enemies which took all advantages against the purity of our Religion I believe it may be safely said that of all the Works of these Holy Doctors there are scarce any more solid and more compleat than their Polemicks I mean the Books they wrote against these Enemies of Christianity it is true they had no Controversy with Hereticks upon the point of the Sacrament but nevertheless because the Holy Fathers do sometimes employ this Divine Mistery to refute some of their Heresies we will not omit drawing from those places some Light for illustrating the matter which we examine but before we proceed so far we will endeavour to explain some Inductions from certain Customs practised by some of them and of their Silence As to the former of these two Heads we see in the second Chapter of the first part that the Heretick Marc pretended to consecrate Challices wherein there was Wine and even White Wine as some think and that insisting very long upon the Words of Invocation and Prayer he made it appear red and of a Purple Colour to the end it should be believed that the Divinity which he called Grace should from the highest Heavens distil his Blood into the Cup by means of his Invocation whereupon it is said that if the Catholicks of his time had believed that the Wine of the Sacred Cup was changed by the vertue of Consecration into the real substance of the Blood of Jesus Christ the imposture of this Deceiver would not have been so much regarded by those miserable Wretches which he seduced for they might have said unto him that he took a great deal of pains to little purpose in making the Blood of the God which he preached come into the Cup seeing that the Catholicks and Orthodox without
Adversary without at the same time giving mortal blows to the Eucharist of Orthodox Christians of his time if it had been the same with that of the Latins But because those which know the rare Genius of Tertullian will never accuse him of so great Imprudence it must of necessity be concluded that the belief of the Church of his time upon the point of the Sacrament was quite contrary unto that of the Latin Church they think one cannot chuse but make this conclusion which I leave unto the Reader 's Liberty And from this Dispute of Tertullian against Marcion I proceed unto that which the ancient Church had against the Encratites which detesting Wine as a Diabolical thing and sinful to be used did celebrate the Mysteries with bare Water What have the Holy Fathers said unto them how have they refuted this Heresy have they said unto them that our Saviour having employed Wine to the matter of this Sacrament bare Water cannot be converted into the Blood of Jesus Christ have they further said to them that the aversion they had against Wine should not hinder them from using it in the celebration of the Eucharist because though it were Wine before Consecration yet it was not after the substance of it being changed by the vertue of Consecration into the substance of the real Blood of Jesus Christ and that so 't is no longer Wine which we drink but the real Blood of the Saviour of the World they have said nothing of all this unto them but then what have they said unto them they have constantly represented that Jesus Christ Offered Wine which be gave and drank thereof Which they prove by these Words I will no more drink of this Fruit of the Vine until the day I drink it new in my Fathers Kingdom It is in this manner that Clemens of Alexandria St. Epiphanius and St. Chrysostom argued against these Hereticks as hath been shewn in the second Chapter of the first part But it is enough spoken to this matter it is time to conclude this Chapter and by the same means I will conclude the Proofs drawn from the Disputes of the. Holy Fathers against Hereticks by the consideration of what passed betwixt them and the Eutychians The Heresy of the Eutychians following the same Track of the most part of others sought out Artifices and Invention the easier to insinuate it self into the Minds of Men thereby to make the greater Progress For although for the most part they declared there was two Natures in Jesus Christ but that at the instant of his being received up into the Heavenly Glory the Human Nature was changed into the Nature or Substance of the Divine Nature yet nevertheless I conceive to speak truly their Heresy was not much different in this point from the Heresy of Marcion and his Companions which formerly denied the Truth of Christ's Human Nature and only attributed unto him a Shew and Appearance And what makes me think so is that the ancient Doctors of the Church do testify that Eutyches did teach that Jesus Christ took nothing of the substance of the Holy Virgin but having brought I know not what Body of his own from his Heavenly Father he only passed through the Womb of the Blessed Virgin as through a Channel I will not insist upon alledging all the Passages of the Fathers which mention this it shall suffice to instance in some few Feriand Diacon ad Anato He would not confess saith the Deacon Ferrand that the Son was consubstantial with his Mother for he denied that the Holy Virgin had communicated unto the only Son of God which was to be born of her by the vertue of the Holy Ghost the substance of his Flesh And Vigilius an African saith Diac. Vigil adv Eutych l. 3. c. 3. alibi that he assured the Word was so made Flesh that it only passed through the Womb of the Virgin as Water passeth through a Conduit but that he did not believe that he took any thing of her which was of the Nature of our Flesh And Theodoret treating historically of this Heresy which he so learnedly hath refuted in his Writings Theod. haeret Fabul l. 4. 13. p. 246. t. 4. Eutyches saith he taught that God the Word took nothing of the Human Nature of the Virgin Mary but that he was steadily changed and made Flesh I use his ridiculous Expressions that he only passed through the Body of the Virgin and that it was the incomprehensible Divinity of the only Son of God which had been crucified buried and raised from the Dead Therefore the Count Marcellin said in his History Ma cell Cem. in Chronol Theodoret Bishop of Cyr wrote of the Incarnation of Christ against the Priest Eutyches and against Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria which asserted that Jesus Christ had not Human Flesh St. Prosper also observes in his Prosp in Chronol ad Consul Astur Protog that this Arch Heretick said That Jesus Christ our Lord Son of the Blessed Virgin partaked not of the substance of his Mother but that in the likeness of Man he had only the Nature of the Son of God This as I conceive is the exact Opinion of the Eutychians conformable in this point with Marcion therefore I find that the Holy Fathers which disputed against them have employed the Sacrament against them in the same sence and the same manner as those which preceded them had done against the Marcionites I mean that they proved by this Sacrament the truth of the Body of Jesus Christ as commonly the truth of a thing is proved by its Image Theod. dial 2. p. 84. t. 4. and by its Picture An Image say they must of necessity have its Original for Painters do imitate Nature and delineate things which they do see if then the Divine Mysteries are the Figures or Anti-types of a true Body it follows that our Saviour hath now a Body not changed into the Nature of the Divinity but filled with the Divine Glory It is the reasoning of Theodoret in his second Dialogue which he repeats again in two other places I cannot comprehend saith the Protestant the meaning of this ancient Doctor if the Doctrine of the real Conversion at that time was an Article of Faith in the Church wherefore to alledg the Sacrament as an Image and a Figure to prove the verity of the Body of Christ if it were really and truly the very Body it self I cannot understand this Difficulty but in freely confessing that Christians at that time did not know nor believe this real Conversion whence it was that Theodoret did argue against the Eutychians just as Tertullian had done before against the Marcionites The Evidence of this Truth will yet better appear if it be considered that there was an universal Peace amongst the Orthodox and the Eutychians touching the Sacrament of the Eucharist which Peace had been incompatible with the belief of the substantial Conversion which the
deceived that it hapned about they year 630. Hist Miscel l. 18. And because Anastatius wrote some time after there being yet in Egypt an Augustal Prefect it necessarily follows that he wrote about the year 637. And before the year 639. Hist Sarac in Omar that the Sarrazins entring into Egypt expelled the Augustal Prefect and made themselves Masters of the Country Which being granted the Reader may please to take notice that this Anastatius of whom we speak disputing against the Hereticks which held that the Body of Christ could not suffer from the first moment of his Conception brings in the Orthodox making this question to the Heretick Annasâ—at Sin in cap. 23. Tell me I pray the Communion of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ which you offer and whereof you are partakers is it the true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ or common Bread as that which is sold in Markets or only a Figure of the Body of Jesus Christ as the Sacrifice of the Goat offered by the Jews Whereunto the Heretick having answered God forbid we should say that the Holy Communion is the Figure of the Body of Jesus Christ or bare Bread Anastatius replies We believe it to be so and confess it according to Christ's words to his Disciples when in the Mystical Supper he gave them the Bread of Life saying Take Eat this is my Body He also gave them the Cup saying This is my Blood He said not this is the Figure of my Body and Blood He is the first that deviated from the usual Expressions and that denied what all the holy Fathers before him had affirmed and some also after him as we have shewed in the Third Chapter of this Second Part And have shewn that these holy Fathers testifie That when our Lord gave his Eucharist to his Apostles he gave them the Figure of his Body Anastatius then denying what the others affirmed according to the Maxim of Vincentius Lirinensis his Opinion should be rejected as an Opinion private and peculiar to himself and we are firmly and constantly to hold and embrace the publick and universal Belief but because the words of Authors are favourably to be interpreted at least as much as may be some say it should be so done towards Anastatius and that 't is easie to give a good sense unto what he said He declares the Eucharist is the true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ he saith nothing as they think that being rightly understood but is very reasonable because it is most certain that the Sacrament is unto the faithful Soul instead of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ that he truly communicates unto him this broken Body and this Blood poured out for his Consolation and Salvation and that it is changed as St. Cyril of Alexandria speaks into the Efficacy of his Body If Anastatius say they erred in rejecting the word Sign and Figure the Fathers both before and after him having used it it cannot be believed that he hath changed any thing in the ground of the Doctrine they think so for several reasons in the first place he saith it is not simple Bread as is sold in the Markets for thus speaking is to acknowledge that it is Bread which by Consecration hath acquired the quality of an Efficacious and Divine Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ of whom for that reason it takes the name as it hath the virtue and efficacy in its lawful use as when the Fathers say of the Waters of Baptism and the Oyl of Chrisin Cyril Hieros Catech. 3. illum Mystag 3. that it is not common Water and common Oyl they deny not that it is Water and Oyl they only mean that it is Water and Oyl sanctified to be the Symboles of the washing and purifying our Souls by the Blood of Jesus Christ and by the Vertue of the Holy Ghost Secondly He declares that it is not a Figure as the Sacrifice of the Goat which the Jews offered that is a Type and Figure without efficacy and vertue having taken this name of Type and Figure for a Legal Figure and without Operation in which sense it is true that the Communion is not a Figure and bare Type destitute of the truth like the Types and Figures of the Law whereof he produceth an Example in the Sacrifice of the Goat In the third place he speaks of a Body of the Lord Which being kept in a Vessel corrupts in few days Id. Anast Ibid. c. 23. changeth and quite altereth of a Body and Blood which as he saith in another Chapter of the same Treatise may be broken divided Id. c. 13. Ibid. c. 13. and distrihuted in parcels broken with the Teeth changed poured out and drank And in the same Chapter he saith That the Body and Blood distributed unto the People saying The Body and Blood of our Lord God and Saviour is a Visible Body created and taken from the Earth They conclude then that if there was imprudence in his expressions there was no Error in his Doctrine and they are very much confirmed in this Opinion which I freely remit unto the judgment of others if they consider the Doctrine had received no Opposition in the East nor West Maxim in Nol. Dionys Arcop pag. 68. 75. 69. not in the East because in the time Anastatius wrote in his Desert Maximius Abbot of Constantinople whose Name was more famous and his Doctrine more eminent taught That the holy Bread and Cup of Benediction are Signs and sensible Symbols or Types of true things Symbols and not the truth that the things of the Old Testament were the Types those of the New Testament are the Antitypes but that the truth shall be in the state of the World to come This Author faithfully retains the ancient Expressions and Doctrine of those which went before him and he thus defines the word Symbol Id. in Interp. vocum The Symbol is a sensible thing taken for an intelligible thing as the Bread and Wine are taken for the Divine and immaterial Food Not in the West because in the same Age Anastatius lived Isid Hispal de Offic. Eccl. l. 1. c. 18. St. Isidor of Sevil said That the Bread which we break is the Body of Jesus Christ that the Wine is his Blood that the Bread is called his Body Id. Origin l. 6. c. 19. because it strengthens the Body that the Wine resembles the Blood of Jesus Christ because it creates blood in the body Id. voca c. 26. de alleg in Genes c. 12. And that these two things which be visible pass into a Sacrament of the Divine Body being Sanctified by the Holy Ghost That by the Commandment of the Lord we call the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ that which being made of the fruits of the Earth is sanctified and becomes a Sacrament by the Invisible Operation of the Holy Ghost Id. in Genes
were written the Books of Images which bear the name of this Emperor because in all likelihood they were written by his order rather than by his Pen. In one of these Books is censured the word Image or likeness as those of Nice had censured it in those of Constantinople I will not now examine if there was any thing of surprise in this Censure that is if it was done with an intent of directing it against Nice and not against those of Constantinople for although it is most certain that the principal design of the Council of Francfort was to oppose that of Nice against whom those of the West were no less incensed than those of Nice had been against them of Constantinople I will make no censure upon the matter not to give occasion unto any uncharitable Reader of censuring me It shall suffice to cite the words of the Book Carol. Magnus de imag l. 4. c. 14. that all the World may see what was the thoughts of the Author in censuring the word Image The Mystery saith he of the Body and Blood of Christ ought not now to be called Image but Verity not Shadow but Substance not the Type of things to come but what had been figured by Types the Day-light is already come and Shadows are gone away now Jesus Christ the end of the Law in righteousness unto all believers is come he hath already fulfilled the Law He that was in the valley of the shadow of Death hath seen a great Light already the Vail is fallen from the Face of Moses and the vail of the Temple which is rent hath discovered unto us all things that were hid and unknown now the true Melchisedek to wit Jesus Christ the righteous King the King of Peace hath bestowed upon us not the Sacrifices of Beasts but the Sacrament of his Body and Blood It is no hard matter to guess at the scope of these words and to see that they do not tend to the condemning the word Image taking it for a holy Sign instituted of God not only to signifie and represent but also effectually to communicate Jesus Christ unto our Souls dead for our sins their intent is only to reprove this term as it was taken for a legal Shadow or for a prefiguration of Christ to come therefore to shew that the Sacrament was not of the Nature of Types and Figures of the Law which did only represent without communicating the thing represented it is spoken in opposition unto the Sacrifices of Beasts that our Saviour hath left us not his Body but the Sacrament of his Body and of his Blood but a Sacrament so efficacious and Divine that the faithful Soul never participates of it but that it really and truly communicates of the thing it self whereas the Types of the Law did only prefigure it therefore it is that the Author said a little before Ibid. speaking of the Mystery of the Body and Blood of the Lord That believers do receive it every day in the Sacrament And in another Book he declares Lib. 2. c. 25. That it is the Mediator of God and Men which by the Ministry of the Priest and the Innovation of the name of God doth make the Sacrament of his Body and Blood which he hath left us for a Commemoration of his Death and of our Salvation And again The Apostle St. Paul Ibid. that chosen Vessel considering that the Body and Blood of our Lord should not only be equal unto all other Sacraments but also preferable unto any he saith Let every one examine himself and so let him eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup. He testifies That what is eaten at the Holy Table is Bread and in saying that the Sacrament of the Eucharist ought to be preferred almost before all others he shews plainly that he did not believe it was the very Body of our Saviour for these words would have been unworthy a Christian if they had been spoken of the proper Flesh of the Son of God But what need there any other explanation than that which is given us by Charlemain himself when writing unto Alcuin his Tutor De ration Septuages ad Alcuin he saith That our Saviour Supping with his Disciples broke Bread and also gave them the Cup for a Figure of his Body and Blood and gave them a great Sacrament for our profit Thus it is that several explain it But as to Alcuin let us see what he will furnish us for the better understanding the History of this Age and if the Tutor will accord with his Schollar I will not insist upon the Treatise of Divine Offices which go in his name because the Learned do confess that 't is not his it shall suffice to relate what is written by the late Andrew du Chesne the last of which hath set his hand unto the Edition of his works We do not saith he want sufficient conjectures to shew that this Treatise is not Alcuin's Gallia Braccata Andr. Quercetan praefat ad Alcuin c. 17. for the Author whoever it was doth testifie that he is of Gall Narboness and an ancient Copy by the help whereof we have recovered twelve whole Chapters Attributes the question of the Feasts of Saints tacked unto the 18th Chapter unto the Friar Elpris who according to Trythemius flourished in the year 1040. And in fine in this Treatise there is mention of the Institution of the Feast of All-Saints the first of November Nevertheless it is easily found by Sigebert and others that it was not begun to be celebrated that day in France and Germany till a good while after the Decease of Alcuin that is Anno 835. and Alcuin died Anno 804. Neither will I infist upon a Confession of Faith which Father Chifflet hath published in the name of the famous Alcuin because it is no less Fathered upon this excellent Master of Charlemain than the Book of Divine Offices And that it is most certain it was taken out of the Books of Anselm's Meditations and unadvisedly crowded into the Works of St. Austin Now Anselm lived towards the end of the XI Century and the beginning of the XII And I could easily here insert all the evident proofs of Forgery which the piece it self doth furnish but because it is so apparent a truth and that moreover I find it hath already been done I will proceed to the consideration of what is found in the genuine works of Alcuin touching the subject in hand In one of his Letters he saith of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament that they be consecrated in Corpus Sanguinem Christi into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ But let us hear the Explication he gives unto us of these words in the same place Alcuin Ep. 59. The Sanctification saith he of this Mystery doth presage the effect of our Salvation The faithful people is understood by the Water and by the Grains of Wheat whereof the Flower is taken to
contrary unto the Doctrine of Paschas who taught that the Eucharist was no other Flesh but that which was born of the Virgin Mary and which suffered upon the Cross But in these two Sermons the people are taught that it is not the same Flesh nor the same Body which suffered nor the same Blood which was shed for us You cannot but think those that said so were opposite unto Paschas and endeavoured to ruin his Belief and it may be also that of Odo Arch-Bishop of Canterbury if it be true that he did what William of Malmesbury wrote a long while after for there be a great many that think this Relation is very suspicious In the main Bishop Usher observes that the words which were but now alledged in the last Testimony have been stolen away by some perfidious hand from the Manuscript which was transported from the Church of Vigorn into the Library of the Benedictines College at Cambridge But besides these two Witnesses which shew what was believed of the Sacrament in England there is to be seen a Sermon which was read unto the people every Year at Easter to preserve in their minds an Idea of the Belief which their Fathers had left them It is needless to transcribe it here at large some parts of it shall suffice which shewing that it was almost copied out of the Treatise of Ratramn of the Body and Blood of Christ they will by the same means shew that it contains a Doctrine opposite unto that of Paschas Liber Catholic serm Anglice recitandorum ad Bedam l. 5. c. 12. edit Anglo-Sax Latin seeing Ratramn was one of his declared Enemies There is great difference saith this Homily betwixt the Body wherein Jesus Christ suffered and the Body which is consecrated for the Eucharist for the Body wherein Jesus Christ suffered is born of the Flesh of Mary and is furnished with Blood Bones Skin Nerves and Humane Members and with a reasonable Soul but his spiritual Body which we call Eucharist is composed of several Grains without Blood without Bones and Members and without a Soul The Body of Jesus Christ which suffered death and which rose again shall never die any more it is eternal and cannot die but this Eucharist is temporal not eternal it is corruptible and divided into several parts broken by the teeth and goeth into the draft This Sacrament is a Pledge and a Figure the Body of Jesus Christ is the truth it self We hold this Pledge sacramentally until we do attain unto the Truth and then the Pledge shall be accomplished And a little before If we consider the Eucharist in a corporal manner we see that it is a corruptible and fading Creature but if we consider the spiritual vertue which is therein we know very well that there is life in it and that it gives immortality unto those which which receive it with Faith There is great difference between the invisible vertue of this holy Sacrament and the visible form of its proper Nature by Nature it is fading Bread and corruptible Wine but by the vertue of the Word of God it is truly his Body and his Blood not for all that corporally but spiritually that is to say in vertue and in efficacy Whereunto amounts what is said before The Bread and Wine which the Priests do consecrate Ibid. do outwardly offer one thing unto the eyes of the Body and another thing inwardly unto the eyes of the faithful Soul outwardly it is plainly seen it is Bread and Wine and it is judged to be such by its form and by its savour and nevertheless they be truly after Consecration his Body and Blood by a spiritual Sacrament And to the end the Hearers should be well persuaded they were the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ not in substance but in vertue the Change which happens unto the Bread and Wine by Consecration is compared unto that which comes unto Children by Baptism and unto the Water of this Sacrament of our Regeneration Ibid. The Child of a Gentile is baptized yet it doth not change its outward form although it be changed inwardly It is led unto the Font full of sin by the disobedience of Adam and he is cleansed from all inwardly although he is nothing changed outwardly So also the Water of Baptism which is called the Fountain of Life in appearance is like unto other Waters and subject unto Corruption but the vertue of the Holy Ghost intervenes by Prayer unto this corruptible Water and by a spiritual vertue renders it fit to cleanse the Body and Soul from all sin Now we consider two things in this only Creature according to its true nature it is a corruptible Water but according to the spiritual mystery it hath a saving vertue It is well said that Jesus Christ did change by an invisible power the Bread and Wine into his Body and Blood but after the same manner that formerly he changed the Manna and the Water of the Rock into this same Body and and into this same Blood to wit because he made it the Sacrament of his Body and of his Blood And again Ibid. What there is in the Sacrament that gives life proceeds from a spiritual Vertue and an invisible Operation therefore the Eucharist is called a Sacrament because one thing is therein seen and another thing is understood that which is seen is of a bodily Species that which is understood hath a spiritual Vertue And in another part of the Sermon expounding what Jesus Christ said of eating his Flesh in the 6th of St. John He commanded not to eat the Body which he had taken Ibid. nor to drink the Blood which he had shed for us but by this discourse he meant the Sacrament which is spiritually his Body and Blood for whosoever eateth him with a believing heart shall have this Life everlasting Under the Old Law Believers offered Sacrifices which represented the Body which Jesus Christ offered unto his Father for our sins but as for the Sacrament which is consecrated at the Altar of God it is the Commemoration of the Body which he offered and of the Blood which he shed for us as he himself commanded saying Do this in remembrance of me I am not ignorant that in this same Homily there is some miraculous Apparitions made mention of whereunto Christians had given some way since Paschas his time But that serves only to confirm the Observation that was made That although our Saviour had bestowed upon his Servants in the X. Century Light sufficient to avoid the most dangerous Errors yet he communicated not so great a measure unto them as to be safe from all sorts of Surprises in matters of Religion If from England we pass into the Country of Liege we shall there find Folcuin Abbot of the Monastery of Lobes who speaking of the Eucharistical Table Tom. 6. Spicil de Gestis Abbat Lob. p. 573 saith That it is the Table whereupon
That there is no doubt but the Tholousians and Albigensis condemned Anno 1177. and 1178. were no others but the Waldensis Neither doth Monsieur de Thoul make any difference betwixt them in the sixth Book of his History Which sufficeth to shew that the Waldensis as well as the Albigensis had an Opinion contrary unto the Latin Church upon the point of the Sacrament seeing we fully proved it in regard of the Albigensis from whose Belief and Faith the Waldensis did nothing differ What they say may be read in a Treatise entituled The spiritual Almanack where they give an account of their Faith particularly upon the Subject of the Sacrament for they say in plain terms History of the Waldensis and Albigensis of Paul Perrin l. 1. c. 6. That the bread which Jesus Christ took in his last Supper which he blessed which he broke and gave his Disciples to eat is in its nature true bread and that by the Pronoun This is shewn this sacramental proposition This is my Body not understanding these words identically of a numerical Identity but sacramentally really and truly and not measurably And afterwards The eating of the sacramental bread Ibid. is to eat the body of Jesus Christ in figure Which is just the Language used by the Albigensis in the Year 1120. as hath been shewed But besides their own Confession we have the Testimony of their very Enemies which suffer us to make no question but that they opposed themselves against the Decrees of Councils held under several Popes against Berengarius Radulphus Ardeas an Author of the XII Century or of the XI makes this Observation Hom. in Dom. 8. post Pentec They say that the Sacrament of the Altar is meer bread Caesarius of Heisterback In Dialog They blaspheme the Sacrament of the body and blood of Jesus Christ Contr. Vald. c. 6. to wit because they did not acquiesce unto the determinations of the Latin Church And Reynerus They say that the Body of Jesus Christ is but bread but the proper body they call that the true Body of Jesus Christ De erroribus Begehard Conradus de Montepuellarum Prebend of Ratisbon They blaspheme saith he against the Sacrament saying That the true Body of Jesus Christ cannot be contained under so small a quantity of bread and against the Priests calling them through derision Contra Vald. c. 8. God-makers Evrard of Bethune saith the same They are so far from saying that what Christ called his Body is his Body that they deny it Contra Vald. c. 11. as Successors of Judas Ermengard wrote somewhat to the same effect touching the same Waldensis it is the same Slander which is made against them by Guy of Perpignan Lib. de haeres saying That they denied that the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ was under the Sacrament of the Altar Tom. 2. c. 19. And Thomas Waldensis speaking of Bruno and Berengarius They erred said he like those He observes moreover That when the Host was lifted up they lifted their eyes up unto Heaven saying openly that they worshipped the Body of Christ where it was Contra Vald. c. 10. and not where it was not Coussard a Divine of Paris speaks of them also in these terms They say that the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ is not the real Sacrament but consecrated bread which is called the Body of Jesus Christ by a Figure as it is said that the Rock was Christ Therefore the Inquisitor Emery Director part 2. q. 14. chargeth it upon them as an Error when they said That the Bread is not transubstantiated into the true Body of Jesus Christ nor the Wine into his Blood And because the Albigensis and Waldensis to shew that they could not conceive that the Eucharist was the real Body of Jesus Christ were wont to say that how big soever it had been it could not subsist still because the numbers of Communicants would have consumed it since the time they participated thereof Peter de Vaux-Sernay writes that they taught publickly and infused this Doctrine into the ears of the simple Hist Albigens c. 2. That the Body of Jesus Christ if it had been as big as the Alps had been consumed long since and reduced unto nothing by those which eat thereof And I find in the Chronicle of the Senonian Monastery at the Mount de Vauge in the Diocess de Toul that a Person of Quality upon that very consideration rejected the Doctrine of the Real Presence and Substantial Conversion for being sick of his last Sickness at the end of the XII Century they going about to persuade him that the Sacrament was the real Body of Jesus Christ Tom. 2. Spicil p. 405. And how saith he can that be For if this Body were as big as a great Mountain it would have been eaten by the people a thousand times There be some which observe also that Berengarius was wont to jest by the like words at the Confession of Faith which they would have him make and wherein they made him confess amongst other things Petrus Clunia contra Petrobrus That the Body of Jesus Christ is truly handled by the hands of the Priests that it is broen and eaten by the teeth of Believers I will joyn unto all these Considerations that we find in the History of Roger de Hoveden by the relation of Peter Cardinal of St. Chrysogan and Legat of Pope Alexander the Third in France touching his proceedings against the Waldensis at Tholouse and principally by the Declaration of Henry Abbot of Clervaux upon the same Subject That one of the eminentest amongst them called Peter Moran being pressed to declare ingenuously what he believed concerning the Sacrament of the Altar answered Apud Baron ad An. 1178. That the holy Bread of Life Eternal consecrated by the Ministry of the Priest and by the word of our Saviour is not the Body of Jesus Christ A Declaration which fully justifies that it was the true Belief of the Albigensis and Waldensis and sheweth that they were deceived which said that they did not deny that the Eucharist was the true Body of Jesus Christ but when him that celebrated and consecrated was sinful and unworthy to consecrate for they denied it simply and absolutely without enquiring into the good or bad qualities of him that officiated And the most considerable Doctors of the Latin Communion do confess that they had the same Belief that Berengarius had of the Sacrament and it cannot justly be any way questioned after all the many Testimonies which have been instanced It is true that the Albigensis and Waldensis have been taxed and charged with many reproaches and there has been many grievous Accusations laid to their charge both referring unto their Doctrine and their Manners As to their Doctrine I think that their Belief ought to be judged according to their Confessions of Faith which being publick Declarations of
exterminated like so many Witches and Sodomites whereby they were necessitated to desire the protection of this Prince who the better to be informed of the truth of matters Carolus Molilinae in Monarch Franc. sent thither one of his Masters of Requests called Fumee and a Doctor of Sorbon a Jacobin called Parvy who was his Confessor They visited the Parishes and Temples of those people where they found neither Images nor Ornaments for the celebrating of Masses nor any marks of the Ceremonies of the Church of Rome and having strictly examined and informed themselves of the crimes charged upon these Albigensis they found not as much as the least appearance thereof On the contrary it was clearly made evident unto them that those of Merindol and others which made profession of the same Faith were strict observers of the Lord's Day that Infants were baptized by them according to the practice of the primitive Church and that they were well instructed in the Law of God and in the Apostles Creed The King having received the Report of Fumee and Parvy affirmed with an Oath Ibid. That these Waldensis were the best and honestest people of his Kingdom All this hindred not their Enemies from undertaking again to accuse them of several Crimes in the Reign of Francis the First unto whom they presented a Confession of their Faith in the Year 1544. to justifie their Innocency Therein they explain themselves upon the Article of the Sacrament just as the Protestants do at this present But it is time to pass from Provens into Piedmont Claude de Cecil Advers error sectam Valdens fol. 1 2 7 8 9 10 20 61. Arch-Bishop of Turin hath already informed us that the Waldensis had setled themselves in the passage of the Alps within his Diocess upwards of two hundred years before he wrote against them and he wrote above a hundred years ago that they had continued there until his time preaching publickly and defending their Doctrine in Disputes against their Adversaries This Prelate acknowledgeth that in writing against them he undertakes a difficult task seeing that Popes and Princes have employed all means imaginable against them without ever being able to make them renounce the Profession and Belief which they embraced He grants that the covetousness of the Clergy and their ill conduct was the occasion of those people's separation He reckons up most of the Articles of their Belief which are found to agree with those which are received and professed by Protestants Ibid. fol. 55 56 'T is true he doth not speak positively of the Sacrament it may be because he will not stand to examine what the most knowing amongst them said of this Article seeing they are things so high and mysterious that the greatest Divines are scarce able to understand and much less to teach them blaming moreover those of the Latin Church who writing against these Waldensis troubled themselves in vain about the difficulties which attended the subject of the Sacrament As for their life and manners this same Prelate renders them this testimony Ibid. fol. 9. Excepting only saith he what they teach against our Belief and our Religion they lead a purer and more innocent life than other Christians do Ibid fol. 4. And speaking of the holy Scriptures he saith That they believe only what is contained in the Old and New Testament Ibid. fol. 10. Therefore he declares That he will cite nothing against them but what is contained in the holy Canon which themselves saith he do allow of But besides the testimony of this Bishop Apud Thuan. hist lib. 6. Monsieur de Thoul mentions some others which are no less favourable unto them In the first place That a person of Quality in Provens in Francis the First his time mentions them as people which were very constant in serving God and of paying the King and Lords in whose Territories they lived the Tribute and Sums due not failing in the Obedience due unto them Ibid. Secondly he alledges that of William du Bellay Lord of Laugay who in the relation he made of them unto Francis the First according to the Order which he had to that purpose These Waldensis which saith he had been in Provens about three hundred years he could not charge them with any thing but some points touching Religion and which was common with them and the Protestants as not kneeling unto Images of not offering them Candles nor any thing else not praying for the Dead and of celebrating Divine Service different from the Church of Rome and in the vulgar Tongue and some other points of this nature Which is the reason that Cardinal Sadolet unto whom they sent their Confession of Faith agreeing with that of the Protestants Apud Thuan. hist l. 6. declared freely That the other things laid to their charge beside the Heads contained in that Book were nothing but things forged to render them odious and meer fooleries And Monsieur de Thoul himself Ibid. who mentions some of the things which they believed of the same which Protestants do acknowledgeth That they had been charged with other things concerning Marriage the Resurrection of the Dead the state of Souls departed From these Waldensis are lineally descended from Father to Son those which in the Alps whether in France or in the Territories of the Duke of Savoy at Cabriers and at Merrindoll in Provens make profession of the Protestant Religion of whom we have no thoughts of speaking nor of extending any farther this History because that Luther began to appear in Germany Zuinglius in Switzerland in the Year 1517. Farrel at Geneva Anno 1535. and afterwards several others in other places which have all opposed the Tenet of Transubstantiation although they agreed not all about the Article of the Eucharist So that I should here conclude the History of the Doctrine and of the Alterations which have thereupon ensued were I not obliged to speak somewhat of other Churches besides that of the West There is in the Library of the holy Fathers a Liturgy of the remainder of the ancient Christians in the Mountains of the Kingdom of Mallabar in the East-Indies Missa Christian apud Indos t. 6. Bibl. Pat. p. 142. where they speak after this manner Our Lord Jesus Christ in the night in which he was betrayed took the holy Bread into his holy hands listed up his eyes unto Heaven and gave it unto his Disciples saying Take eat ye all of this Bread this my Body The Church of Ethiopia expresseth the Sacramental words in such a manner that they make a metaphorical and figurative proposition as the Roman Catholicks and Protestants do confess for she saith 1 Literae Aetheop Jesuit Alphon. ann 1626. edit Roman an 1628. This Bread is my Body As for the Armenians if we believe Guy of Perpignan and Thomas Waldensis they do deny Transubstantiation 2 Uterque apud Vald. t. 2. c. 30. They teach
Alexandria to visit the Patriarch Miletus his Country-man unto whom he succeeded after his decease having received a thousand marks of his kindness and friendship during his life time of the vigorous resistance which he made by order of this same Miletus in the Year 1592. and the following years against the Latins who used all their endeavours to take off the Russians and Moscovites from the Communion of the Greek Church of his Voyages into Germany where he visited several of the Protestant Universities into Holland where he became acquainted with Grotius and Cornelius Haga Into England from wence he returned unto Alexandria unto his Patriarch Miletus who dying had his dear Cyril for Successor I should also mention the Voyage which he made unto Constantinople whilst he was Patriarch of Alexandria the good success which he had there of meeting his friend Cornelius Haga Ambassador from the States General of the United Provinces the design then in hand of making him Patriarch the difficulties which interposed therein and his Return unto Alexandria from whence he was again called in the Year 1621. to be installed in this Dignity unto the general satisfaction of the Greek Church The great persecutions and troubles which the Latins stirred up against him and how notwithstanding all their Artifices and endeavours he preserved his Dignity of Patriarch of Constantinople although with some difficulty by reason of the malice of his Enemies from the Year 1621. unto the Year 1638. at which time they got some opportunity to strangle him and several other notable circumstances wherewith his life was attended But because in this place I consider him only as a Patriarch of the Greek Church which spake of the Eucharist in the Confession of Faith which he composed and communicated unto a Synodal Assembly convocated at Constantinople in the Year 1629. although several years before he had made several acquainted with it and had also left a Copy of it with the Bishop of Leopolis from whence it was sent to Rome I shall content my self only in observing that this Confession of Faith found different Receptions The Protestants rejoyced in as much as it is exactly agreeable unto their belief The Armenians finding it contrary unto them in the point of Predestination and of Free Will rejected it as being forged by the Protestants and there were some amongst the Latins which did so too But at last all the World was disabused and every body was constrained to own that it was truly made by the Patriarch And how can it be questioned after being refuted by Caryophylus and two Councils where it is said it was condemned the one under Cyril of Beroe who by the violent death of the other Cyril became the peaceable Possor of the Patriarchship and who in the Year 1639. assembled a Synod at Constantinople wherein he caused the Confession now spoke of to be condemned And the other under Parthenius who having driven out Cyril of Beroe in the Year 1641. had it also condemned in 1642. As to the Refutation of Caryophylus it cannot reasonably be thought to contain the Opinions of the Greek Church because that although he was a Greek by Nation yet he was a Latin by Religion Programmate poster having been bred up at Rome from his Infancy as Nihusius doth confess And as for the two Councils if they be received to be Councils of the whole Greek Church for legitimate Councils where all things were done in due form in a word for true Councils it must be granted that the Doctrine of Cyril of Lucar the same with that of the Protestants had not time to be setled amongst the Greeks but the Protestants do not yield at the sight of these two Councils which they suppose to be only forged by the Latins In fine There was lately communicated unto me a Treatise of a learned Man of this Communion which proves by many strong Arguments and Reasons that these two Councils were only fained by the Latins which I intend not to determine but I shall only say that there is one thing in this History which much surpriseth me which is that Parthenius under whom the latter of these Councils was to have been assembled in the Year 1642. was driven out by another Parthenius unto whom Leo Allatius a Greek Latinized and Library-keeper of the Vatican gives this testimony De perpet consens Eccl. Orient Occident l. 3. c. 11. of having been Disciple to Cyril of Lucar and a great favourer of the Calvinists from whence they fail not to infer that the Doctrine of Cyril was not extinguished with his person as neither do they spare to say that if the Greek Church did believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation there would signs of it appear in the Decrees of their Councils as well as in those of the Latin Church in their Liturgies Catechisms and in the publick and authentical pieces touching their Religion which yet they pretend is not to be seen They add also that the Greeks believe that the Communion breaks the Fast that the Eucharist is digested and goes into the draft with other common meats as hath been shewed in the 17th Chapter They observe that they receive the Sacrament standing that they do not bow unto it when it is carried unto 〈◊〉 folks that they have not dedicated unto it any particular Holy day nor Processions that they do not expose it in publick neither in their rejoycings nor in their sorrows that they have not composed any particular Office and Prayers to celebrate its praises and in a word that they do nothing of all which the Latins do to express the Adoration which they give unto it Therefore Arcudius a Latinized Priest of the Isle of Corfu all in a passion demands of Gabriel of Philadelphia wherefore the the Consecration of the Gifts being ended That the Priest doth not bow his head nor adore nor prostrate himself nor give any shew of honour Wherefore is it that he doth not light Candle nor sing any Songs nor Hymns unto the Sacrament making unto it neither reverences nor bowing of the head nor of the knee not honouring it by bowing down unto the ground and not so much as saying unto it Lord remember me in thy Kingdom Besides I think that the Greeks in general are at this time so ignorant that they are not very capable of giving an account of their Faith touching the holy Sacrament So that if I mistake not it would be no difficult matter for persons any thing ingenious whether Protestants or Roman Catholicks to make them to embrace and believe either of the two Opinions But it is now time to treat of the Worship which is to be the Subject of the latter part of this History THE HISTORY OF THE EUCHARIST Part III. Wherein is Treated of the Worship of it AFter having seen and considered the manner how the Ancient Christians did Celebrate their Eucharist and what they said and believed of this August Sacrament with
Chrysostom may be understood of the Sign of the Cross only and not of the Cross it self especially if the passages are understood in their full compose and extent Besides these things which have been examined the Original whereof we have endeavoured to discover there be some others which have been hinted at as for instance divers Hymns as well regarding the Clergy as the People the reading the holy Scriptures several prayers the turning out of the Catechumeny the Energumeny and the Penitents whereto we may add in regard of the Greeks the preparing the Oblation that is to say the Symbols of Bread and Wine upon the Table of Proposition the carrying of these gifts unto the Mystical Table to be Consecrated whereof we say nothing now having treated thereof at large in the first Part of this History As also of the time the place and of the Vessels necessary unto Celebration Whereunto may be joyned the Ceremony of Vestments appointed unto this use whereof I find no mention at all made before Pope Sylvester who held the Pontifical See at the beginning of the IV. Century that is from the year 314 until the year 336. For in his Life there is mention made of Dalmaticks for the Deacons Tom. 1. Concil p. 258. and of a certain Cloth wherewith their left hand was to be covered The Author of the questions upon the Old and New Testament in the works of St. Austin but before his time Tom. 4. in append q. 46. p. 436. Tom. 1. Concil p. 729. Hom. 83. in Matth. Liturg. Chrysost speaketh also of the Dalmaticks which Deacons used in his time The 41 Canon of the 4th Council of Carthage doth formally prescribe them the use of the Cope during the reading of the Gospel and at the time of Oblation only St. Chrysostom makes mention of White Vestures in the celebration of the Sacrament and in the Liturgy which goes in his name may be seen the prayers made unto God whilst he that Officiates is putting on the holy Vestments an action which is not omitted by the Author of the Apostolick Constitutions as hath been before shewed According unto which St. Jerom observes Lib. 1. advers Pelag. c. 9. p. 565. Ep. 3. that all the Clergy have White Vestures when the Eucharist is celebrated and in his Letter unto Heliodorus upon the death of Nepotian he saith that Nepotian at his death bequeathed him the Coat which he used in doing the functions of a Priest Since which time in the Life of St. Gregory by John the Deacon and in the Authors which have treated of Divine Offices there is frequent mention made of these Priestly Habits for it cannot reasonably be referred unto this custom what Policrates said of St. John That he bore a Golden Plate upon his forehead as the High Priests of the Jews did But all that is nothing in comparison of what is seen in the Latin Church for there is to be seen six several sorts of Vestments or if you will Ornaments which belong unto the Priests which Officiate and eight or nine unto the Bishop and there is not one of them but they have searched some mysterious signification for it and whereunto they have destined a particular Consecration not to insist of the diversity of colours which are there to be seen nor of the sundry occasions which sometimes require one sometimes others and the practice and use is esteemed so necessary that if it be ever so little neglected the celebration of Mass is in a manner counted imperfect Those which desire particularly to inform themselves of these things now hinted at may but read what Durandus Bishop of Mende and the President Duranti have writ on this subject For it shall suffice me here to observe that Jesus Christ and his Apostles unto whom we may joyn the Christians of the first Ages did not celebrate the Eucharist but in their ordinary Apparel Therefore Wallafridus Strabo wrote in the IX Century that Priestly Vestments were multiplyed in time unto the degree they were then in For in the first Ages saith he Masses was celebrated with ordinary Apparel Lib. de reb Eccles c. 24. as it is said that several in the Eastern Churches do still practice Lib. 1. Gemm amm c. 89. And Honorius of Autun said about 400 years ago That the Apostles and their Successors did celebrate the mysteries in their ordinary Cloaths and with Challices of Wood. As for the bowings of the Body before a Crucifix no more then before an Image and before an Altar which is so frequently practised amongst the Latins by those which say Mass I see no footsteps of it neither in the constitutions which are called the Apostles nor in St. Cyril of Jerusalem no nor in the pretended Dennis the Arcopagite whose Writings could not see light before the end of the V. Century although all of them have very exactly represented that which was observed in their times in the celebration of the Eucharist from whence I infer that what is to be seen in one part of the Liturgy attributed unto St. Chrysostom to wit That he that celebrates turns himself towards the Image of Jesus Christ with bowing of the body is not of this holy Doctor but that in all likelihood it was foisted into the Liturgy since the contests of the Greeks about the subject of Images and what confirms me in this thought is that the favourers of Image Worship have not alledged these words not so much as the Deacon Epiphanius in the second Council of Nice although he answers unto some passages of this Father which the Iconoclasticks had cited against this Worship What might be alledged from a Homily which is in the works of St. Chrysostom and hath for Title That there is one only Law-giver of the Old and New Testament is of no moment because this Homily is none of his as hath been long since remarked by Fronton du Duke a Learned Jesuite who laboured with great success upon the works of this incomparable Writer The Muscovites Apud Euseb Hist l. 5. c. 24. Vide Lit. Cassander although they be of the Religion of the Greeks yet they seem to celebrate the Sacrament with less Ceremony than the Greeks the Armenians much like these latter and the Abyssins although they have no want yet methinks have not so many as the Greeks nor Armenians But to see a very great number you need only have recourse unto what is done by the Latins in the Roman Order in the Mychrology in the Pontifical in the Ceremonial of Bishops and in the Book of the Sacred Ceremonies of the Church of Rome which are more or less in number according to the days and persons which celebrate especially when 't is the Pope himself that says Mass whereas by the testimony of Gregory the first and of several others the Apostles only repeated the words of Institution with the Lord's prayer which simplicity Amalarius Fortunatus a Writer of the IX
Century heartily desired Lib. 3. de divin office in praefat It would suffice saith he without Singers without Readers and without all the other things practised in the celebration of the Sacrament that the Bishop or Priest should pronounce the blessing to consecrate the Bread and Wine to the end the People should be nourished for the salvation of their Souls as the Apostles did at the first beginning of Christianity By which words he sheweth that he found the celebration of this Mystery too much clogg'd with Ceremonies as also St. Austin found that all the Christian Religion was 500 years before Amalarius for he complains That Religion is burdened with heavy yokes Ep. 119. c. 19. so that the state of the Jews is more supportable But now it is time to consider the preparations of the Communicant having examined those of him which Celebrates CHAP. II. Of the Dispositions necessary for the Communion And first Of the Inclinations of the devout Soul in regard of God and of Jesus Christ WHen our blessed Saviour did distribute the Bread and Wine of his Eucharist to his Apostles he said unto them Do this in remembrance of me which his Apostle doth extend to the Commemoration of his Death and of his Sufferings a Remembrance which draweth after it all the good and holy dispositions which the Communicant should have towards God and Jesus Christ And these Inclinations proceed from several Idea's which this saving remembrance doth stir up in our Souls at the time in which we do prepare our selves for the participation of this adorable Mystery of our Salvation For although the Sacrament was instituted principally for remembring the death of our Saviour nevertheless because his Death is inseparable from his Incarnation Resurrection and Ascension so it is that we approach unto the holy Communion after having meditated on all these great and sublime Mysteries every one of which produceth in our Souls dispositions somewhat different as having divers objects and several encouragements the which nevertheless are all heavenly and all divine and all which do tend unto one mark and unto one end which is the Glory of God and of Jesus Christ and the eternal Salvation of our Souls And to say the truth this Sacrament cannot represent unto our eyes all these great and wonderful objects but that it opens unto us at the same time a wide Field for our Meditation to enlarge upon from the Incarnation of the eternal Word even unto his second coming to Judgment and we cannot finish this glorious course without having all the dispositions which God requires and all the preparations which he desires of us This will plainly appear if we do severally reflect upon all the Idea's which the remembrance of our Saviour and of his Sufferings do present unto our Souls and what the Fathers have said upon each of them and if we also feel the divine motions which will necessarily flow from the Christian Soul For example The holy Fathers have considered the Eucharist as a Memorial a Symbol an Image and a Sacrament of the Incarnation or as the Doctors of the Greek Church speak of the Oeconomy of Jesus Christ that is to say of that free and merciful dispensation which inclined him to take our Nature in the Womb of the blessed Virgin Mary by the miraculous operation of the Holy Ghost which is what St. Justin Martyr would say when he observed Contr. Try phon p. 296. That the Lord commanded us to make the Bread of the Eucharist in remembrance in that he was made Man for those which should believe in him It was also the thoughts of Eusebius Demonstr l. 8. a Genesi That Jesus Christ gave unto his Apostles the Symbols of his divine Oeconomy commanding them to make the Image of his true Body And it cannot be any way doubted but it was on this same consideration that Pope Gelasius said De duabus in Christo natur That we do celebrate in the Action of the Mysteries the Image and resemblance of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and that we must believe of our Lord Jesus Christ that it self which we profess in his Image which we there celebrate and there receive that is to say that we should be persuaded of the truth of his Flesh and Blood the Symbols and Sacraments whereof we do receive at the holy Table It is just what St. Leo intended to express by these words which were addressed unto the Eutychians You should communicate at the holy Table in such a manner Serm. 6. de jejun 7. mensis pag. 86. that you may not in the least doubt of the truth of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ It is whereunto also attendeth all the passages of the Fathers which prove either against the Eutychians or against the Docetes and the Putatifs the truth of the Flesh of Jesus Christ by the Eucharist as the existence of a thing is proved by the Image and by the Figure which represents it Dialog 2. p. 84. because according to Theoderet's saying There must be an Arch-type of the Image because the Painers which imitate Nature do represent the Images of things which are seen From whence he draws this Conclusion If the divine Mysteries are the Figure of a true Body then the Body of our Lord is now also a true Body not changed into the nature of the Divinity but filled with the divine Glory A Reasoning for the most part like unto that of Tertullian against Marcian for having expounded these words This is my Body by these others That is to say Lib. 4. advers Marcion c. 40. the Figure of my Body he adds That it would not have been a Figure if there had not been the truth of a Body or a true Body And indeed this Idea of the Incarnation of our Lord was in such a manner imprinted in the minds of Communicants that the last Prayer of St. Basil's Liturgy begins thus O Jesus Christ our God Bibl. Patr. t. 2. Graeco-Lat we have accomplished and finished according to our power the Sacrament of thine Oeconomy and Dispensation This Meditation which representeth unto us the horrour of sin the sad condition we were in the fearful Gulph wherein we have precipitated our selves the Love of the Father the tender Charity of the Son the admirable work of our Redemption the great Mystery of Godliness God manifest in the Flesh fills us full of Gratitude unto God And if unto the Idea of his Conception and Birth we joyn that of his Life therein to contemplate the purity of his Innocence the glory of his Miracles the splendor of his Vertues the efficacy of his Doctrine and the shame of his Sufferings we shall therein find so great joy so great comfort and so great pleasure in the contemplation of this divine Scene that we shall be insensibly transformed into the same Image from Glory unto Glory to speak with St. Paul that is to say
in newness of life And if we would know what this Resurrection is which St. Paul requires of a Christian St. Ghrysostom will inform us Hom. 10. in c. 6. Rom. That it is a holy Conversation which proceedeth from the change of Manners the death of Sin the restoring of Righteousness and the entire ruin of the old Life to establish one that is new and wholly Angelical Therefore it is that Theodoret interpreting these same words In c. 6. Rom. gives us this excellent Lesson The Sacrament of Baptism teacheth us to fly from sin for Baptism is a type of the death of our Saviour now by it you participate with Jesus Christ of death and also of the Resurrection you must then lead a new life and agreeable unto him of whose Resurrection you have been made to participate Unto the Remembrance of Christ's Resurrection these holy Doctors joyn also that of his Ascension and Glory therefore it is they say Gaudent tr 2. tom 2. Bibl. Pat. That the Sacrament is the Viaticum of our journey wherewith we are nourished by the way until we come unto him at our leaving this World a pledge of his presence and a portraict of his passion until he comes again from Heaven And in preparing our selves for the Sacrament we cannot make this reflection but that we must bewail his absence but yet comforting our selves with this persuasion that he is sitting on the Throne of his Father as Lord of Heaven and Earth the Master of all things and the Monarch of the whole Universe That it is from thence that he sends forth his Commands into all the World that he dispenseth the Treasures of God that he defends his people that he protects his Church and that he restraineth the pride and insolency of his Enemies but that we must at the same instant be raised with heavenly thoughts divine motions and spiritual affections to be lifted up unto him by holy ejaculations and to contemplate him shining with Glory in Heaven after having meditated on him all covered with shame upon Earth and nailed upon the Cross in Mount Calvary for the expiating of the sins of Men and for the work of our Redemption Therefore the holy Fathers desire we would become like unto Eagles Chrysost Hom. 24. in 1. ad Corinth To fly up unto Heaven that we should have nothing of Earth in us that we should not bend downwards that we should not wallow in the love of the Creatures but that we should incessantly fly towards the things above and that we should stedfastly behold the Sun of Righteousness with an earnest sight and piercing eyes In fine the ancient Liturgies do not from all these Commemorations separate that of his second coming Which maketh us think of that great and last day wherein the Dead shall be raised wherein the Books shall be opened and wherein shall be the universal Judgment to cast the Wicked into Hell and to receive the Good into the felicity and glory of Heaven then there shall be no more want of Sacraments for as Theodoret saith In 1 ad Corinth c. 11. After his second coming we shall have no farther need of the signs and Symbols of the Body because the Body it self will appear but until that time the Celebration thereof is absolutely necessary according to this Observation of the Author of the Commentaries upon the Epistles of St. Paul attributed unto St. Jerom In 1 ad Corinth c. 11. That we have need of this Memorial during all the time which shall pass until he be pleased to come again So that all the Idea's which we have considered do help to form in us Acts of Faith Repentance Hope Charity Humility Gratitude Sanctification Holiness Justice Innocence Purity Joy Consolation and generally all those of Piety and devout Christianity and by consequence all the motions and dispositions which the Soul of a worthy Communicant ought to have towards God and Jesus Christ Now let us see those which it should have in regard of the Sacrament it self CHAP. III. Of the Motions and Dispositions of the Communicant in reference to the Sacrament AS the remembrance which our Saviour commands us to make of him and of his death when we receive the Sacrament comprehends all the Qualifications which we ought to have in regard of God and of Jesus Christ so also the Examination required by St. Paul contains all those which we ought to have in regard of the Sacrament 1 Cor. 11. Let every one saith he prove his own self But it is not sufficient to say that the Apostle enjoyns Communicants unto this Examination we must also know wherein it doth consist to this purpose I say that what St. Paul requires of us is an act whereby we must search our hearts look into every corner of it whereby we examine every part of our Soul we must assure our selves of the state wherein it is whether Faith hath therein taken its place whether Hope lifted us up in expectation of the happiness promised and whether the Love of Jesus Christ and of our Neighbour therein unfolds its vertue and efficacy In a word it is an act whereby we discover whether we be fitting to approach unto the holy Table for in coming thither we protest that Jesus Christ is our Master and our Lord that it is he which hath redeemed us by his Blood and that hath purchased Life for us by his Death And as the Apostle enjoyneth this Law unto all Communicants it may be said that this Trial doth consist in the serious and sincere Examination which every one makes of his Conscience to know in what state and disposition it is Whence it may be gathered that it desires no Witnesses but that it should be done in private and in secret in the presence of God only for there it is that the Sinner calls himself to an account that he reflects upon his life past that he condemns his wicked actions that he groans under the thoughts of his sins that he deeply mourns for the greatness of his offences that he cleanseth his heart and purifies his Soul by the tears of Repentance and by the working of a true Contrition But because the Latin Church defines in the Council of Trent whose Decretes are to be considered as the Confession of Faith of the Latin Church Sess 13. c. 7. That the custom of the Church declares that the necessary proof is that how contrite soever the sinner feels himself he ought not to approach unto the holy Eucharist without having first made his sacramental Confession that it must of necessity be made that without it one receives this Sacrament unworthily unto his death and condemnation We are obliged to enquire what was the Conduct of the ancient Church in this occasion for it is not my intention to examine the matter of Confession in all its parts but only in that which concerns my subject To do it in some order it must
be observed that the Council of Trent restrains the necessity of this Confession before communicating unto those which feel themselves guilty of mortal sin Concil Lateran c. 21. whereas Innocent the Third had thereunto subjected without any distinction all those which had attained the age of discretion In. 3. Thom. q. 80. art 4. in his Council of Lateran Anno 1215. Secondly That Cardinal Cajetan doth not believe Confession absolutely necessary unto the Communion if one have a real Contrition saying This necessity is not founded neither upon the Commandments of God nor of the Church nor upon the Law nor natural reason In the third place That here is not question of publick sins which fell under the Canons of publick Penance because those sins excluded those which were guilty of them from receiving of the Sacrament unto which they were not admitted until they had fulfilled the time of their laborious Penance which presupposed Confession or at least the Conviction of those sins which indispensibly obliged sinners to undergo the Laws and bear the yoke of this Penance Here is the Question of the necessity of the Confession of the Latin Church which comprehends all mortal sins universally without dispensing with any body from confessing them in private unto a Priest before they approach unto the Communion Thereupon I say that if it be true as all the World doth agree that the Communion was very frequent in the primitive Church insomuch as some do think that they communicated every day It is very hard to conceive how twelve Apostles could suffice to receive the Confessions of the Believers of the Church of Jerusalem Act. 2.41 4.4 I will not say every day but even once a Week after the Conversion of eight thousand persons in two Sermons by St. Peter What I say of the Church of Jerusalem I say also of the Church of Rome Apud Euseb hist lib. 6. c. 43. towards the middle of the III. Century for Cornelius its Bishop witnesseth in Eusebius that it was already so increased and so rich that it maintained the number of fifteen hundred persons Widows Orphans and poor impotent folks and that the rest of the people was an innumerable multitude Yet nevertheless to serve all this great people he had but forty six Priests and himself which made up the forty seventh Now I cannot tell whether it was possible they could hear the Confessions of thirty or forty thousand Believers whereof this Church in all probability was composed and to hear them once or twice a Week for in all appearance that was the least that they did communicate I do not see how they could do it so much as once in a fortnight But this is not yet all Let us see if the Examination requisite in order to receive the Communion doth principally consist in Confession Origen speaking of lifting up the eyes unto Heaven in Prayer or of looking down to the Earth as the Publican did refers it unto the Conscience of each Believer and declareth in these words that it is the same as to the participation of the Sacrament In Joan. t. 23. p. 252. K. Let every one saith he judge himself as to these things and let a man examine himself and so let him not only eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup but also let him lift up his eyes unto Heaven and let him pray in prostrating and humbling himself in the sight of God He refers both the one and the other of these two things unto the Judgment of Believers without making any difference betwixt them According unto which he declareth elsewhere That Pastors have not power to excommunicate Believers Homil. 2. in Judic p. 212 in Matt. tract 35. p. 121. and to deprive them of the participating of divine Mysteries but when they be guilty of publick sins which be known unto the whole Church We yet descend lower Hom. 28. in 1 ad Cor. c. 11. St. Chrisostom will tell us in expounding the words of St. Paul Let a man examine himself and so let him eat he doth not command one to examine the other but to examine himself making a Judgment which the people know not of Hom. 8. de poenitent quae est 56. t. 1. p. 700. and an Examination which may be without Witnesses And elsewhere St. Paul saith Let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup He did not discover the Ulcer he shewed not the Accusation in publick he appointed not Witnesses of the Crimes Homil. de beat Philog quae est 31. t. 1. p. 401.402 Judge your selves secretly in your Conscience in the presence of God only who beholdeth all things make a search of your sins and furveying your whole life refer the Judgment unto your Understanding amend your faults and so draw near unto the holy Table with a pure Conscience and participate of the holy Oblation And in another place he commands only to abstain from sin Let him keep himself from defrauding other men from slandering and from all sorts of violences He requires we should sincerely promise unto God not to commit any sin And in fine after having exhorted his hearers to be reconciled unto their Brethren Hom. 27. in Genes pag. 358. t. 2. If we do so saith he we may with a safe Conscience approach unto this holy and terrible Table and boldly recite the words contained in the Prayer the Initiated know what I mean therefore I leave it uuto every ones Conscience to see how we can repeat them with safety at this fearful time after fulfilling the Commandment He speaks of this Clause of the Lord's Prayer Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us St. Austin a little younger than St. Chrysostom Serm 46. de Verb. Dom. c. 4 in one of his Sermons of the words of our Lord alledged by Bede refers unto the Conscience of each Communicant the Examination which is necessary before coming unto the Table of the Son of God In 1. ad Cor. c. 11. v. 28. And Pelagius in St. Jerom's Works The Conscience saith he must be first tried if it accuseth us of any thing and accordingly we should either offer or communicate We may yet proceed farther and enquire of the Doctors of the VIII and IX Centuries whether they required those which were to communicate Capit. 44. t. 2. Concil Gall. p. 22. to confess unto a Priest before they received the holy Sacrament Theodolph Bishop of Orleans made his Capitularies in the year 797. if we credit Father Sirmond in one of them he prescribes unto the people of his Diocess the manner of Communicating and the inclinations they should bring unto so great a Sacrament but he speaks not one word of Confession The Council of Chalons assembled in the Year 813. made a Canon which hath for its Title Concil Cab. 2. can 46. t. 2. Concil Gall. p.
coming of the Holy Ghost and you are also holy having received the Gift of the Holy Ghost And so holy things agree very well with those that be holy therefore German Patriarch of Constantinople observes in few words in expounding these words of the Liturgy 1 Theoria rerum Eccles t. 2 Bibl. Pat. Grec vel Lat. p. 407. That God takes pleasure in giving holy things unto those which be pure of heart And then the Sacrament doth not a little contribute unto the augmentation of this purity according unto what is spoken by Theophilus Arch-Bishop of Alexandria 2 Ep. Pasch 2. That we break the Bread of our Lord for our Sanctification And Pope Gelasius 3 De duab nat Christ That the Sacraments of the Body and Blood of our Saviour renders us partakers of the divine Nature And to say the truth 4 In Anaceph There is in the Bread a vertue that quickens us as St. Epiphanius doth testifie Moreover the Sacrament effecting in regard of our Souls what a good Medicine doth operate in regard of our bodies there is no question to be made but when the ancient Doctors of the Church have contemplated it under this Idea but that they intended that Communicants should at the least use as much care and caution unto the reception of this divine Medicine as we are wont to take when we intend to purge our Bodies for when we intend to take Physick we live the day before within some bounds and are careful not to surcharge the Stomach that it might operate with more ease and profit for the purging out of peccant humours In like manner when we are to present our selves at the holy Table of the Church we should prepare and dispose our Souls to receive this saving Remedy the vertue and efficacy whereof shews and maketh it self to be felt in healing the spiritual Maladies wherewith we are naturally oppressed This was in all likelihood the thoughts of Hillary Deacon of Rome when he said Apud Ambros in c. 18. 1. ad Cor. That although this Mystery was celebrated at Supper yet it is not a Supper but a spiritual Medicine which purifieth those which come unto it with devotion and which do receive it with respect Besides the Sacrament having been instituted to give unto us the Communion of our Saviour Jesus Christ because that in participating of this visible Bread one eats spiritually the Flesh of Christ to speak with St. Hom. 27. Macarius is it not just that we should purifie and sanctifie our Souls to be the Palace and Temple of this merciful Saviour to the end that there delighting to make his abode and residence he might spread abroad his Graces his Blessings and his favours and that he may incessantly apply unto them the fruits of his death wherein they find their life their joy their comfort and their salvation In fine The Sacrament being to be unto us a Symbol of Unity a Band of Charity and of Peace according to the constant Doctrine of the holy Fathers they desired that Believers should maintain a holy Concord amongst themselves and a perfect Union that they should be careful of preserving the Unity of the Spirit in the Band of Peace and that they should put on unto each other bowels of pity and of Charity as the Apostle speaks Therefore they would not receive Oblations of those which were not reconciled and not accepting them they admitted them not unto the Sacrament for the one necessarily depended upon the other Therefore they warned Believers at the time of the Communion to salute each other and to give each other the holy Kiss mentioned by St. Paul in one of his Epistles Mystag 5. The Deacons cry saith St. Cyril of Jerusalem embrace and mutually kiss each other and then we salute one another But do not think that it is such a kiss as common friends do give unto each other when they meet in the publick place This Kiss doth unite Souls and makes them hope a perfect forgetfulness of what is past it is a sign of the uniting of spirits and not retaining the memory of injuries any longer And therefore also it is that our Saviour Jesus Christ the Son of God said When you bring your Gift unto the Altar and that you there remember that your Brother hath ought against you leave there thy Gift before the Altar and go first be reconciled with thy Brother and then come offer thy Gift This Kiss then is a Reconciliation and by consequence is holy And it is of this Kiss St. Paul speaketh when he said Greet one another with a holy Kiss and St. Peter Salute each other with a Kiss of Charity And they believed this Union so necessary that without it as they thought one could receive no benefit by the Sacrament how much soever other ways one was addicted unto good works Whence it is that St. Chrysostom after having exalted the vertue and efficacy of this holy Kiss which uniteth Souls reconciles Spirits and maketh us all to become one Body he exhorts his Auditors strictly to unite their Souls by the Bands of Charity to the end they might with assurance enjoy the Fruits of the Table which is prepared for them he adds Although we abound in good works Chrysost de praed iud t. 5. p. 465. if we neglect the Reconciliation of Peace we shall reap no advantage for our Salvation All the Liturgies come to our hands make mention of this Kiss of Charity which Believers gave each other before the Sacrament and which St. Paul calls a holy Kiss and St. Peter a Kiss of Charity many of the ancient Fathers do also make mention of it Indeed the time of kissing each other was not alike in all Churches in some it was given before the Consecration of the Symbols and in others just at the time of communicating but however it was the manner to salute each other before approaching unto the holy Table And this custom continued a very great while in the Church but at length it insensibly vanished at least in the West and the Latins have put instead of this mutual Kiss that which they call Kiss the Peace which is a kind of little Silver Plate or of some other matter with the Image of Jesus Christ or the Relicks of some Saint which is offered unto each person to kiss a custom not very ancient seeing it was never heard of until the end of the XV. Century Lect. 81. for then it began to be introduced into some Churches in the West as is observed by Gabriel Biel in some of his Lessons upon the Canon of the Mass Besides it is not said in the Liturgies whether this Kiss was given indifferently amongst Men and Women Lib. 3. c. 32. I only observe in the Books of Ecclesiastical Offices of Amalarius Fortunatus who wrote in the IX Century and in the Rational of Durandus Bishop of Mende L. 4. c. 53. extr who lived
It is evident that this respect and veneration hath reference unto the Body of Jesus Christ as the Adoration of the Wise men had which adored him when they saw him in the Manger at Bethlehem as Communicants adore him when they see him not in himself but in his Sacrament whereof he grants them the favour to participate All the World doth confess that Jesus Christ is not any more visible unto the Eyes of Men since his Ascension into Heaven I think that it is so also are to be understood the Adorations spoken of in a Liturgy which is attributed unto St. Chrysostom but cannot be his the Author being much younger than him There be some also which attribute it unto John the Second called the Mute Patriarch of the same Church but about 200 years after St. Chrysostom and yet neither is it very certain that it is of this John To conclude the Copies are very different for in that amongst the works of St. Chrysostom there is no mention made of Adoring but once when the Gospel is carried and when 't is lifted up because then the Choir saith Tom. 4. p. 9â—3 Come let us Worship and kneel down before Jesus Christ excepting that the Priest and Deacon bow the Head in several places in the Liturgy before and after the Consecration and that the People are once warned to bow the Head to give thanks unto God In liturg c. 7. Cassander represents another unto us in his Liturgies of the version of Leo Tuscus wherein there is no mention of Adoration but is not so of two others which we have one in the Library of the Holy Fathers and the other in the Ritual of the Greeks by James Goar of the Order of Preaching Friars for in both these there is frequent mention made of Adoring It is true these sorts of Adorations are there practised before the Consecration and after which plainly sheweth they were addressed unto God and unto Jesus Christ because the Bread and Wine by the Doctrine it self of the Church of Rome are not to be adored until after Consecration The thing will appear yet plainer if we consider the prayers which be there made when they dispose themselves unto the Communion Tom. 4. obser Clarysâ—st p. 618.8 〈◊〉 Pat. t. 2. Gree-Latiâ— p. â—1 Lord Jesus saith the Priest behold us from thy holy habitation and from the Throne of thy Glory and come sanctifie us thou who art in the Heavens sitting with thy Father and art here present with us in an invisible manner be pleased to give us by thy powerful hand thy pure and unspotted Body and thy precious Blood and by us unto all the People This prayer as every body sees hath for its Object Jesus Christ Reigning in Heaven and present unto his faithful Communicants by his Eternal Divinity and by the participation of his Grace Besides that Erasmus whose Translation comes nearer the Greek then that which is in the Library of the Holy Fathers and which we have followed because it is better liked by some Roman Catholick Doctors hath Translated these words Ibid. Be pleased by thy powerful hand to give us thy pure and immaculate Body and thy precious Blood In like manner when the Priest the Deacon and the People do Worship it is in saying three times Lord or as it is in the Ritual of the Greeks O God have mercy upon me who am a sinner which words do shew that this Adoration doth address it self unto God only who is therein expresly mentioned I say the same of the prayer which the Priest makes in taking the holy Bread when bowing his Head before the holy Table he saith I confess that thou art the Christ Ibid. p 32. the Son of the living God which didst come into the World to save sinners whereof I am chief c. After which he beseecheth him that he will vouchsafe to enter into his Soul filled with Passions and into his Body polluted with sin It cannot then be questioned but this prayer hath reference unto Jesus Christ and not unto the Sacrament which cannot enter into our Souls whereas our Saviour doth therein enter and into our Bodies also by the vertue of his Grace and by the efficacy of his holy Spirit for the sanctifying of them both of which Sanctification dependeth their Salvation and their Life As for the Deacons adoring when he cometh unto the Communion of the Cup in saying Ibid p. 8â—3 I come unto the King Immortal it can admit of no other Interpretation for I do not here examine what was the belief of the Ancient Church upon the point of the Sacrament I only inquire what the Ancients have said of the Adoration of Jesus Christ in the Act of communicating not to confound the Adoration of the Master with the Adoration of the Sacrament Therefore unto all the passages which have been alledged I will yet add two others unto which if I mistake not the same Explication ought to be given The first is taken from a fragment of the life of Luke the Anchorite who lived in the X. Century wherein is read these words You should sing Psalms which are suitable unto this Mystery In auctar Francis Combef t. 2. p. 986. and according to the Greek Typical Psalms and which do represent it Or the Hymn called Trysagion with the Symbol of the Creed then you shall three times bow the Knees and joyning the hands you shall with the mouth participate of the precious body of Jesus Christ our God It is easie to see that these three Genuflections have relation unto him to whom the Trysagion was sung that is to say unto God the Father Son and Holy Ghost of whom they begged Grace to communicate worthily I place in the same rank the History of St. Theoctista who having lived 35 years in a wilderness in the Isle of Paros desired a Huntsman whom she met by accident that he would the year following bring her the Sacrament Apud Metaphrast in vit S. Theoctist c. 13. which the Huntsman having done the Saint cast her self upon the ground received the Divine Gift and wetting the ground with her tears she said Lord now let thy Servant depart in peace because mine eyes have seen the Saviour which thou hast given us or as Cardinal du Perron hath translated Because mine eyes have seen thy healthiness After what way soever these words are taken nothing else can lawfully be gathered but that this Maid being transported with a holy joy in that God was pleased to give her the benefit of participating of this Divine Mystery of the enjoyment whereof she had been so long deprived she profoundly humbles her self in his presence in rendring thanks for procuring her so great a benefit and so sweet and solid a Consolation not to speak of Cardinal Baronius his often undervaluing Metaphrastus who relates the life of this Saint But besides this first consideration we must make a second which
81. to intimate that she received it with respect and with veneration Whence also it is that St. Jerom in his Preface unto the Easter Epistles of Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria speaks only of receiving the holy things with veneration a veneration which he makes to be common and of the same nature with that which is given unto Chalices Vails and other things which are used at the Celebration of the Eucharist or as he speaks At the Passion of our Saviour intimating that these things should be venerated with the same Majesty as the Body and Blood that is to say the Sacrament for he did not mean to include in the same kind of veneration the true Body of Jesus Christ and the holy Vessels but the Sacrament of this divine Body unto which Sacrament he yields no Adoration but a common Veneration the same as unto the Lining and unto the Chalices of the holy Table Thus do these last argue and discourse After these two considerations we may with more ease examine the matter whereof we are to write the History I mean the Question of the Adoration of the Sacrament And because according to the Advertisement of St. Cyprian That heed must be taken unto what Jesus Christ did do and that what he did in celebrating his first Sacrament should serve as a Model and rule unto what Christians should do after him in the Celebration of theirs it is absolutely necessary to look back unto him to begin our Examination and Enquiry I say then in the institution of this Sacrament which is exactly described unto us I find that our Saviour having broke the Bread which he had taken and consecrated gave it unto his Disciples saying unto them Take eat and that he also in like manner commanded them to take the Cup and drink of it but I do not find that he commanded them to adore neither the one nor the other But if we do not find that he commanded them to adore what he gave unto them neither do we read that the Apostles did adore the Eucharist The Evangelists which have so exactly transmitted unto us the History of this Institution in so exactly marking all the Circumstances of it speak not a word of the holy Apostles adoring of it On the contrary they represent them unto us in a posture which doth not well agree with an act of Adoration for they were almost lying along upon their sides on little Beds round the Table according to the manner of that time Moreover if Jesus Christ had commanded his Disciples to adore what he gave them in the distribution of his Sacrament and if the Disciples had indeed adored it it is very likely say some that the Rulers of the Jews would have known it by Judas and knowing it they would not have failed to have urged it as a capital Crime against Jesus Christ for as they searched only some specious pretext to condemn him they would never have failed embracing this which was very plausible and would have accused our Saviour of having adored Bread and Wine and the rather because amongst them worshipping of Creatures was held for an unpardonable crime at least after their return from the Babylonian Captivity But besides what hath been said the disorder of the Church of Corinth in St. Paul's time affords us say they a convincing Argument of the same thing This divine Apostle condemns the Corinthians irreverence in the celebration of this august Sacrament he endeavours to make them ashamed of it and to shew them that their Conduct in this occasion was quite contrary both unto the working of Charity and the rules of holy Discipline such as the Discipline amongst Christians should be yet nevertheless to return them unto their duty and to persuade and inspire them with the respect due unto so great a Sacrament he doth not say a word unto them of its Adoration the consideration whereof had been of very great moment and capable of producing in the Spirits of these disorderly Christians other thoughts than those which they shewed at the time which they were to participate of this divine Mystery St. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles which contains the History of the Infant Church doth observe several times that Believers assembled to break Bread that is to say to celebrate the Eucharist but he never said that the Sacrament was to be adored But it may be that the Christians which immediately followed the Age of the Apostles had upon this Subject other discoveries than those which the Scriptures inform us of and that they can inform us of things we know nothing of St. Justin Martyr which flourished about fifty years after the death of St. John doth in his second Apology exactly and amply describe the whole action of the Sacrament and all that was therein practised in his time on the behalf of him which celebrated and also on their parts which did communicate the Oblation of Bread Wine and Water which was presented unto the Pastor when Sermon and Prayers were ended the Consecration which was performed by him by Prayers and Thanksgivings unto God the Amen which was answered by Believers the distribution and communicating of the things which had been blessed and consecrated and in fine the Charities and Alms-deeds made by particular persons and which was as the Crown and Seal of all this holy Action But in all this description we do see no mark of the Worship of Latry nor of any religious Worship either commanded by the Pastors or practised by the People towards the Sacrament although that this glorious Martyr had twice treated of the Sacrament in this Apology as hath been declared in our first part And this Representation which St. Justin gives unto us of the Eucharist in his time I mean of the Celebration of this Sacrament answers not ill unto what himself observed in his Dialogue against Tryphon That Christians in all places made the Eucharist of Bread and Wine and yet never speaks of adoring it and unto the silence of other Authors of his and the following Age because in all their Writings they are silent upon this matter although it be of the greatest moment in Religion I speak of St. Ireneus of Clemens of Alexandria Tertullian St. Cyprian and of Origen who very far from enjoyning this Adoration give not the least appearance to imagine that it was practised neither in the passages where they speak of the Eucharist nor in others where they seem to be indispensably obliged to say something of it As for example Tertullian in his Apologetick where he promiseth to discover Cap. 39. and to demonstrate what doth concern Christian Religion and where he makes so excellent and rich a description of the Agapes and of the Assemblies of those primitive Christians he saith only Ep. 10 11 12 13. That they do there eat as persons which remember that they are obliged to serve God all night And St. Cyprian treating of those which had fallen
in the time of Persecution and being assisted by the Recommendations of Martyrs would needs communicate before they had accomplished the time of their Penance doth all he can to exaggerate the crime of these over-hasty persons and to justifie his severity and his rigour yet nevertheless he doth not touch far or near the point of Adoration which however would have vindicated the justice of his Conduct and the temerity of those insolent persons But besides we are so far from finding any thing in the Writings of these ancient Doctors above-named that doth in the least favour the Adoration which we examine that on the contrary they therein deliver certain things which have been already cited elsewhere as do absolutely alienate from the Spirit of Communicants all thoughts of Adoration as when St. Ireneus represents the Oblation of the New Testament by an Oblation of Bread and Wine of the first Gifts of God which gives us Food of the first of his Creatures Clement of Alexandria That what Jesus Christ gave his Disciples to drink was Wine that the Eucharist is divided into several parts that each Communicant takes a part and that one eats sufficiently of the Bread of the Lord. Tertullian That the Eucharist is a figure of the Body of Jesus Christ St. Cyprian That what our Saviour did call his Blood was Wine And Origen that the Eucharist is Bread in substance that according unto what it hath of matter it descends into the Belly and from thence into the place of Excrements The Adoration now in question doth not appear in the Liturgies which go under the names of St. Peter St. James and St. Mark nor in that which is in the Book of the Apostolical Constitutions nor in the Writings of the pretended Dennis the Arcopagite which hath treated expresly of the Celebration of the Sacrament It must be confessed that it is a wonderful thing if this religious Adoration had been in use that neither one nor another should say any thing of it the action being of moment sufficient not to be forgotten in such ample and exact descriptions as those be which are contained in these Liturgies for as for that Apostrophe which is read in the Liturgy of the forged Dennis the Arcopagite Hierarc Eccl. c. 3. p. 245. O most divine and holy Sacrament unfolding the Vails of Mysteries wherewith thou art symbollically environed discover thy self clearly unto us and fill the eyes of our Understanding with thy marvellous and always resplendent Light This Apostrophe I say if we believe the Protestants makes nothing for the Adoration of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament no more than doth this other of St. Ambrose unto Baptism the first Sacrament of the new Covenant Tom. 3. in Luc. lib. 10. c. 22. O Water which hast washed the Earth sprinkled with humane Blood that the figure of Sacraments should precede O Water which hast had this honour to be the Sacrament of Jesus Christ Establish the Adoration of this Symbol of our spiritual Regeneration Nor this which is made unto the Chrism in the Roman Pontifical the Adoration of this Ointment or Liquor Part. 3. de offic fer 5. in coen Domin I salute thee O holy Chrism These are Apostrophes and discourses addressed unto inanimate things as if they had life and unto signs as if they were the things themselves which they signifie and which they represent and instead whereof they are in a manner set as they communicate unto us all their vertue and all their efficacy It is just so Pachymeres understood the Apostrophe of the pretended Arcopagite in his Paraphrase of his Writings even alledging to make good his Interpretation the like Apostrophe of Gregory Nazianzen unto the Christians Easter In locum Dionysii p. 268. He speaks saith he unto it as if it were alive and that very properly As also the great Divine Gregory But thou O great and holy Easter And he gives this reason for it that as well Easter as the Sacrament do represent and are Jesus Christ sacramentally For adds he our Easter and this holy Mystery is our Lord Jesus Christ himself unto whom the Saint directs his discourse to the end that he should open the Vails and that we might be filled with his excellent Light In fine Pachymeres had reason to back is Interpretation with the example of Gregory Nazianzen who speaks unto Easter as if it were endowed with sense and reason O Easter saith he great and holy Easter Orat. 42. p. 696 the Purifier of all the World I speak unto thee as if thou wert alive according to the Translation of Billius very agreeable unto the Original and that is the reason that his Commentator Nicetas makes this Observation These words O great Easter have reference unto the Feast it self as if it were alive Which is so much the easier done because in these sorts of occasions he that speaks lifteth up his thoughts unto the Object signified after the same manner as he directs his speech unto the sign which represents it and unto which he attributes things which do not agree properly but unto him which is represented as in this place where Gregory Nazianzen applies unto the Feast that which is due but unto Jesus Christ only I mean the washing away the sins of the World but he attributes it unto the Feast as unto the day whereon the thing was done even as when the Latins say unto the Crucifix That it hath reconciled them unto God although they confess That it is unto the Crucified alone that they are obliged for these benefits St. Cyril of Jerusalem and St. Catech. Myst 5 Serm. 83. de divers Austin have been careful very exactly to explain unto their Neophites or new Baptized the principal things which were practised in this divine Service And they observe that after Consecration of the Symbols the Lord's Prayer was said and the Priest cried Sancta sanctis Holy things be for the Holy the Believers gave unto each other the Kiss of Peace and they were invited unto the Communion by these words which were sung Taste and see how good the Lord is As soon as the Consecration is ended saith St. Austin we say the Lord's Prayer which you have learned and said after this Prayer is said Peace be with you and Christians give each other the holy Kiss They were also told of Sursum Corda Lift up your hearts of Gracias agamus Domino Deo nostro Let us give thanks unto the Lord our God and of the washing of hands but amongst all these Instructions I do not find any one touching the Adoration of the Sacrament It is true St. Cyril will have his Communicant approach unto the holy Table not with hands stretched out nor his fingers open but in supporting the right hand with the left that he should receive the Body of Jesus Christ in the hollow of his hand or as he speaks some lines before The Antitype of the Body of
Jesus Christ that he take care that not a crumb of it fall to the ground and having in this manner communicated of the Body of Jesus Christ he should approach unto the Cup having the Body bowed in way of Adoration or Veneration But besides say some St. Cyril doth not desire of his Communicant this inclination of body for Reception of the other Symbol which he represents unto us and doth call it the Body of Jesus Christ such as some crumbs whereof may fall to the ground it is that the Cup unto which he desires he should draw near with this inclination of Body contains a Liquor the moisture of which and the humidity remains as he saith upon the lips which cannot be said of the proper Blood of the Son of God The posture then which he prescribes for receiving of the Cup must necessarily be understood not of an act of Adoration which he doth not teach in any part of his Catechisms unto his Neophites but according to our second Consideration of the Veneration and respect which we ought to have for so great a Sacrament the Greek word used by St. Cyril being to be understood by that of veneration and respect because he speaks of an Object which is not adorable with the Adoration of Latery that is to say of the Sacrament and that besides he would not have said barely Approach with a little bowing the body but he would precisely have commanded to have adored it before receiving of it this action being of too great moment to speak so indifferently of and not to have commanded it after a more exact manner I will ad unto all these reasons that St. Cyril requires nothing of his Communicants but what what St. Chrysostom doth require of his also and yet in stronger terms of his Catechumeny when the time of their Catechising was expired that they presented themselves to be baptized In illud simile est regnum coelor patrifamil t. 6. p. 550. When you shall saith he come into the Closet of the holy Spirit when you shall run into the Marriage-Chamber of Grace when you shall be near unto that terrible and also desirable Pool prostrate your selves as Captives before your King cast your selves all together on your knees and lifting up your hands unto Heaven where the King of us all is sitting on his Royal Throne and lifting up your eyes unto that Eye which never slumbers use these words unto that Lover of Mankind c. Is not this approaching unto Baptism in a way of Worship and Adoration as St. Cyril desired one should approach unto the holy Communion And yet Christians never inferred from the words of St. Chrysostom that the Water of this Sacrament of our Regeneration was to be adored But what I say of the water of Baptism the same Chrysostom requires we should also do of the hearing of the Word of God The King himself saith he will not have his Diadem upon his head In illud ne eleemos vestr sac t. 6. p. 528. but lays it aside in reverence unto God speaking in the holy Gospel What saith he I know his Dignity which hath given me mine I adore his Kingdom which hath been pleased to make me reign And to say the truth we owe the same respect and veneration unto the Word of God and to his Sacraments which we do owe unto him which is the Author of them by giving him the Soveraign Adoration which we are obliged to render him at all times especially when we hear his Word read and preached and when we participate of his divine Sacraments If we descend yet lower than St. Austin we may inform our selves of what hath been practised in the Church since his death upon the Subject of the Adoration of the Sacrament for we have in the Works of St. Ambrose two Treatises touching the same matter made in the behalf of those newly initiated of which the latter entituled Of the Sacraments is more ample than the other We have that of Ecclesiastical Offices composed by St. Isidore Arch-Bishop of Sevil the Book of Sacraments of Gregory the First that made by Maximius Abbot of Constantinople expounding very mystically all the Action of the Sacrament German Patriarch of the same place also employed himself upon the same Subject and hath at large all that long History of Ceremonies practised in an Age which had already departed very much from the simplicity of the primitive times The Book called The Roman Order doth also examine all the particulars of the publick Service practiced in the Church of Rome We have in the IX Century the Treatise of Rabanus Arch-Bishop of Mayans of the Institution of Clerks that of Ecclesiastical Offices of Amalarius Fortunatus that of Walfridus Strabo almost under the same Title that of Florus under the name of Explication of the Mass In fine we have several other Treatises of the manner and order that ought to be observed in the Celebration of the Mass or of the Eucharist which Hugh Mainard a learned Benedictine hath caused to be printed with the Books of Sacraments of Gregory the Great as that he took from the Manuscript of Ratold Abbot of Corby about the Year 986. Another from the Library of du Tillet and which he saith is the Roman Order of the Year 1032. and a third of the Priory of Saluse in Normandy of the Prebends of the Order of St. Austin about the Year 1079. But in all this we do not find one word of the Adoration of the Sacrament no more than the Interpreters and Commentators of the History of the Institution of it which are not a few Moreover the expressions of the ancient Doctors of the Church will not a little contribute unto the illustrating of this matter for if they had a design to have Christians worship the Sacrament before receiving of it or at the instant of communicating methinks they should have spoke in a manner and way which should have possessed them with thoughts and dispositions suitable and which should have made them to conceive of it the same Opinion which one hath for an Object which is truly adorable Nevertheless instead of so doing I find their Instructions tended rather to divert than to incline them unto this Homage In fine I cannot comprehend that the people could dispose themselves unto the Adoration of the Eucharist when they heard the holy Fathers unanimously call it Bread and Wine even in the very act of Communion Wheat the Fruit of the Vine the Fruit of the Harvest and the like things They testifie it is Bread which is broke positively affirm that it is Bread and Wine Bread which nourisheth our Bodies which is inanimate which is digested the substance whereof remains after Consecration in a word Bread subject unto the same accidents with our common food For these are so many formal Declarations which these holy Doctors have made unto us in the second Chapter of the second Part. Must it not be
Christ is present with the believing Soul by the Intercourse of Devotion Id. 241 Jesus Christ must be sought in Heaven in Communicating Id. 242 The Body of Jesus Christ which was made 1600 Years ago cannot be made every day B. Ch. 5. 251 In what sense the Books of Charlemain condemn the term of Image in respect of the Sacrament B. Ch. 12. 380 John Scot wrote of the Sacrament by Command of Charles the Bald. B. Ch. 13. 403 Adversaries of John Scot upon the Point of Predestination Id. 415 John Scot never accused by his Adversaries to have erred upon the Point of the Eucharist Id. ibid. John Scot enrolled in the number of Saints after his death Id. 413 The Book composed by John Scot by Command of the Emperor Charles the Bald burnt at the Council of Verceil 200 years after viz. An. 1050. Id. 414 L. A Body cannot be in several places at once no not the glorified Body of our our Lord Jesus Christ B. Ch. 5. p. 247 The glorified Body of Jesus Christ cannot exist invisibly and after the manner of a Spirit in one place nor by consequence in the Eucharist Id. 248 The place which containeth is greater than what is contained Id. 251 Two Bodies cannot be in one and the same place and there cannot be Penetration of Dimensions Id. 261 Every part of a Body should answer unto every part of the place Id. ibid. A Body cannot be whole and entire in one of its parts Id. ibid. The Original of using Lamps and Lights in the Celebration of the Eucharist C. Ch. 1. 531 M. THe Flesh of Jesus Christ is to be eaten spiritually and corporally B. Ch. 4. 234 The Wicked do not eat the Body of Jesus Christ but the Sacrament of it only Idem 237 John Hus and Jerome of Prague put to death as Enemies of Transubstantiation although they ever believed it B. Ch. 19. 508 c. What a Mystery doth mean B. Ch. 5. 259 c. N. THe Nature of Bread remains after Consecration B. Ch. 2. 206 Nicholas the First keeps silent during the Disputes of the IX Century B. Ch. 15. 430 The Silence of Nicholas the First no way favourable unto Paschas Id. 431 O. JOhn Damascen his particular Opinion of the Eucharist B. Ch. 12. 365 Paschas Radbert a Friar of the Monastery of Corby near Amiens his Opinion He was after Abbot of the same Convent B. Ch. 13. 385 Opinion of the Adversaries of Paschas Id. 393 c. The Opinion of Paschas is that of Roman Catholicks and the Opinion of his Adversaries that of Protestants which are called Calvinists Id. 405 The Opinion of his Adversaries followed by the greatest Men in the IX Century Idem 430 The Silence of the Popes Adrian the Second and Nicholas the First prejudicial to the Opinion of Paschas B. Ch. 15. 431 The Opinion of Paschas had no advantage over that of his Adversaries during the X. Century B. Ch. 16. 440 It began to be established in the XI Century B. Ch. 17. 451 Berengarius and his Followers Opposition with his several Condemnations which hindred not but he persevered unto his death Id. 455 Berengarius calls the Opinion contrary to his the Folly of Paschas of the People and of Lanfrank Id. 454 Berengarius his Opinion condemned after his death by Urban the Second in a Council held at Plaisance Anno 1095. B. Ch. 18. 465 Those which held this Belief assembled themselves in the Arch-bishoprick of Treves Anno 1106. Id. 466 P. REflections of the holy Fathers upon the words of Institution of the Eucharist B. Ch. 1. 187 How they understood these words This is my Body Id. 188 No Body can participate of himself B. Ch. 5. 262 How the Fathers instructed their Catechumeny B. Ch. 7. 283 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not only to adore but venerate and respect therefore it is to be explained according to the nature of the Subject in hand C. Ch. 4. 563 c. Q. THe Question of Communicating under both Kinds discussed at large A. Ch. 12. 141 c. Who opposeth not an Error approves it B. Ch. 15. 431 Whosoever recovereth not a Man from Error sheweth that he erreth himself Id. ibid. Whosoever defends not a Truth suppresseth it Id. ibid. The Question of the Adoration of the Sacrament fully examined C. Ch. 4. 563 c. R. THe Christians reproached for sacrificing Bread to God A. Ch. 3. 25 Christians reproached for serving Ceres and Bacchus Id. ibid. Religious Women called the Blood of Jesus Christ common Wine B. Ch. 6. 273 Remy of Auxerr as well as Damascen believed the Union of the Bread unto the Divinity B. Ch. 13. 391 Rupert de Duitz believed the Assumption of the Bread and followed near hand the Opinion of Damascen and of Remy of Auxerr B. Ch. 18. 468 S. THe Sacraments are simple in the Act and wonderful in effect Preface The Sacrifice of Christians is a Sacrifice of Bread and Wine A. Ch. 8. 82 The reason why the Fathers gave the Eucharist the name of Sacrifice but improperly Id. 83 c. They confess unto the Pagans they have neither Altars nor Sacrifices Id. 94 They never oppose the Eucharist unto the Sacrifices of the Law but the Actions of Piety and Christian Religion and the Sacrifice of the Cross Id. 96 The Elevation of the Sacrament to represent the Elevation of Christ on the Cross when begun to be practised A. Ch. 9. 101 The Elevation converted into the Adoration of the Host in the XIII Century Idem 105 There hath been always People in the West which have celebrated the Sacrament without Elevation or Adoration Id. 103 The breaking of the Bread of the Sacrament always practised in the Church even amongst the Latins until the XII Century A. Ch. 9. 106 The Sacraments have no Miracles in them B. Ch. 2. 212 It is unto the vertue and efficacy of the Sacrament that we must refer the Communion which we have with Jesus Christ and our Vinification B. Ch. 3. 230 The Testimony of the Senses is infallible B. Ch. 5. 257 The Use of Flowers practised by the Latins in honour to the Sacrament unknown unto the primitive Christians C. Ch. 4. 573 T. ALtar or Eucharistical Table one and the same thing in the Writings of the ancient Fathers of the Church A. Ch. 5. 44 45. It was for a long time made of Wood in the same form of Tables to eat upon and not in the form of an Altar Id. ibid. There was but one Table or one Altar in a Church Id. 47 The Greeks Muscovites and Abyssins now retain the same Custom Id. 50 What Fraud and Deceipt is B. Ch. 5. 260 The Taborites of Bohemia and their Belief B. Ch. 19. 505 John Hus and Jerome of Prague ever held Transubstantiation Id. 508 V. THere can no Prescription be alledged against Truth Preface The Truth of God must be followed and not the Traditions of Men. A. Ch. 1. p. 1 A Body should be visible and palbable B. Ch. 5. 247 What may be seen and felt is a Body Id. 264 Waldensis their Doctrine Manners and the Persecutions used against them B. Ch. 18. 472 c. Waldensis in Italy in the XIV Century B. Ch. 19. 502 Wickliff his Doctrine and Followers which were very numerous in England under the name of Lollards in the XIV Century Id. 499 The Waldensis of Provence and Piedmont Id. 512 The Original of holy Vestments used in the Celebration of the Eucharist C. Ch. 1. 539 FINIS
our Saviour gave unto his Disciples in his Sacrament the Figure of his Body and Blood That the Creatures of Bread and Wine pass into the Sacrament of his Body and Blood by the ineffable sanctification of the Holy Ghost That our Saviour hath changed the Legal Sacrifices into Sacrifices of Bread and Wine And that whereas the Ancients celebrated the Passion of our Lord in the Flesh and Blood of Sacrifices we celebrate it in the Oblation of Bread and Wine According to which he testifies in a great many places Homil. de Sanct. in Epiph as hath been seen in the 4th Chapter That Jesus Christ is absent from us as to his Body but is present by his Divinity It is true he saith That the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ is received by the Mouth of believers for their Salvation But after what he hath spoken it is very evident say the Protestants that he speaks not of receiving them in their matter and Substance but in their Sacrament accompanied with a quickning and saving virtue and that if he be not so understood he will be made to contradict himself and to destroy with one hand what he built with the other therefore it is that he distinguisheth the Sacrament and that he declares that the wicked participate only of the Sign and not of the thing signified saying with St. Prosper in the Sentences drawn from St. Austin Id. in 1. ad Cor. 11. He that is not reconciled unto Jesus Christ neither eats his Flesh nor drinketh his Blood although he receiveth every day the Sacrament of so great a thing unto his condemnation It is also true that he often calls the Bread and Wine the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ but he declareth with St. Austin whom he exactly follows Id. in cap. 6. ad Rom. Id. in Marc. cap. 14. That it is by reason of the resemblance they have with the things whereof they are Sacraments And with St. Isidor of Sevil That it is because Bread strengthens the body and Wine increaseth Blood in the Flesh and that for this reason the Bread relates mystically unto the Body of Jesus Christ and the Wine to his Blood And because say they in the matter of Sacraments it is not so much to be consider'd what they be August contra Maxim l. 3. c. 22. saith St. Austin as what it is they signifie because that as Signs they are one thing and yet they do signifie another Venerable Bede makes no difficulty to say That the Bread and Wine being visibly offered another thing must be understood which is Invisible to wit The true Body and Blood of Christ because in effect he will have the Believer raise up his Soul and his Faith unto Jesus Christ sitting at the right Hand of his Father for as he told us before He carried by his Ascension into the Invisible Heavens Beda domui vocem Ju. Id. Hom. de Astil de temp in vigil Pasch the Humane Nature which he had taken In fine he is not afraid to speak of Sacrificing again Jesus Christ for the advancement of our Salvation but all Christians agreeing That Jesus Christ cannot any more be truly Sacrificed he doubtless speaks of offering him by the Sacrament whence it is that he acknowledgeth with St. Austin That Jesus Christ was once offered in himself Let the Reader judge then what advantage the Latins can draw from these latter words of Bedes which they mightily esteem Unto Bede may be joyned Sedulius a Scotchman or more truly an Irishman not him that composed the Easter work who was much later than the other I mean the Author of the Commentaries upon the Epistles of St. Paul which many attribute unto one Sedulius a Bishop in England but originally of Ireland who assisted with Fergust a Bishop of Scotland at a Council held at Rome under Gregory the 2d Anno Dom. 721. I find that the Author of these Commentaries expounding the 4th Verse of the 6th Chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians cites a long passage of the 14th Chapter and 19th Book of the Morals of Gregory the First without naming him Now this Sedulius whom we place in the VIII Century until we receive better information furnisheth us with these words which he seemeth to have taken out of Pelagius and Primasius when explaining these words of St. Sedul Comment in 1. ad Cor. C. 11. Paul Do this in remembrance of me he saith He lest us his remembrance as if one going a long Loyage left a Present with his Friend to the end that every time he saw it he should think of his Love and Friendship which he could not look upon without grief and tears if he dearly loved him Whereby he shews that Jesus Christ left us his Sacrament to be in his stead until he comes again from Heaven We read in the Life of the Abbot Leufred Vita Leufred C. 17. in Chron Insulae term about the beginning of the VIII Century that Charles Martell having desired him to obtain of God by his prayers the recovery of his young Son Gryphon he gave him the Sacrament of the Body of Christ In notis Menard in Sacram Greg. And we have seen in the second Chapter by the testimony of a Pontifical Manuscript kept in the Church of Roan that Christians then believed that what was drank in the Eucharist was a thing which might be consumed as that was indeed consumed If we pass from the West into the East German Germ. Constantinop Theor. rerum Eccles t. 12. Bibl. Patr. pa. 402. 403. Patriarch of Constantinople and a great stickler for Image Worship will present himself unto us in the beginning of this same Century and tells us that the Priest prays a second time to the end the Mystery of the Son of God may be accomplished and that the Bread and Wine should be made and changed into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ which the Latins stand upon very much but the Protestants pretend he declares very favourably for them and moreover they observe that it is not certain this piece is that German's which lived in the VIII Century others attributing it to another German that lived in the XII They indeed observe that to shew of what kind the change whereof he speaks is he saith In celebrating the Eucharist Ibid. p. 410. the Oblation is broken indeed like bread but it is distributed as the Communication of an ineffable benediction unto them which participate thereof with Faith He testifies that what is distributed at the holy Table is Bread but Bread accompanied with the Blessing of God and with a Heavenly and Divine Virtue for the Salvation and Consolation of Believers Ibid. p. 408. And in another place he saith That presently after Elevation the Division of the holy body is made but though it is divided into parts it remains indivisible and inseparable and that it is known and found whole and
entire in each portion of the things divided These words can receive no good sense but by understanding them of the Sacrament that is to say of the Bread which is broken in pieces as to its matter and substance but that remains whole and intire as to the vertue of the Sacrament which made the great St. Basil say Basil Ep. 289. t. 3. That to receive one part or several at ae time is the same thing as to its virtue Moreover German will have us consider Jesus Christ as dead in the Sacrament and as pouring forth his precious blood for the Salvation of mankind when he saith Id. Germ. ib. p. 407 409 410. That the Elevation of the precious body represents the Elevation in the Cross the Death of our Lord on the Cross and his Resurrection also That the Priest receiving the Bread alone without the Blood and the Blood also without the Body signifies nothing else but that the Divine Lamb is yet all bloody and that we eat the Bread and drink the Cup as the Flesh and Blood of the Son of God confessing his Death and Resurrection And clearer yet in these words where speaking of the holy Bread which he distinguisheth from Jesus Christ he saith Ibid p. 408. That it is the only Bread wherein is figured and represented the Divine and all-healing Death of him which was Sacrificed for the Lafe of the World because it is the only Divine Bread which is Sacrificed and Offered as the Lamb but as for the other Divine Gifts they be not cut in the form of a Cross with the Knife but they are put in pieces as the members and parts of the body It is the true Commentary of what he saith in the same Treatise That Jesus Christ is always sacrificed because he is so not in himself for that cannot be by the confession of all Christians but in the Sacrament the Celebration whereof doth lively represent unto us the imolation of Jesus Christ upon the Cross Ibid. p. 408. Add unto this that he declares That Jesus Christ drank Wine in his Sacrament as he did after his Resurrection not through necessity but to perswade his Disciples of the truth of his Resurrection And that he desires at the instant of communicating we should lift up our thoughts from Earth unto the King which is in Heaven Now let it be judged after all these declarations what the change can be which he saith is passed upon the Bread and Wine by Consecration if he meant a change of substance or only of use and condition for the former seems unto Protestants to be inconsistent with the Explanations which he hath given us whereas the latter doth not ill accord with it in all appearance German saith That Jesus Christ is seen and felt in the Eucharist but he positively affirms that it is done in his Sacrament that is to say that he is seen and touched inasmuch as the Sacrament is seen and felt which doth represent him Ibid. p. 401. Our Saviour saith he is seen and suffers himself to be touched by means of the ever to be revered and sacred Mysteries I will not insist upon what is said by this Patriarch That the Bread and Wine offered by Believers for the Communion do in some sort become upon the Table of proposition which amongst the Greeks is different from that where the Consecration of the Divine Symbols are made I say they become in some sort the Images and Figures of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ because it is a frivolous conceit and with reason rejected by Roman Catholicks and Protestants But let us lay aside the Patriarch German and prosecute the History of the VIII Century in the same City where German was Patriarch the Metropolis of the Eastern Empire Constantine the 6th commonly surnamed Copronymas Son of the Emperor Leo the third called Isaurus assembled a Council of 338 Bishops Anno 754. The Assembly held full six months during which they quite abolished the Worshipping of Images and by the way Concil Constantinop in Act. Concil Nicaen 2. t. 5. Concil p. 756. clearing up the Doctrine of the Church upon the point of the Sacrament to draw a proof against the same Images they had condemned they left unto us for a Monument of their belief this following testimony Let those rejoyce which with a most pure heart make the true Image of Jesus Christ which desire which venerate and which do offer it for the Salvation of body and soul the which Jesus Christ gave unto his Disciples in Figure and Commemoration And having repeated the words of Institution they add That no other Species under Heaven was made choice of by him nor any other Type that could represent his Incarnation That it is the Image of his quickning body which was honourably and gloriously made That as Jesus Christ took the matter or humane substance in like manner he hath commanded us to offer for his Image a matter chosen that is to say the substance of bread not having any humane Form or Figure fearing lest Idolatry may get in As then say they the Natural Body of Jesus Christ is holy because it is Deified It is also evident that his Body by Institution that is to say his holy Image is rendred Divine by Sanctification of Grace for it is what our Saviour intended to do when by virtue of the Union he Deified the Flesh he had taken by a Sanctification proper unto himself so also he would that the bread of the Sacrament as being the true Figure of his Natural body should be made a Divine Body by the coming of the Holy Ghost the Priest which makes the Oblation intervening to make it holy whereas it was common therefore the Natural body of our Lord endowed with Soul and Understanding was anointed by the Holy Ghost being united unto the Godhead so also his Image to wit the holy bread is filled with the Cup of enlivening Blood which flowed out of his side What renders this testimony the more considerable and worthy to be credited is That these Fathers which represented all the Eastern Church or at least the greatest part of it were assembled about the matter of Images and not about the subject of the Sacrament for had they been assembled upon the point of the Sacrament it may be some uncharitable person might suspect them of pre-occupation or of design but having been assembled upon a very different subject of necessity it must be granted that it is by the by that they inform us of the common and general Opinion and Belief of Christians They would draw from the Eucharist an argument against the use and Worship of Images and to do it the better they were obliged to unfold unto us the Nature of the Sacrament and they explain it in saying That it is the substance of Bread that it is no deceiving Figure of his Natural Body and as they say a little before a Type
318. Of the care which should be taken in receiving of the Eucharist In reading this Title it came into my mind that the Fathers of the Council might haply have comprised Auricular Confession in the preparations which they commanded yet nevertheless I do not find therein any such thing they only warn That a great deal of care must be taken in participating of the Body and Blood of our Lord and take care that we do not abstain from it too long lest that should turn unto the ruin of the Soul and that if one partake thereof indiscreetly we should fear what the Apostle saith Whosoever eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh his own Damnation A man ought therefore to examine himself according to the Command of the same Apostle and so eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup that is to say to prepare himself for the receiving of so great a Sacrament in abstaining some days from the works of the Flesh and in purifying of his Body and Soul Hincmar Arch-Bishop of Rhemes who died towards the end of th IX Century useth the same method when he represents unto Charles the Bald the Preparations necessary for worthy receiving the Sacrament Opusc 1. c. 12. t. 2. p. 101 102. He desires that every one would judge himself to the end that the trial being made in the heart the thought should serve for an Accuser the Conscience for a Witness and fear for an Executioner Then that the blood of the Soul should fall by tears And in fine that the Understanding should give such a sentence that a man should judge himself unworthy of participating of the Body and Blood of our Saviour And several other things which he proposeth without speaking any thing of Confession But by degrees Confession established it self infensibly amongst the Christians of the West and at length Innocent the Third authorized it by a Decree at the Council of Lateran in the Year 1215. at which time the Albigensis and Waldensis had separated themselves from Communion of the Latins The most part of all Christian Communions have no such Law as the Latins that obliges them unto Confession before receiving the Communion for example the Abyssins or Ethiopians the Armenians the Nestorians Confession 't is granted is used in the Greek Church which is of a large extent but it is so little practised that their Bishops and Priests do scarce ever confess De concord l. 4. c. 2. as Arcudius a Greek Latinized doth inform us And as for the Protestants every body knows they have found this Yoke of the Latins too heavy to bear But if the holy Fathers have not hitherto demanded private Confession before coming unto the Table of our Lord they do require other dispositions without which they forbid us approaching unto it It is in this sense that St. Chrysostom condemning the practise of those which came unto the Sacrament as it were by Rancounter and by custom at certain times which they looked upon to be more solemn he sheweth them that it is not the time that makes us any thing the more worthy to receive but that it is the purity of the Soul the holiness of our life the innocence of our Conversation Chrysost Hom 3. in c. 1. ad Ephes p. 1050 1051. It is not saith he the Epiphany nor the Lent that renders us worthy to approach unto the holy Sacrament it is the sincerity and purity of heart therewith draw near at all times and without them never come unto it Consider with what care and with what respect the Flesh of Sacrifices was eaten under the Law What caution did they not use what trouble were they not continually at to purifie themselves to that purpose And you approaching unto a Sacrifice which the very Angels behold with a religious reverence you think it is sufficient to prepare your selves unto so solemn an action by governing your selves according to the course of the Season Consider the Vessels which are employed for the Celebration of this Sacrament how clean they be how bright and shining they be yet nevertheless our Souls should be cleaner more holy and more resplendent than these Vessels seeing that it is only for us that they be prepared And in another place speaking of seldom and often receiving the Sacrament Id. Hom. 17 in Ep. ad Heb. p. 1872. We regard not saith he neither those which communicate often nor those which communicate seldom but those which communicate with a sincere Conscience a pure heart and an unreprovable life Let those that are in this condition always draw near and those which are not let them not so much as once draw near because they only draw upon themselves the wrath of God and make themselves worthy of Condemnation of pains and of punishments which should not seem strange unto us for as Meats which are wholsom of themselves being received into a diseased Body there causeth a disorder and an entire corruption and becomes the Original of some disease so it is the same of these terrible and venerable Mysteries when they be received into Souls which be indisposed And because the holy Fathers considered that this august Sacrament which giveth life unto some gives death unto others that is to say unto those which receive it unworthily and that if it be full of consolation unto holy Souls it is also full of terror unto the wicked They have spoken of it as of a terrible and fearful Sacrament because according to the saying of the same St. Chrysostom Whilst the death of Jesus Christ is celebrating Hom. 21. in Act a dreadful Sacrament is represented God gave himself for the World From thence came the Exhortation addressed unto the people in the ancient Liturgies to call them unto the Communion Draw near with fear August l. 3. de doctr Christ c. 16. in Ps 21. Hom. 2. Id. qu. super Evang l. 2. q. 38. p. 152. t. 4. And in fine should not we be seized with a holy fear accompanied with a very great respect to participate of the death of our Saviour to eat his Passion in eating his Supper as St. Austin speaks and to lick as he saith again his Sufferings in the Sacraments of his Body and of his Blood But if this warning was given unto Communicants they were told also in inviting them unto the holy Communion Holy things are for the Saints Whereupon St. Chrysostom makes this reflection When the Deacon cries Hom. 17. in Ep. ad Hebr. Holy things are for the holy it is as if he said Let not him draw near which is not holy he doth not say only him which is free of sin but him that is holy for it is not barely the remission of sins which renders a man holy but it is the presence of the Holy Ghost and the abundance of good works And St. Cyril of Jerusalem Mystag 5. The holy things saith he are proposed to be sanctified by the