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
term The mother and root of all Riches the death of Sin the life of Virtue and the way which leads unto Paradise they chearfully with their Goods relieved the necessities of the Church whereof they were Members and in the Communion of which the Lord was pleased by his grace to settle them to make them partakers of his great Salvation S. Luke gives us so clear and full a representation in the second Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles that it cannot be thought of without admiration and at the same time without lamenting and deploring the dulness and coldness of these last times wherein is too plainly seen the accomplishment of the words of our Saviour who foretold That iniquity should abound and the love of many should wax cold But at the beginning of Christian Religion as this charity was in its greatest beauty the whole Church offered unto God upon the Table every Lords day or on the days when they Assembled to participate of this Sacrament of their Salvation and of there Union their Oblations for the support of their Spiritual Guides or Ministers for the relief of their Poor and for the other Necessities of the whole Church and out of these Offerings there was taken as much Bread and Wine as was needful for the holy Communion a custom which if I mistake not began to be practised in the days of the Apostles for S. Clement one of their Disciples Clement Epist ad Cor. p. 53. speaks of it as of a matter already established in that excellent Letter which he wrote unto the Church of Corinth in the name of that of Rome whereof he was one of the Pastours Those saith he which make their oblations at the time appointed are agreeable and blessed for obeying the command of God they do not sin Just Mart. Apolog. 1. p. 60. And Justin Martyr in his first Apology for the Christians it is commonly called the second sheweth that in his time the Food which was offered unto God by Believers with Prayers and Thanksgiving to be eaten and to relieve the Poor were called Oblations and towards the conclusion of that excellent work he saith That after Prayers and the kiss of Charity there was presented unto the Pastour Bread and a Cup mingled with Wine and Water and that he having received these things rendred praise and thanks unto God the Father of all in the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost And there also he distinguisheth the Prayers of the Minister for the Consecration of the Eucharist from the action of the people presenting him the Bread and Wine which action he calls Oblation which he repeats again afterwards Cypr de operib Eleemos S. Cyprian also mentions these Oblations but under the name of Sacrifices when he reproacheth a rich and covetous Widow That she came into the Assembly or unto the Sacrament of the Lord without an Oblation and that she took part of the Sacrifice which the Poor had offered Hieron in â—erem c. 11. in Ezech. c. 18. Innoc. ad Dâ—cent c. 3. Ambros in Pâ—al 118. In like manner S. Jerom and Pope Innocent the first inform us that in their time the Deacon did publickly repeat in the Church the names of those which offered S. Ambrose Bishop of Milain in the argument upon the 118. Psalm and according to the Hebrews the 119. teacheth us that he that would communicate after having received holy Baptism was obliged to offer his present or gift at the Altar in the Constitutions which commonly go under the Apostles names Conslit Apost l. 8. s. 10. Prayers are made for them which offered Sacrifices and the first-fruits to the end God would render them an hundred fold and there is to be seen in the same piece several rules touching those Oblations Sozom. hist Eccles l. 6. c. 15. Hist Eccles l. 5. c. 17. Aug. Ep. 122. Sozomen observes in his Church-History that the Emperour Valens came to Church offered the gift upon the Table Theodoret reports the same of the Emperour Theodosius And S. Austin speaking of two Christian Women Captives who deploring their misery said amongst other things that in the place where they were They could neither carry their Oblations unto the Altar of God nor find any Priest unto whom to present it Id. Serm. 215. de temp if it were his And elsewhere recommending unto his flock the use and practice of these Oblations Offer saith he the Oblations which are consecrated at the Altar that man that is able to offer and doth not ought to blush for shame if he communicates of the offering of another And because the charity of Christians decayed by little and little and their zeal insensibly failing and loosing daily some of its ardour and strength these Oblations were not so numerous as they were wont to be every one easily dispensing with himself in not offering at the Table of the Lord as they were accustomed to do the Councils were obliged by their Canons and decrees to kindle the fire of this zeal which was almost extinguished whereunto tended that of the second Council of Mascon Assembled Anno 585 Concil Matisc 2. can 4. which ordains that all the people should offer every Lords day the Oblation of Bread and Wine and that of the Council of Mayence Anno 813. Which requires that Christian people should continually be put in mind to make the Oblations Con. Mogunt an 813. can 44. Capitul 858. c. 53. t. 3. Concil Gall. which is also repeated in the fifth Book of the Capitularies of Charlemain Chap. 94. It was also one of the instructions which Herard Archbishop of Tours gave unto his Priests Anno 858. that they should exhort the people to offer their Oblations to God and also in many other parts of the writings of the Antients I know not whether that Woman mentioned by John the Deacon in the life of Gregory the first needed those exhortations of presenting her offering unto God or whether she did it of her own free will and by that ardent zeal which inspired the primitive Christians with such commendable sentiments of pity and charity Vita Gregor 1. l. 2. c. 41. but in fine he writes That a certain Woman did offer unto Gregory as he celebrated the solemnity of the Mass the usual Oblations and that afterwards Gregory said in giving her the Sacrament The body of our Lord preserve your Soul she smiled in that he called the loaf of Bread which she made her self the body of Christ And forasmuch as for the most part none were admitted unto the participation of the Eucharist but those which presented their Oblations there is a very great number of Canons in the Councils which prescribe to whom the Oblations were to be distributed and to whom not but it is not necessary to alledge more proofs of this Antient custome seeing the matter admits of no difficulty Nevertheless this is not all that we intend
in the Sclavonian Tongue unto those of that Nation whom he had Baptised that is to say Converted That as the matter was debated in the Sacred Colledge where there were several that opposed it there was a voice-heard as it were sent from Heaven saying Let all Flesh praise the Lord and every Tongue confess his Name upon which Cyrill was granted his request It is said that this Cyril is the same who in the Sclavonian Language is called Chiuppil That he lived about the Year 860. and that in the Days of Michael the Third Emperor of the East and of Pope Nicolas the First he with Methodius Converted unto the Faith of Jesus Christ the Mingrelians the Circassians and the Gazarites and afterwards several of the Sclavonians therefore in the Roman Martyrology is celebrated the day of his Birth as was antiently said amongst Christians that is of the Death of Cyrill and Methodius in the same day which is the ninth of March whence it is also that Pope John the Eighth wrote several Letters unto this Methodius Companion unto Cyrill and one of the Apostles of the Sclavonians according to the Language of those times and we find by the 247th Letter of this Pope written Anno 879. unto Sphentopulcher Prince of the Country That Methodius had been sent by this Prince unto John the Eighth who returned him back unto him to execute the Function of Archbishop with power to celebrate Mass and Divine Service in the Sclavonian Tongue We have just cause to commend saith this Pope Tom. 7. Concil part 1. Ep. 247. p. 91. writing unto Sphentopulcher the Sclavonian Characters invented by a certain Philosopher called Constantine whereby the Praises of God are published abroad and we command That in that same Language be recited the Sermons and Works of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ for we are warned by Divine Authority to praise the Lord not only in three Languages but also in all which Authority enjoyns us this Commandment when it saith All Nations praise the Lord and all People bless his name and the Apostles being filled with the Holy Ghost spake forth in all Languages the wonderful things of God Thence also it is that St. Paul that Heavenly Trumpet publisheth this Warning Let every Tongue confess that our Lord Jesus is the Christ to the Glory of the Father Touching which Languages also he instructeth us fully and plainly in the 14th Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians how we are to edifie the Church in speaking several Languages and certainly it doth in no way prejudice the Faith or Doctrine to sing Masses in the Sclavonian Tongue or to read the holy Gospel or Divine Lessons of the Old and New Testament well translated and interpreted or to say or sing all the other Offices because he who made the three principal Languages the Hebrew Greek and Latine is the same which hath also created all other Languages for his Praise and Glory However we appoint that in all Churches under your inspection for the greater Honour the Gospel be read in Latine and because 't is translated into Sclavonian that it be read to the People who understand not Latin as it is practised in some Churches It were to be wished say the Protestants that the Christians of the Roman Communion would make serious reflection upon these words of Pope John the Eighth and that then they would consult the Decree of Innocent the Third at the Council of Lateran assembled in the year of our Lord 1215. T. 7. Concil Paâ—r part 2. Can. 9. p. 8â—9 Because that in most places in the same City and in the same Diocese there be people of divers Languages mingled together having under one Faith different Ceremonies and Customs we expresly enjoyn the Bishops of those Cities and Dioceses to provide for them persons fit to celebrate Divine Offices according to the different Ceremonies and Languages and to administer the Sacraments of the Church instructing them by their words and by Example Cardinal Cajetan who lived in Luther's time hath left in his Opuscula Opuscul t. 3. tract 15. art 8. That it were better for the edification of the Church thaâ— publick Service and Prayers which are made in presence of the People should be made in the Church rather in the vulgar than in the Latin Tongue and being blamed for it by some he answered That he grounded what he had said upon the 14th Chapter of the first to the Corinthians De offic pii viri p 865. George Cassander who lived and dyed in the Roman Church wished that it might have been so practised Methinks saith he it were much to be desired that according to the Apostles command and the custom of the antient Church some heed were to be taken of the People in the publick Prayers of the Church in the Psalms and Lessons which are used in their behalf and that the common People should not always be kept strangers from the knowledge of Prayers and Divine Service The words of St. Paul are clear That one cannot understand what is said if it be not said in a known Tongue and that he that by his ignorance understands not what is said cannot say Amen unto the Prayers of another Ibid. p. 866. And having alledged the words of Aeneas Sylvius and those of Cajetan he adds Vnto those who have the conduct and Government of the Church at this time it were no hard matter to establish and settle these and the like things according to the pure and antient practice of the Church if the minds of some persons were not seized with a vain and foolish fear and if they were not kept back by a vain Superstition nevertheless unless this be done I do not see that there is any great hope of an assured agreement and union in the Church nor that the Seeds of Schisms and Divisions will ever be rooted out and I cannot conceive how those persons unto whom the oversight of the Church is committed shall escape rendering an account of the Rents and Divisions in the Church which they have neglected and whereof they have not been careful according to their duty to prevent the growing Schisms and Heresies He repeats almost the same things in the consultation addressed unto the Emperors Ferdinand I. and Maximilian II. where he saith Pag. 995. amongst other things That 't was requisite Priests should so say Mass that the People may reap some benefit by it and not to be barely busied about an outward shew This was also the Testimony of Erasmus which is cited in the Margin of Cassander's Book just by the words first alledged Dâ— modo orandi It were saith he much to be desired that the whole Divine Service were said in a Language understood by all the People as it was wont to be practised in antient times and that all things were so plainly and so distinctly spoken that those which hearkened might understand them Queen Katherine
'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
This is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many O. He makes no mention then of the Divinity in shewing the Type of that Passion E. Not any O. But of the Body and Blood E. It is true O The body then was Crucified And venerable Bede Bede in Marc. c. 14. He himself broke the Bread which he presented unto his Disciples that he might shew the fraction of his Body Also it is without all doubt that Christians carefully observed this Ceremony for they consecrated a Loaf greater or less according to the number of Communicants which was divided into several Morsels to be distributed unto each Communicant all the Liturgies that are extant true or false testifie this fraction and all the holy Fathers confirm it Accordingly we read in the life of Pope Sergius who held the Chair towards the end of the Seventh Century That he ordained that at the breaking the Bread of the Lord T. 5. Concil p. 407. Extr. the people and Clergy should sing Lamb of God that takest away the sins of the World Have mercy upon us Hugh Maynard whom we mentioned before hath caused to be Printed at the end of the Book of Sacraments of St. Gregory some antient Manuscripts which contain several Liturgies for the Celebration of the Eucharist and in all these Liturgies which are of the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries the Fraction which we speak of is therein found In that of Ratold Abbot of Corby who lived at the end of the Tenth Century this Prayer is made when the Body is broken O Lord vouchsafe to send if it be thy Will Apperd ad lib. Sacram. Greg. p. 265. thy holy Angel upon this holy and immortal Mystery to wit upon thy Body and Blood for O Lord we break it and be pleased to bless it and vouchsafe to make us fit to handle it with pure hands and senses and to receive it worthily In another of these Manuscripts towards the year 1079. Ibid. p. 276. there is also mention made of the division of the Body of our Lord into several parts and in fine in a third of the year 1032. or thereabouts it is observed That whil'st the Bishop is making the Fraction In Notis p 24. he saith Lamb of God c. and that the Bread being broken he bites in Communicating in part of the Oblation There is frequent mention made of this Fraction in those antient customs of the Monastery of Cluny above-mentioned L. 1. c. 13. p. 58. l. 2. c. 30. p. 141. alibi The Interpreter of the Roman Order who lived towards the end of the Eleventh Century observes what we have already alledged of Pope Sergius And because there were some who were scrupulous because the Roman Order commanded to break the Bread of our Lord he reproaches them by the Authority of the Scriptures and of the Fathers Apud Cassan in litur c. 29. We are informed saith he that some persons of late times do find and think strange that the Roman Order enjoyns the Bread of our Lord to be broken as if they had not read or that they had forgot what is written in the Gospel That Jesus Christ took Bread That he blessed it and broke it and gave it to his Disciples saying Take eat c. and what is read in the Acts of the Apostles That the Primitive Church continued with one accord in the Doctrine and Fellowship of the Apostles and in breaking of Bread and watched in the Exercise of Prayer As for the holy Fathers he saith That forbearing at this time to speak of all others who celebrated the Divine Mysteries as they had been taught by the Apostles and the Evangelists he contents himself to instance in the example of that Woman mentioned by Gregory the First in his Dialogues who smiled when she heard Gregory call that Loaf of Bread which she her self had made the Body of Christ It is upon this custom of the breaking the Bread of the Sacrament that Humbert Cardinal of Blanch-Selva grounds the slander he makes against the Greeks in this same Eleventh Century in that they used Oblations which had been before consecrated during the Lent because that obliged them to separate the Benediction and breaking the Bread from the distribution of it And indeed during Lent they did not fully celebrate the Eucharist but on Saturday and Sunday and on that day they kept some of the consecrated Symboles to Communicate the other days of the Week and so they were constrained to do that at several times which our Saviour did at once when he celebrated his Sacrament Thereupon Humbert presseth his Enemy Nicetas Humbert contr Nicet t. 4. Bibl. Pat. part 2. p. 246. â—id p. 216. B. by the Example of the Son of God We read saith he that the Lord himself gave unto his Disciples not an imperfect but a perfect commemoration in giving unto them the Bread which he had broken and at the same Instant broken and distributed for he not only blessed it deferring till next day to break it neither contented he himself to break it but he distributed it presently after having broke it whence it is that the blessed Martyr Pope Alexander the Fifth after St Peter inserting the Passion of our Lord in the Canon of the Mass saith not as oft as ye do this but as often as ye do these things that is to say that ye bless that ye break and that ye distribute ye do it in remembrance of him because each of these three things the Blessing without the Distribution doth not perfectly represent the Commemoration of Jesus Christ no more than the distribution doth without the Benediction and the Breaking I say nothing here of the Decretal of Pope Alexander which is a forged and a counterfeit piece as are all the Decretals of the first Popes until Siricius it sufficeth that until the days of Humbert and also before it was owned to be true that so its authority might serve to prove the Ceremony of breaking the Bread as a thing essential in the Celebration of the Sacrament also we see that most Christian Communions observe it at this time not distributing the holy Bread unto the Communicants until it be broken in parcels to give a piece or morsel unto each one So it is practised by the Greeks the Moscovites the Russians and the Abassins for they make a Loaf of Bread greater or less either in breadth or thickness according to the number of Communicants so that having blessed and consecrated it they break it into little bits to distribute it unto those who approach unto the holy Table to participate of this Holy and Divine Sacrament From thence it is as St. Austin hath observed that in some places they called the Sacrament the Parcels that is to say the Pieces amongst the Greeks the Fragments that is to say the Portions and Pieces of the Eucharist broken and the holy parcels As for the Latin
Church this custom of breaking the Bread into little pieces to be distributed unto each of the Communicants was practised therein until the Twelfth Century as we have seen at large And this manner of speech was so frequent that although they have abolished the action which had introduced it Serm. de Azymo c. 4. extr yet they do not forbear at this day to give the name of Particules that is to say little pieces unto the Hosts which they distribute unto Communicants although they give them unto each of them whole and not broken But you must take notice that before the Latin Church had laid aside the use and custom of breaking the Bread of the Sacrament to distribute it unto Believers there was a very considerable Separation made from her by Berengarius and his followers and the Albigenses and Waldenses and their adherents whereby this practice and custom hath been still observed even in the West it self which is not now practised in the extent of the Church of Rome CHAP. X. Of the Distribution and of the Communion and first of the Time the Place and Posture of the Communicant IN the Celebration of the Sacrament the breaking of Bread should be followed by the Distribution but because the Distribution contains several things under its compass as the Time the Place the Posture of the Communicant the Persons which distribute it those which receive with the words both of the one and the other and in fine the Things distributed and received it is absolutely necessary to examine them severally to give the more light unto this part of the outward form of the Celebration of the Sacrament Therefore we will rest satisfied to consider in this Chapter the Time the Place with the Posture and Gesture of the Communicant As for the Time there 's no body can make any doubt but that Jesus Christ did institute and celebrate the Sacrament of the Eucharist after the Supper of the Passeover and at the end of the Supper the Evangelists do witness it and express themselves so fully as that they give us not the least cause to doubt of it which makes me believe that the Apostles and the Churches founded by their Preaching practised the same during life And to say the truth it seems to be plainly found in the Eleventh Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians that the Belivers of that Church did celebrate this Divine Mysterie and participate thereof after having eaten altogether so that the Celebration of the Sacrament was as it were the Seal the Crown and accomplishment of those Agapes and Feasts of Charity I know that all be not of this Opinion and I do not intend to censure those who judge that the Celebration of the Sacrament was performed before the Agape I will only say that it is the Judgment of many Learned men which they ground upon the following Reasons which I am obliged to recite that the Reader might judge of their solidity In the first place it appears that the design of these first Christians was exactly to imitate the Order that was observed by Jesus Christ who as we said celebrated his Eucharist after Supper Secondly 1 Cor. 11.21 They pretend that the Apostle gives an evident proof of it when he saith That some advanceth and taketh his own supper before without staying for the rest for that could not be if they had begun with the Celebration of the Sacrament and ended with the Feast of Charity it being unlikely that the Sacrament would be solemnized before the Assembly was compleat and that all which were accustomed to be present were come In the third place had it been practised otherwise they think S. Paul should not have had so great cause to have charged the Corinthians of having received the Bread and the Cup of the Lord unworthily nor to command them to examine themselves before they come unto the Lords Table because by this reckoning the disorder he charges them with should have happened after the Celebration of the Sacrament and not before So that the Apostle should only have had cause to blame the disorder of their Feast without mingling therewith any discourse of the Sacrament yet nevertheless he doth the quite contrary for he insists much more upon the Sacrament than upon all the rest which doth evidently shew that these first Christians assembled for their Feasts of Charity began this Solemnity by the common Meal which they made all together and did end it by the Sacrament of the Eucharist whereof they did communicate after they had ended Supper after which the company was dismissed Unto all these proofs they add the marks of that ancient Custom which remained in the V. Century Tertullian saith in some of his Works That the Eucharist was celebrated at supper time Tertul. de corona c. 3. as Rigaut and Rhenanus confess upon the place But although that the practice of celebrating it also in the Morning was already very frequent in the Church I cannot see how it can be concluded from the words of this Learned African that the Celebration was made after the Meal rather than before no more than by what is observed by S. Cyprian about forty years after for disputing against those who celebrated the Sacrament in the Morning with Water and urging them with the Example of our Lord who did his with Wine he said Cypr. Ep. 63. that they happily imagined to be quit under colour That at Supper Wine was offered in the Cup. All that can be inferr'd from these two passages of Antiquity is That in those times the Eucharist was celebrated conjointly with the Agapes or Feasts of Charity but in such a manner that it was also very frequently celebrated and most commonly in the Morning and by consequence fasting Also is it not therein the marks of the ancient custom before mentioned are sought as also in what is said by S. Austin in the beginning of the V. Century Aug. Ep. 118. c. 7. That some were wont to receive the Sacrament after Meal time but upon one day of the year only to wit Thursday before Easter Concil Carth. 3. c 29. as is expresly observed by the Third Council of Carthage assembled at the same time ordering that this Sacrament should alwaies be celebrated fasting excepting only the day that our Lord's Supper is celebrated that is to say the day whereon Commemoration is made every year of the Supper of our Lord which is as every body knows upon Holy Thursday But as this Rule would serve as a Law only in Africa there were other Churches which used thus not on that day precisely but every week on Saturday And indeed two ancient Church Historians Socrates and Sozomen Socr. l. 5. c. 21. Grac. 22. Sozom. l. 7. c. 19. who wrote some years after the death of S. Austir inform us That the Christians of Egypt those of Thebais and about Alexandria in several Cities and Villages did
have always the Sacrament ready to Communicate Sick Folks be they old or young that they may not dye without Communicating Gautier Bishop of Orleans prescribes the same unto his Priests in his Capitularies of the year 869. And Riculfe Bishop of Soissons unto his in the year 889. proving the necessity of Communicating Infants which he will have to be given presently after Baptism by the same words whereby S. Austin proves it The Book of Divine Offices called the Roman Order was written as some think at the end of the Eighth Century or the beginning of the Ninth and as others think in the Eleventh In that Book this Decree is to be seen Ord. Rom. t. 10. Bibl. Pat. p. 84. Care is to be taken that young Children receive no Food after they are Baptized and that they should not give them Suck without great necessity untill they have participated of the Body of Christ Greg. lib. Sac. p. 73. Nevertheless in S. Gregory's time it was not forbidden to give them Suck but at the end of the Eleventh and beginning of the Twelfth Centuries this pity was shewed unto these poor Infants and for the difficulty there was in making them swallow Bread they were communicated with the blessed Wine only Pasch 2. Ep. 32. t. 7. conc patr 1. p. 530. So it was enjoined by Pope Paschal the Second who succeeded unto Vrban the Second Anno 1099. according to Cardinal Bellarmin's computation and this custom continued after his death as Hugh of S. Victor testifies who lived in the Twelfth Century in his Ecclesiastical Books of Ceremonies Sacraments Offices and Observations L. 1. c. 20. t. 10. Bibl. Pat. p. 1376. Vnto Children new born saith he must be administred with the Priest's Finger the Sacrament in the species of blood because such in that state do naturally suck And he saith It must be so done according to the first Institution of the Church he laments the Ignorance of Priests who saith he retaining the form and not the thing give unto them Wine instead of Blood which he wished might be abolished if it could be done without offending the ignorant Nevertheless this practice of giving a little Wine unto young Children after Baptism continued a long time in divers parts of the Western Church Lindan Panop l. 4. c. 25. as appears by the words of Hugh of S. Victor and some have observed that not much above one hundred years ago the same thing was used and practised in the Church of Dordrecht in Holland Apud Arcad. de concord l. 3. c. 40. before it embraced the Protestant Reformed Religion In fine Simon of Thessalonica Cabasilas Jeremy Patriarch of Constantinople and Gabriel of Philadelphia also defend this necessity of Communicating not only of persons of discretion but also of young Children This Tradition thus established there only rests to finish this Chapter to speak something touching the words of the Distributer and of the Communicant When the Lord gave unto the Disciples the Sacrament of Bread he said This is my Body and in giving them the Symbole of Wine This is my Blood or this Cup is the New Testament in my Blood but we do not find that the Apostles said any thing In Justin Martyr's time Apolog. 2. the Distributer nor the Communicant said nothing but the Deacons gave unto the Believers Bread and Wine which had been consecrated Serom. l. 1. p. 271. and it may be collected from Clement of Alexandria that it was so practised at the end of the Second Century Some time after it was said unto the Communicants in giving them the Sacrament the Body of Christ the Blood of Christ and the Receivers answered Amen as may be read in the Apostolical Constitutions S. Ambrose S. Cyril of Jerusalem S. Austin and elsewhere but it must also be observed that they said unto them Ye are the Body of Christ and that unto these words they answered Amen as they had answered in receiving the Sacrament as is restified by S. Austin in his Sermon unto the new Baptized in S. Fulgentius In the days of Gregory the First and after they said in distributing the Eucharist The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ keep ye unto Life everlasting The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ redeem ye unto Life everlasting But I do not find that Believers answered so punctually Amen Such Liberty the Church hath used in this circumstance of distributing the Sacrament Amongst the Greeks they say unto the Communicant In Euchol p. 83. Servant of God you do Communicate of the holy Body and precious Blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in remission of Sins and unto Life everlasting But 't is time to consider the things which were given unto Believers when they did participate of the Sacrament and it is wherein we will employ the following Chapter CHAP. XII Of the things distributed and received WHat was distributed unto Believers in Communicating were the things which had been Blessed and Consecrated to be made the Sacraments of the Body and Blood of our Lord. I will not now examine the change which Consecration may thereunto bring this not being the place to treat of the Doctrine of the holy Fathers which shall appear in the second part of this Treatise it will suffice here to enquire if Christians have always participated of both Symboles and if they have ever been permitted to Communicate under both kinds as is spoken or under one kind only As for the Symbole of Bread it is an undoubted truth that it hath always been given to Believers in all Christian Communions in the whole world and there hath never been any contest on this subject at least in what regards the thing it self I mean the matter of fact not to speak of the difference touching the quality of the Bread which ought to be used in this Mystery The greatest difficulty then is to know the practice of the Church in the species of Wine we are indispensably forced to treat of the Communion under both kinds and to lay before the Readers eyes the practice of Christians with the changes and innovations which have therein happened Jesus Christ who distributed the Bread unto his Apostles gave unto them also the Cup and expresly commanded them all to drink of it as S. Matthew hath written S. Mark hath said that they all drank of it The Christians immediately following the Apostles practised the very same but because it would make a whole Volume to collect the passages of the Ancients to prove the certainty of this matter and besides both Roman Catholicks as well as Protestants confess That Jesus Christ did institute this Sacrament under both kinds That the Apostles taught so and that it was so practised by the primitive Church for a long time as I think it may suffice to prove this Tradition from age to age by some of the clearest passages and to follow it until its abolishing at the Council of
to take it when they pleas'd for besides that it was an abuse which indeed was tolerated along time in the Church but could be no prejudice unto the practice generally received it may be observed that those very persons which carried home with them the Bread of the Sacrament did it not in all likelihood until after they had eaten part of it in the Assembly and participated of the Cup of the Lord. Nor that there was given unto sick Folks at the point of Death the Eucharist steeped because it was a thing extraordinary and that beside it was shewn by this practice that both Symbols were believed to be necessary nor that the XI Council of Toledo permits the Cup only to be given unto those who are so weak that they are not able to swallow down the consecrated Bread unto whom Pope Paschal II. joins young Children because this sufferance is grounded upon invincible necessity as well as that which is practised by some Protestant Churches towards those who have naturally such an aversion for Wine that 't is not in their power to surmount in which cases she dispenseth with the participation of the Cup and is content to administer the Bread only After what hath been hitherto spoken of the Communion under both kinds I think it will be needless to add any more unto this History which if I mistake not I have written large enough to satisfie the curiosity of those who desire to be informed of what passed in the ancient Church in the practice of so important a matter as is that of the Communion of the holy Cup not but that a great number of other testimonies may be alledged for the establishment of this Tradition but when I consider that if the great number of passages doth not prejudice the matter which is examined yet it proves tedious unto the Reader when too large I shall forbear alledging any more to avoid tiring those who shall give themselves the trouble of reading this Treatise and I forbear the rather that if they are persons who have any knowledge of Ecclesiastical Antiquity they will know of themselves without my help that there be many others in the Works of Tertullian of S. Ambrose Gaudentius S. Jerome S. Austin besides those related by Gratian in his Decree of Gregory the First in the Roman Order in the Books of Images under the name of Charlemaine in the Writings of Rabanus of Paschase of Oecumenius Theophylact Fulbert of Chartres Humbert of Blanch-Selva of Lanfranc Guilmond Rupert de Duitz Alger S. Bernard Odo Bishop of Cambray of Lombard Master of the Sentences and elsewhere as for such as have not applied themselves to the reading the Holy Fathers they may sufficiently inform themselves of what I have written how Christians have from time to time governed themselves in the matter of communicating under both kinds Therefore I shall content my self in touching a circumstance which I had almost forgotten and which in all likelihood will not be displeasing unto any it concerns a Chalice of Saint Remy Archbishop of Rheims this Prelate who was so famous in our France especially after he had Baptized Clovis the first of our Kings who imbraced the Christian Religion this Prelate I say did Consecrate unto God a Cup to distribute the Communion unto the people upon which he caused three Latin Verses to be ingraved which are preserved unto our daies although the Chalice is not in being the Church of Rheims having been constrained to melt it and to pay it for their Ransom unto the Normans above 700. years ago and these Verses plainly shew that in S. Remy's time that is towards the end of the V. Century the people did not participate of the Bread of the Sacrament only but also of the Cup of Benediction Flodoard cites them in his History of the Church of Rheims and I 'll make no difficulty of representing them in this History in the same stile in which they were written Hauriat hinc populus vitam de sanguine sacro Flodoard Histor Remens l. 1. c. 10. Injecto aeternus quem fudit vulnere Christus Remigius reddit Domino sua vota Sacerdos Now I say to conclude this Chapter it appears plainly by all that hath been said that the Christian Church universally practised the Communion under both kinds separately the space of 1000. years that since that time they began in some places in the Latin Church to administer the Sacrament mixt or steeped from the Eucharist steeped they came in process of time to distribute the consecrated Bread only not in all places but in some Churches until that the Council of Constance in the Year 1415. commanded by a publick Decree the Communion to be given under one kind only which yet was not so generally obeyed but that we have produced since that time examples and instances of a contrary practice But in fine the Council of Trent made its last Essay in the manner as hath been above declared as for all the other Christian Churches which hold no commerce with the Latin they administer the Sacrament under both Symbols although it be with some little difference CHAP. XIII The Eucharist received with the hand BUT because it is not sufficient to know the things which were distributed unto Communicants if we do not at the same time know the manner they were received by Believers I think fit to imploy this Chapter in the inquiry of this Custom and Practice When Jesus Christ celebrated and instituted his first Sacrament he said unto his Disciples Take the Greek word used by him in this place imports to take with the hand or receive with the hand what is given accordingly the ancient Christians which succeeded the Age of Jesus Christ and his Apostles did in the very same manner and it is certain that all the Communicants generally received with the hand in the Church the Sacrament of the Eucharist so Tertullian teacheth us in his Treatise of Idolatry where shewing that it is not lawful for a Christian Workman to make Idols that is to say Images of false Gods he expresseth his anger against any amongst the Christians Tertul. de Idol c. 7. Who come saith he from making Idols to Church who lifteth up unto God the Father the hands which are the makers of Idols Id. de Coron c. 3. And in fine which stretcheth forth those hands to receive the Body of the Lord who gave Bodies unto Devils And elsewhere We receive the Eucharist from no other hand but from his who doth preside Id. de Orat. c. 14. And in his Book of Prayer Having saith he received the Body of the Lord and kept it Clement of Alexandria at the end of the Second Century wherein he lived teacheth us that there were certain Priests who did not distribute the Sacrament unto Communicants but permitted each one that approached unto the holy Table to take it Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 1. p. 271. Apud Cassand in Liturg
Miles but St. Marsus felt the Eucharist was turn'd into a Scrpent which rouled about him and as he found by the pain he suffered that he was severely punished for his Disobedience and Neglect he had committed at the Communion He cast himself at the Feet of St. Milain and told him what was happened the holy Bishop wept for him all Night Watching and Praying and next Day gave him Absolution and the Blessing and presently after the Serpent took again the Form of the Eucharist and St. Marsus taking it he communicated with Joy which he neglected to do to his Damage It is plain that the Eucharist here mentioned is nothing else but the Bread of the Eucharist which St. Cyril of Alexandria commonly calls by that Name In short this Eucharist was intended for the Communion as appears by the whole Story Therefore St. Milain gave unto each of them a Portion it also appears that Marsus had received some Tincture that the receiving the Sacrament broke the Fast and I find not but the other Bishops were of the same Mind All that is blam'd in Marsus is the having preferr'd the Fast of the Day before the Communion whereas he ought to have preferr'd the Communion before the Fast that is to say that it was better to have communicated with the others and broke his Fast as they had done than to deprive himself of the Sacrament to keep the Fast of the Day Theodoret. Hist Relig. p. 791. because the Sacrament is a Bond of Charity which is infinitely greater than Fasting Therefore the Anchorit Marcion said to Avitus who went to visit him in his Solitude and who made some scruple of breaking his fast to eat with him We know that Charity is more excellent than Fasting But in fine it was believed in our France in the VIth Century as 't was in Tertullian's time that the receiving the Eucharist broke the Fast and it shall appear in the Course of this History that the Greeks believed so in the XIth Century and that they still believe it at present as Father Cellot informs us To conclude if any desire to know the Dioceses of these five French Bishops abovementioned he may understand St. Milain was Bishop of Rennes Albin of Anger 's Launus of Constance in Normandy Apâ—d Eus b. Hist l. 6. c. 49. Serm. 35. de verb. Dom. c. 5. Contr. Donat. post Collat. c. 6. Clem. Alexand. Sâ—romat l. 1. p. 271. Cyril Alex. in Joan. l. 4. c. 14. Victor of Mans and Marsus of Nantes In the seventh place I observe that the Fathers speak of the Eucharist as of a thing whereof but a little is received a Bit a Piece a Portion So the Priest of Alexandria in Eusebius sent unto Seraphion A little of the Sacrament So St. Austin speaks of receiving a little and again That Peter and Judas received each of them a Morsel So Clement of Alexandria said That each of the People took a little And St. Cyril of Alexandria That Jesus gave Morsels of Bread unto his Disciples And so in a number of other places which is not necessary here to mention in a thing not contested and that is owned by every Body In fine having endeavoured with some labour to find if the ancient Doctors of the Church have affirmed as the Latines at this time do that several Miracles are done by the Sacrament August l. 3. de Trinit c. 10. I can find nothing of that Nature on the contrary they have informed me That these things might have been honoured or receive respect as religious but not cause astonishment as things strange or miraculous CHAP. III. Of the Use and Office of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament HAving seen what was believed and said in this spatious and vast Country of Ecclesiastical Antiquity of the things received in the Sacrament and having examined the Reflections which the Doctors of that Empire have made upon the Words of Institution of this Divine and August Sacrament we are obliged to enquire what they have taught of the Use Office and employ of these sacred Symbols I mean of the Bread and Wine If we will search into their Records wherein the Laws and Maxims of this Kingdom may be found we shall see that those which have had the Government and Direction of it have conceived that the Eucharist is the Sacrament the Sign the Figure the Type the Anti-type the Symbol the Image the Similitude and the Resemblance of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ It 's true 't is not enough to say so the Reader must moreover see the Testimonies where the holy Fathers say so for 't is their Opinions are now in question and not ours Let us then take all these Titles in Order and shew what the ancient Doctors of the Church have said unto each of them at least as far as may be necessary unto our purpose They say in the first place That it is a Sacrament Hil. in Matth. cap. 9. Ibid. c. 30. as when St. Hilary Bishop of Poictiers speaks Of receiving the Sacrament of the Bread of Life in Faith of the Resurrection and that he saith of Judas Ambros de iis qui init c. 9. Aug. Ep. 163. Id. l. 3. de Trinitat c. 4. Id. Serm. ad Infant Facund l. 9. p. 404 405. Isid Hisp dâ— Offic. Eccles l. 1. c. 18. that he was not worthy of the Communion of Eternal Sacraments St. Ambrose calls it The Sacrament of the true Flesh of our Lord. St. Austin The Sacrament of his Body and of his Blood Again he saith That it is a great Sacrament And again These things saith he are called Sacraments Facundus said the same when he saith That the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ is called his Body and Blood and that Believers do receive the Sacrament of his Body and Blood St. Isidore of Sevil in the VIIth Century saith positively That the Bread and Wine are made the Sacraments of the Divine Body being sanctified by the Holy Ghost But being there is nothing more frequent amongst the Latin Fathers than this manner of Speech which continued in the Latin Church until these late times we shall not insist on gathering more Testimonies to prove that the holy Fathers believed that the Eucharist was the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ It shall suffice to warn the Reader Aug. de Civit. Dâ—i l. 10. c. 5. comr advers leg l. 2. c. 9. aâ—â—i that St. Austin teacheth us in sundry parts of his Works that the word Sacrament signifies a holy Sign and that those which desire more proofs of this Expression may see what is said by the Author of the Commentaries attributed unto St. Jerom on the 11th of the 1st Epist to the Corinthians Charlemain in his 4th Book of Images chap. 14. Christian Druthmar upon St. Matth. in the Library of the Fathers Tome 16. p. 361. The second Title we have set down August contâ—
Ambr. de fide l. 1. c. 4. Id. in Psal 118. serm 12. Ibid. serm 13. No Body can be his own Image And elsewhere he opposeth the Image and the Sign unto the Substance It is the Image saith he and not the Truth And again These are Signs and not the Substance Gregory of Nazianzen in his Treatise of Faith against the Arrians whereof we have only Ruffin's Translation unjustly attributed to St. Ambrose Greg. Nazian de fid vel orat 49. p. 729. Id. orat 13. 37. Id. orat 36. as appears by St. Austin's 111th Letter The Resemblance saith he is one Thing and the Truth another for Man was also made after the Image and Likeness of God yet he is not God Accordingly he declares elsewhere that the Image never attains to the Original and that the nature of an Image consists in the representing of the Arch-type Gregory of Nyss Brother unto the great St. Basil spake the same Greg. Nâ—ss de anim refur Gaudent tr 2. in Exod. Aug. de Trin. l. 7. c. 1. Theod in Dan. l. 2. c. 2. Claud. de stat anim l. 1. c. 5. The Image saith he would be no more an Image if it were quite the same with that whereof it is an Image It is in the same sense St. Gaudentius said That the Figure is not the Verity but the resemblance of the Verity And St. Austin in his Treatise of the Trinity What can be more absurd than to say that an Image is the Image of it self And Theodoret in his Commentaries upon the Prophet Daniel The Image hath the Features and not the Things themselves Claâ—dian Mammert Priest of Vienna One Thing saith he is the Truth and another Thing the Image of the Truth And we have already heard Maximius Scholar of the pretended Denis the Areopagite saying These things are Symbols Maxim in c. 3. Hieros Eccles but they are not the Substance There be some which treating of the Eucharist with regard to the Body of Jesus Christ have not forborn these kind of Expresons as the Deacon Epiphanius in the second Council of Nice If saith he it be the Image of the Body Synod Nic. 2. Act. 6. Niceph. de cherub c. 6. t. 4. Bibl. Patr. it cannot be the divine Body it self And Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople How is it that one and the same Thing is called the Body and the Image of Jesus Christ for that which is the Image of any one cannot be his Body and that which is the Body cannot be the Image because every Image is a thing different from that whereof it is an Image And we shall see in due Time that it was in the ninth Century the Doctrine taught by Ratran Bertram de corp sang Dom. That the Earnest and Image is Earnest and Image of something c. that is that they refer not unto themselves but unto another But what may some say is that all you have observed in travelling in the Dominions of Ecclesiastical Antiquity The Registers of that Kingdom do they contain no other Laws and have you found no other Maximes in its Records Is it possible that the wise and prudent Councellors who in the several Ages have had the Government and Conduct of it have agreed to speak so meanly of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and consider'd this great and sublime Mystery but as the Image the Figure the Type the Symbol of the Body and Blood of our Lord as if a Believer under the Gospel were to feed his Soul only with empty and vain Figures with Images without efficacy and with Sacraments without any virtue Reader have but a little patience and you shall see that the holy Fathers have not abandoned their Belief unto Scorn or Calumny and that they very prudently prevented the Reproaches which would have been made against them What likelihood is there that Persons of so much Light and Knowledg as the antient Doctors of the Church were should speak meanly of the venerable Mystery of the holy Sacrament they who so valued and commended and highly praised the holy Scriptures which St. Paul calls the Power of God unto Salvation unto those which believe Rom. â— 16 and who have consider'd it as the powerful and efficacious Instrument of the Conversion and Salvation of Men which made St. Justin Martyr writing against Tryphon the Jew to say Just Martyr contra Tryph. We have not believed vain Fables and Words which cannot profit but which are full of the Spirit of God and grow into Grace for as he observed a little before the Words of our Saviour have in them something which command a Respect and Fear and they are able to shame those which turn from the right way whereas those which exercise themselves therein find Comfort and Peace What appearance is there that these same Fathers which have given unto Baptism one of the Sacraments of the New Testament which the Apostle calls the Washing of Regeneration Tit. 3. Gal. 3. and wherein he assures that we put on Jesus Christ such great high and magnificent Commendations and Encomiums calling it the Remedy which drives away all Evils the Death of Sin the Chariot which carries to Heaven the Deluge of Sin the Scattering of Darkness the Key of the Kingdom of Heaven the Inlargement from Slavery the Breaking of Bonds the putting on of Incorruption Grace Salvation Life the Remedy the Antidote that which leads to Immortality the Water of Life the Waters which can extinguish the Fire to come and which bring Salvation the best and most excellent of the Gifts of God and several other Elogies of this Nature I say what likelihood is there that they should have had any meaner lower or less honourable thoughts of the holy Sacrament and that after the Apostle's Declaration 1 Cor. 10. That the Bread which we break and the Cup which we bless are the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ that they should look only upon this Sacrament as an empty and bare Sign without any effect or virtue without raising their Contemplations any higher Alas God forbid we should ever do them the Injustice as to think so In short if they taught that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament are Images and Figures they judged them not to be empty Figures which had no other use nor virtue but to set before our Eyes some form that may be like the Original whereof they are Figures like the Images and Pictures which are to be seen in Painters and Carvers Shops they have firmly believed that they are Signs instituted by God and consequently accompanied with his Grace and Benediction which makes them efficacious unto those which receive them worthily and that with holy dispositions draw near unto the Mystical Table And if I mistake not this is what St. Epiphanius means when speaking of this Sacrament he saith Epiph. in pan exposit fid That the Bread is the Food or
conformable unto the Principles which they have set down Nevertheless because there be several others which we have not touched we find our selves absolutely obliged to handle them in this Chapter the better to clear the Truth which we seek for and if in what remains to be examined they have said any thing which might favour the Hypothesis of the real Conversion which the Latins have made an Article of their Faith it is certain that what they have said hitherto will not be of so much moment and will lose of its worth and vertue whereas if nothing can be found in what is yet to be seen contrary unto what hath been already examined it must then be necessarily concluded say the Protestants that there is nothing in all their Writings that agrees with the Hypothesis of the Latin Church In fine if these Holy Doctors have believed the change of the Substance of Bread and Wine into the Substance of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ then they must also have admitted of these following Maxims First That a Body may be in several Places at once but far from admitting this Maxim to be true they directly oppose it Tertullian disputing against the Heretick Hermogenes which made the Creature co-eternal unto God Tertul. advers Hermog c. 38. If it be in a place saith he it is then within the place if it be within the place it is then bounded by the place within which it is if it be bounded it hath a remote Line and being a Painter as you are your own Profession must needs inform you that the furthest Line is the end of any thing whereof it is the remotest Line And elsewhere Id. de anim c. 9 he establisheth the same Doctrine when he places the Extent and the three Dimensions that is the length breadth and heighth amongst the most essential Properties of a Body and which necessarily and absolutely belong to their Bulk and Mass Arnobius was so strongly of Tertullian's Opinion that he uses it as a Principle universally received to refute the Evasion of Pagans who taught that their Gods were in all the Images which were consecrated unto them Arnob. l. 6. p. 89. ult edit It is not possible saith he that one God should be at one and the same time in several different Images suppose that Vulcan hath ten thousand Statues consecrated unto him in all the World can he be present as I have said in all the ten thousand at one time I think not Why not Because that which is of a particular and singular Nature cannot multiply it self into several Subjects and yet preserve its singleness intire and whole From whence he concludes a little after That it must be said or confessed that there must be an infinite number of Vulcans if there be one in each of these Images or that he is in neither of them if there be but one Vulcan because being but one Nature cannot admit that he should be divided to be in several If the Christians of those times had believed that the Body of Jesus Christ their Saviour and God had been in a Million of places at once without being therefore multiplyed nor divided it must indeed be granted that they had chosen a miserable Advocate to defend their cause because instead of defending he betray'd it and exposed it to the scorn of Infidels in reproaching them with that to be impossible which they themselves held to be possible and which said happened daily unto the Body of their God but we intend not to do this Injury unto the memory of this Christian Orator that would be Injustice and Ingratitude so to serve him seeing he hath said nothing but what is conformable unto the Opinions of other Doctors of the Church For when a Man saith St. Hilar. de Trin. l 8. p. 41. l. in Psal â—24 p. 211. â— Hilary or his Resemblance is in a place he cannot be elsewhere at the same instant because that which is is contained where it is the Nature of him which is in any place where he is sustained being infirm and incapable of being every where Hence it is that the Fathers commonly prove the Divinity of the Holy Ghost by his being present in sundry places at once in opposition unto Creatures which can be but in one place at a time I will not here alledg all their Testimonies it shall suffice to produce some upon a matter that admits of no difficulty Amb de spirit l. 1. c. 7. t. 4. Seeing that every Creature saith St. Ambrose is circumscribed by its Nature by certain bounds and limits and that the Creatures even invisible Creatures are limited by the Propriety of their Substance who dares call the Holy Spirit a Creature which hath not a limited and bounded Power for he is over all and in all which is certainly the property of the Deity Didymus who flourished at Alexandria at the same time when Ephrem did at Edessa Didym de Spir. S. l. 1. If the Holy Ghost saith he were a Creature he should have a circumscribed Substance as all things which have been created for altho the invisible Creatures are not circumscribed by place and bounds yet they are bounded by the propriety of their Substance but as for the Holy Ghost seeing he is in many places he hath not a limited Nature And a little under he saith The Angel which was present with the Apostle when he prayed in Asia could not be present at the same time with others which were in other parts of the World Pasch de Spir. S. l. 1. c. 12. â— 9 Bibl. Patr. Paschas Deacon of the Church of Rome As all Creatures saith he are subject unto the beginning of time it is known also that they be local and bounded by certain Limits and Spaces but as for the Holy Ghost he is not inclosed within Bounds or Limits like a Creature I could add unto all these Witnesses the Depositions of several others but because it is a matter the Truth whereof is known unto those which are any thing verst in the Writings of the Ancients it is needless to insist any longer upon it but only to observe that the Holy Fathers do never except the Body of Jesus Christ from these general Maxims as if his Glorification had acquired him the propriety of being in several places at once their silence upon occasions of such weight and where they could not possibly dispense with themselves from making this Exception if their belief had admitted of it doth evidently prove that they constantly believed that when the Body of Christ was in one place it could not be in another no more than other Creatures his Glorification having indeed given him a Glory which he had not before but without taking away from him the qualities or properties of a true Body besides they are not content to inform us of their Belief by their Silence they also inform us by their Words for
Doctors that spake after this manner it may be said that they did not remember to except the Sacrament of the Eucharist wherein the Accidents of Bread and Wine exist miraculously without their Subjects for tho this Reason was not very strong there being question of a Maxim equally received both by Jews and Gentiles at Athens and Jerusalem as well as by all Christians universally excepting those of the Latin Church which admit not of it in the point of the Sacrament Nevertheless with more appearance this neglect might be charged upon one or two Doctors rather than unto a Cloud of Witnesses which have testified without touching a great many others whose Testimonies we have omitted not to burden the Reader with too long a chain of Passages What likelihood saith the Protestant that so many learned illuminated prudent Persons should so universally positively and constantly teach That Accidents cannot subsist without their Subjects and that not one of them have excepted the Sacrament if they believed with the Latin Church that they did subsist in effect without their Subject I freely confess saith he that this proceeding surpriseth me and that I see no other reason of this obstinate silence but this it is that they owned the truth of this Maxim That Accidents cannot exist without their Subject in its full extent and without any Restriction which being so saith he it must be ingeniously confessed that they take not the course to favour with their Suffrages the Doctrine of a substantial Conversion seeing they have so absolutely and unanimously rejected one of its most important and necessary Consequences But besides all these Consequences which we have examined there is yet a sixth against which it is said the Holy Fathers have no less absolutely declared themselves It regards the deposition of our Senses against which the Latin Church doth oppose it self commanding not to believe them when they tell us that what we see upon the Holy Table and that what we receive there for the Comfort and Salvation of our Souls is Bread and Wine because it is not in effect neither the one or the other but appearances destitute of the Truth and that the Senses are deceived when they make us this false Report If the Holy Fathers were of this Opinion doubtless they would have had the same foresight I say they would have undervalued their Testimony as suspicious and deceitful at least in the subject of the Sacrament Let us then set about discovering what they have said the matter is well worth the pains and it well deserves the care of this Inquiry I have done it and very far from finding in their Writings any opposition against the report of the Senses I have observed that they have established their Testimony as certain and infallible and that they assure us by the Mouth of Tertullian That otherwise it would be to overthrow the whole state of Nature Te â—â—de anim s. 17. and disturb the course of our Life and even darken the Providence of God it self which by this reckoning should have given the oversight the knowledg the dispensation and enjoyment of all his Works unto lying and deceitful Masters that is unto our Senses And having chastised the Impudence of the new Academy which condemned the belief of the Senses he passeth from Philosophers unto Christians saying As for us we are not permitted no we are not suffered to question the truth of our Senses fearing least that in the things of Jesus Christ we should not take the liberty to question our Faith which he treateth at large and he proves the Faith and truth of their Testimony especially what regards this Subject he saith That the sight and hearing of the Apostles were faithful in what they reported of the Glory of our Lord when he was transfigured upon the Mount that the taste of Wine at the Marriage of Cana altho it was Water before was no less faithful as also the touching which Thomas made He alledges the Testimony of St. John saying That they declared of the Word of Life what they had heard and seen with their Eyes and their Hands had handled their Testimony saith he should then be false if the sentiment of the Eyes the Ears the Hands is of a Nature capable of Lying that is to say if these three Senses can be deceived in the Report which they make Tertul. contr Marc. l. 3. c. 8 10 11. l. 4. c. 18. alibi â— Iren. l. 3. c. 20. l. 5. c 1. Epiphan haeâ—â—l 42. Thence also it is that the same Tertullian St. Irenaeus St. Epiphanius disputing either against Marcion in particular or in general against the Hereticks Docetes and Putatives of which number Marcion was and all denied the truth of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and of his Death and Sufferings attributing unto him only a Shadow and Resemblance of a Body Thence it is I say that they often call to their aid the Testimony and deposition of the Senses to prove against these Hereticks the truth of our Saviour's Human Nature and the certainty of his Sacrifice and Death which makes Protestants say Is it possible that Men which do so powerfully establish the inviolable Fidelity of the deposition of the Sences and that clear their Testimony from any suspicion of Fraud or Deceit not to trouble the order of Nature nor to ruine the commerce and society amongst Men but above all not to shake the solid Foundation of the Religion of Jesus Christ Is it possible that those People could have been of the belief of the Latin Church touching the Sacrament for every one knows this Church declares it self against the simplicity of their Testimony that they accuse of Infidelity these faithful Witnesses and endeavour to deprive them of being believed amongst Christians because that being persuaded of their Verity and the Truth of their Deposition it will have much adoe to support and defend it self and yet more difficulty of insinuating into the Minds of those which do not question the belief of them But it may be some will say probably the Fathers have excepted in this Dispute of the Testimony of the Senses the Sacrament of the Eucharist as a particular thing and which ought not to be reckoned along with the rest if it be so it is not fit to keep it secret nor to argue against the Faith of the Latins of what they have said in behalf of the Senses this difficulty which may easily be fancied in the minds of many hath obliged me exactly to enquire into their Writings if they have not said any thing which may inform us of their Intentions and having made a strict search into all parts I find they have established the Fidelity of this same Testimony of the Senses in what relates to the Sacrament August Serm. ad Insent What you see saith St. Austin is Bread as also your Eyes do report and testify And Tertullian in the same place which gives us the
Friars transport him into the great Church and to interr him more honourably near the Altar with this Epitaph which is to be seen in the History of William of Malmesbury Guliel Malms l. 2. c. 5. Here lieth John the holy Philosopher who in his life was enriched with marvellous Learning and who at last had the honour to ascend by Martyrdom unto the Kingdom of Jesus Christ where the Saints reign everlastingly The same Historian said in the same place He was esteemed a Martyr which I do not say by way of doubt to do wrong unto this holy Soul And after his death he was put into the Catalogue of Saints for Thomas Fuller in his Ecclesiastical History of England saith that he was accounted a Martyr of Jesus Christ Histor Eccles Angl. l. 2. p. 119. and that his Anniversary Commemoration was celebrated the 4th of the Ides of November in the Martyrology printed at Antwerp Anno 1586. by the Command of Gregory the Thirteenth He adds That it was Baronius that put him out of the Martyrology out of hatred because he had written against the Real Presence alledging upon this Subject Henry Fitz Simond in 2. Edit Catal. S.S. Hibern who defends the Action of Baronius and saith That there was preparing even in his time an Apology for justifying this Proceeding Bishop Usher also testifieth That in the Catalogue of Saints buried in England drawn out of ancient English Monuments Usser de Eccl. Christian success statu c. 20. by a Friar of Canterbury in the time of Anselm that is in the beginning of the XII Century there are these words St. Adelm and John the Wise are recorded to be laid in the place called Adelmisbirig that is to say Malmesbury Molanus Professor of Divinity in the University of Lovain hath left this in Writing in his Appendix in the Martyrology of Ussuard John Erigenius Martyr Molan Appen ad Usuard littera l. translated the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy of Dennis He was afterwards by the Command of the Popes put in the number of the Martyrs of Jesus Christ Hector Deidonat in his History of Scotland Which words have been inserted in the Appendix of the Martyrology of the Gallican Church which was left us by the Bishop of Thoul having recorded in the Supplement at the 4th of the Ides of November the Commemoration which is made of St. John Surnamed Erigenius Martyr kill'd at Malmesbury by some young Debauchees See here exactly what the Man was that wrote of the Sacrament by Command of Charles the Bald as Ratramn also did as we are given to understand by a Letter of Berengarius written unto one Richard who had some Access unto King Philip. In this Letter printed some years past by the care of Dom Luke d'Achery he desires him to speak for him unto this Prince to the end he would be pleased to repair by his Liberality the Losses and Damages which he had unjustly sustained After which he adds Epistola Berengarii ad Richard t. 2. Spicil p. 510. If he doth not do it yet nevertheless I shall be ready to prove by the Scriptures unto his Majesty and those whom he shall appoint and to make appear that John Erigenius was very unjustly condemned by the Council at Verceil and Paschas very unjustly vindicated And afterwards To the end the King should not reject this service of my fidelity he may know that what John Erigenius hath written he wrote it at the desire and by order of Charles the Great he means the Bald one of his Predecessors who was as affectionate unto Religious things as he was valiant in his Expeditions lest the folly of ignorant and carnal men should prevail And he commanded John that learned Man to collect from the Scriptures what might check this folly Whence it follows saith he that the King is obliged to take up the Defence of the Deceased against the Slanders of those alive not to shew himself unworthy of the Succession and Throne of his Illustrious Predecessors that desired this Service of this learned Man not to scatter Darkness over the Light of the Truth but to inform himself carefully in the Knowledge of the holy Scriptures Berengarius complains of the Condemnation of John at the Council of Verceil in the year 1050. because it was there his Book was read and condemned to be burnt about two hundred years after he wrote it as we are informed by Lanfranc who owns him to be an Adversary of Paschas whereof he was himself a great favourer Therefore Berengarius wrote to him Tereng Ep. ad Lanâ—ranc If John whose Judgment we approve touching the Sacrament be esteemed by you to be a Heretick you must also hold for Hereticks St. Jerome St. Ambrose and St. Austin not to mention others That which renders John Erigenius's Testimony the more Authentick in this Debate is for having had four Enemies to wit the learned Church of Lyons Florus its Deacon Prudens Bishop of Troys the Councils of Valencia and of Langres which spared him not upon the matter of Predestination it is very likely they would have less spared him upon the Subject of the Eucharist had he differed from the Belief generally received in the Church upon so important a Point as is that of the holy Sacrament This truth will yet be more evident if we consider that many do believe Prudens Bishop of Troys and Florus Deacon of the Church of Lyons two Enemies which his Opinion of Predestination had stirred up against him were also opposite unto the Opinion of Paschas so that it hapned unto those People much after the same manner as we have seen it hath done in our days unto those called Jansenists and Molinists for however they be divided in the matters of Predestination and free Grace yet nevertheless both the one and the other still retain the great point of the real presence of the Latin Church so although Prudens and Florus did censure what John wrote of Predestination yet for all that they were well agreed as to what concerned the Sacrament Prudens indeed hath writ nothing or at least there is nothing of his come unto our knowledge But the Archbishop Hincmar suffers us not to be ignorant of what Prudens believed when joyning him with John Erigenius against whom nevertheless he observes he wrote upon the Subject of Predestination he saith that they both held Hinemar de praedest cap 31. That the Sacraments of the Altar are not the real Body and the real Blood of our Saviour but only the memorial of his true Body and Blood And when I speak of Prudens I speak of one of the greatest Ornaments of his Age in Piety and Learning and of a Man whose memory is Annually Honoured with great Solemnity I shall content my self with relating the character which the Bishop of Thoul gives of him in the Martyrology of France the 6th day of April Martyrol Gallican Andr du Saussay 5. Id. April
all the Changes and Alterations which have thereupon ensued and the many Disputes and Contests which have frequently hapned in Europe from Paschas until Berengarius and from Berengarius until the great separation of the Protestants The method proposed by us necessarily requires that we should employ this Third Part in examining the Worship I mean to consider the dispositions and preparations which should go before the Celebration of the Sacrament and of the inclinations and motions of the Soul of the Communicant either towards God and Jesus Christ or in respect of the Sacrament it self that we should examine the great question of Latrie and that we should endeavour to discover what the Church hath from time to time required of those which approach'd unto the holy Table to participate of this adorable Mystery of our Salvation For it must not be imagined that these first Christians which abounded with Zeal and Piety contented themselves in Celebrating this Divine Sacrament with indifferency and meerly for fashion sake and only to declare what they believed of the Nature of the Symbols of their use and employment and that they omitted the necessary preparations both for celebrating and for worthily partaking thereof In fine the abode which I made in the Country of Ecclesiastical Antiquity and the inspection which for some years I made into the Records and Registers which contain the Laws and Customs of this great Empire have informed me that this great and sublime Mystery is not Celebrated and that none presume to Communicate without great preparation devotion and respect And that the People of that Country made the actions of Jesus Christ celebrating his Sacrament and that of the Apostles in Communicating the model of their Celebration whereunto nevertheless in process of time they added several Ceremonies which had not been used at first and the words of this same Saviour the foundation of their Doctrine and of their Faith upon this important Article of Religion They had also considered the Commemoration that the Lord and afterwards his Apostle commands us to make of his Person and of his Death and the proof and examination which this latter requires of us as the fountain and principle of all the dispositions necessary for Celebrating and for Conimunicating Having therefore treated at large of the two first Heads we are indispensibly obliged to treat of the third point thereby to finish and compleat this History And because the Celebration precedes the Communion and that the actions of him that Celebrates goes before them of the Communicant we will first treat of the preparations incumbent upon him which doth Celebrate the Holy Sacrament CHAP. I. Of the Preparations which precede the Celebration WHen Jesus Christ did Celebrate his Eucharist the Evangelists do not mention that he prepared himself by any Ceremony they only declare That after the Supper of the Passover was ended he took Bread and that having prayed unto his Father over this Bread he broke it and distributed it unto his Disciples I only say that at the very instant there is no question to be made but that he lifted up his Soul unto his Father to beseech him that he would make this Sacrament which he went about to Institute for a Seal of his Covenant saving and efficacious unto his Children unto the end of the World And that taking the Bread to make it a sign of his Body he did it with that reverence which of it self shewed that he went about doing something that was of great weight and moment The Evangelists nor St. Paul make no mention at all of any preparation accompanied with many external Ceremonies our Saviour designing to institute this Mystery with much plainness and simplicity agreeable unto the Nature of the Gospel the Worship whereof was to be wholly Spiritual and Divine according unto what Jesus Christ said unto the woman of Samaria That God is a Spirit and he must be worshipped by them which serve him in spirit and in truth About six or seven score years after the Conductors of the Christian Churches used no other Ceremony in the Celebration of the holy Sacrament for St. Justin Martyr St. Justin Martyr Apol. 2. who gives an ample description of the exteriour form of Celebrating the Sacrament which was observed in his time prescribes no other preparation unto us on behalf of the Pastor before the Sacrament but only that when the Sermon made unto the People was ended reading some portion of the holy Scriptures he made a prayer unto God and that when prayer was finished the Believers having saluted each other with the kiss of Charity there was presented unto him Bread Wine and Water over which things he prayed unto God to Consecrate them and the People having answered Amen the distribution was made unto the Communicants by the Ministry of the Deacons Nothing can be seen more simple nor more agreeable unto the Institution of this Sacrament then the manner that was used in Celebrating of it in the days of St. Justin seeing there is no mention made of any preparation made by him that Celebrates in order unto this holy Action being content to prepare and dispose himself thereunto in private by ardent and zealous prayers unto God that he would be pleased to enable him by his Grace to Celebrate this Venerable Sacrament with the Gravity Reverence and Devotion befitting so illustrious a Monument of his great kindness and love But this great simplicity was not to the liking of those which came after They thought God was to be served with more pomp and that the splendor of outward Ceremonies would advance the Dignity of the Mysteries of his Religion It often happens that we think God is like our own selves and that because we naturally love outward pomp and are exceedingly inclined unto Pageantries we fondly conceit that it is the same with the Almighty and that the Service which we address unto him would be much more acceptable for being beautified and enriched with a great many Ceremonies and attended with many mystical actions into which deep search must be made to understand their sense and meaning This is indeed the Spring and Original cause of all those which in process of time have been introduced by Men in the Celebration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist But because we here only enquire into those which Celebrate and of the preparations which they ought to make for this holy Action we must to prosecute our design consider what is hapned in this preparation since Justin Martyr In the Constitutions which go in the Apostles names there is a Liturgy for the Celebration of the Eucharist wherein after Prayers unto God for the Catechumeny the Energumeny and the Penitents for those which are ready to receive Baptism and for the faithful And after having dismissed all those which by the Laws of the Church could not be present at the Celebration of Divine Mysteries the Deacons did present upon the Altar Constit
happened at the end of the IV. Century where he concludes his History I have expresly spoken of legitimate and not forged Writings because I am not ignorant that in the Liturgies attributed unto St. James and St. Mark there is to be seen the custom of Perfume and of Incense at the time of celebrating the Sacrament and there be also Prayers for dedicating it unto God But for as much as the Learned as well Roman Catholicks as Protestants do confess that either they were not the Works of these Servants of God or if they be that they have received many Alterations and that things have been foisted into them unknown unto the first Christians nothing hinders but we may in this number include the use of Incense there being no likelihood that it would have been so late received into the Church if it had been practised by an Apostle and an Evangelist What I say of the Liturgies of St. James and St. Mark I say also of that attributed unto St. Peter wherein we observe the same thing Which example the Christians would not have failed to have observed had all the Liturgies appeared from the beginning As for the Liturgies of St. Basil and St. Chrysostom I would not so positively affirm that what is therein mentioned of the Oblation of Perfume hath been therein inserted since the death of the Authors for although that several things have been thereunto annexed and many things altered and that there be several which even believe that which goes under St. Chrysostom's name is not his but of a more recent Author Nevertheless the Canon of the Apostles which prescribes the use of Incense in the celebration of the Sacrament having been composed before either of these two Doctors of the Church I shall refer it unto others to decide this difficulty although St. Basil upon Psal 115. rejects the Oblation of Incense and I shall content my self in saying that if these two Liturgies are truly St. Basil's and St. Chrysostom's and if what is therein said of the Oblation of perfume hath not been thereunto added since their death there is great cause to wonder that there is no mention at all made of it any where else in the Works of Authors of the times before the Council of Chalcedon at least I have not observed any even in St. Cyril of Jerusalem Mystag 5. who describing particularly enough the form of the celebration of the Sacrament and the dispositions thereunto requisite speaketh not a word of the Oblation of Incense He saith indeed that a Deacon giveth Water to wash his hands that officiated and unto the Priests that be with him that the people are exhorted to give each other the Kiss of Charity to lift up their hearts on high to give thanks unto the Lord that there is mention made of Heaven and Earth of the Sea the Sun Moon and Stars and generally of all Creatures as well reasonable Creatures as Brutes of visible and invisible of Angels and Arch-Angels of Vertues Dominions Principalities Powers Thrones and Cherubims which cover their faces especially those which were seen by the Prophet Esay and which cried one to another saying Holy holy holy is the Lord God of Hosts And after being so sanctified they pray unto God that he will be pleased to send his Holy Spirit upon the Gifts proposed that is to say the Bread and Wine the Consecration whereof the Greeks make to depend upon this Prayer but as for the Ceremony of Incense which we enquire after the least sign of it is not to be found in the whole Catechism As for the pretended Denis the Arcopagite which gave occasion unto this whole Enquiry he began not to appear at soonest until the end of the V. Century or the beginning of the VI. at which time the Perfumes and Incenses were practised in the Service of the Greek Church Tom. 6. Bibl. Pat. I know very well that in the Liturgy which goes under the name of St. Cyril of Alexandria in the Library of the Fathers there is Prayers made for those which furnished the Oblations and Sacrifices the Bread Wine Oyl and Incense and the Vessels used at the Altar So that if it were truly his the introduction of this practice amongst the Greeks should be before the Council of Chalcedon because Cyril was deceased before the Council was convocated But it being very uncertain whether it were Cyril's or whether he was the Author of it or that it hath retained its purity we have not ill assigned unto the Council of Chalcedon the first restimony of this custom amongst the Greeks after the Ordinance of the Canon of the Apostles 'T is true the Request of Ischyrion Deacon of the Church of Alexandria wherein it is spoken of and which is contained in the third Action of this Council seeming to presuppose the establishment of this use but of no long time it may without any inconvenience be said that it began to be practised about the time of the assembling of this Council and probably at Alexandria rather than elsewhere Concil Chalced Act 3. t. 3. Concil p. 247. ult edit according to the Testament of a certain Lady called Peristerie who at her death bequeathed great treasures unto the Church unto Monasteries Hospitals and unto the Poor of the whole Province and also provision to supply the Oblation of Perfume as may be gathered from this Request as also from the time of the death of this Lady which was whilst Dioscorus was Bishop and after the death of Cyril But in as much as this custom of offering Incense unto God at the time of celebrating the Eucharist began to be introduced into the Eastern Church in the V. Century as near as I can judge the Reader will not be offended that I here represent the Prayer which was made unto God in presenting him the Perfume for although it be expressed in divers terms according to the diversity of Liturgies nevertheless because all these Prayers amount in substance unto the same thing this here will be sufficient It is in the Liturgy of St. James I mean Liturgia S. Jacobi in that which goes under his name O Lord Jesus Christ Word of God who offeredst thy self upon the Cross as a holy Sacrifice unto thy God thy Father and thy King which art that Coal of two natures which didst touch with Tongs the lips of the Prophet and didst cleanse him from his iniquities touch also our Understanding Ours I say who are sinners and purifie us from all uncleanness and grant we may present our selves pure and holy at thine Altar to offer unto thee a Sacrifice of Praise And receive of us who are unprofitable Servants this present Perfume in an Odour of a sweet savour Change the ill savour of our Souls and Bodies into a sweet Odour and sanctifie us by the sanctifying vertue of thy Holy Spirit for thou art the only Saint which sanctifieth and communicatest thy self unto the faithful And
in the XIII that it was not then given in the Latin Church but amongst persons of the same Sex I say that Men kissed each other and also Women the like And because all these dispositions are not the fruits of Nature but Gifts of the Grace and Mercy of God the ancient Christians addressed themselves unto him by devout Prayers to the end he would be pleased to bestow upon them what they wanted that is the preparations necessary to communicate savingly and worthily Cassander hath collected several of these Prayers but they being penned variously according to the motions of the Devotion of the Communicants we forbear inserting them in this place to endeavour to discover in prosecuting our design whether the holy Fathers which have required these dispositions before drawing near unto the holy Table have also required that the Communicants should adore the Sacrament in the Act of communicating CHAP. IV. Wherein the Question of the Adoration of the Sacrament is examined WEll to explain a matter and to give it the full demonstration which it requires the nature of the question must first of all be plainly stated because it is thereupon most commonly that the clearing of it doth chiefly depend Being therefore to treat of so weighty a Subject as that which now offers it self the first thing we should do is carefully to put a difference betwixt Jesus Christ himself and his Sacrament for the question is not whether Jesus Christ ought to be worshipped all Christians are agreed upon this point But whether the Sacrament should be adored that is to say that which the Priest holds in his hands and which is commonly called the Hostie and the Sacrament for it appears to me that the Council of Trent hath agreed this to be the true state of the Question Sess 13. c. 5. when it defined That there is no doubt to be made but all the Servants of Jesus Christ should render unto the holy Sacrament in the act of Veneration the worship of Latry which is due unto the true God It must then in the first place be acknowledged as an unquestionable Truth that Jesus Christ is an Object truly adorable and that his Flesh it self deserves that we should render it the highest Religious Worship by reason of the privilege it hath of being united into one person with his eternal Divinity When therefore the holy Fathers speak of adoring Jesus Christ in the participation of the Sacrament they say nothing whereunto the Protestants do not acquiesce as well as the Roman Catholicks for say they in coming unto the holy Table one cannot meditate of the infinite love he had for us send our thoughts unto Mount Calvary to consider the precious blood which he there shed make reflection upon the Throne of Glory where he is sitting with his Father nor ever so little cast an Eye upon that ineffable goodness which inclines him to communicate himself unto us by means of the Sacrament but that the Soul of the faithful Communicant humbles it self in his presence and doth truly adore him An adoration unto which may be referred what is said by Origen or at least the Author of some Homilies that are in his Works What we read saith he in the Gospel Hom. 5. in divers t. 2. p. 285. ought not to be passed over by us as a thing of small importance That the Genturion said unto Jesus Christ I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my Roof for at this time Jesus Christ doth yet enter under the Roof of Believers by two Figures or after two manner of ways viz. When holy men beloved of God which govern the Churches enter under your Roof then our Lord doth enter by them and you should believe that you receive our Saviour When also you receive the holy and incorruptible Food the Bread of Life I say and the Cup you do eat and drink the Body and Blood of our Saviour and then our Lord doth enter under your Roof Humble your selves therefore and in imitation of the Centurion say Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my Roof for wheresoever he enters unworthily he there enters for the condemnation of him which receiveth him He saith That our Saviour enters under our Roof by his Sacrament after the same manner as he there enters by his Ministers and that we should humble our selves in receiving as well his Servants as his Sacrament to the end this act of humility may be a mark of the adoration which we give unto him which hath instituted the one and which sendeth unto us the others confessing that we are not worthy of this favour St. Ambrose and St. Austin express themselves so fully that the Reader will find no difficulty to penetrate into their meaning for see here what is said by the first Ambros de Spir. S. l. 3. c. 12 We adore the Flesh of Jesus Christ in the Mysteries He puts a difference betwixt the Mysteries and the Flesh of Jesus Christ which he makes to be the Object of our Worship in the act of communicating I will not now insist upon the manner of Jesus Christs being present in the Sacrament because that hath been treated of at large in the Second Part I only produce the testimonies of Ancient Doctors which speak of adoring our Saviour when we communicate to the end not to divert the Examination we are to make of the Adoration of the Sacrament Therefore we will joyn unto St. Ambrose St. Austin who saith Let no body eat the Flesh of Jesus Christ In Psal 98. until he hath first adored him How say some is it possible St. Austin should teach that the Sacrament should be adored seeing he so formally denies it in one of his Letters for speaking of things sensible and corporeal I mean of Creatures whereof the Scripture makes use to represent things Spiritual and Heavenly he saith That they ought not to be adored although we should draw Images and Resemblances of the Mysteries of our Salvation and he puts in the rank of these signs which we should not adore Ep. 119. ad Januar cap. 6. The Water and Oyle of Baptism the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament without saying any thing more particularly for the one than the other It is unto Jesus Christ that he desires we should address our Adoration without speaking one word of the Sacrament by means whereof he communicates unto us his Flesh I know not whether any other Interpretation can be given unto the words of S. Chrysostom Homil. 24. in 1. ad Corinth You do not only see the same Body which was seen by the Wise man but you also know the vertue and all the dispensation of it and are not ignorant of the things which he did and accomplished Being well informed of all these Mysteries let us then stir up our selves let us be seized with astonishment and let us testifie yet greater respect then was shewed by the Wise men
manner of Trades and places of trust the quite contrary hath been practis'd the Courts of Judicature wherein was an equal number of Counsellors and Judges of both Religions for hearing and determining differences have been suppress'd and quite alter'd Attorneys Apothecaries Chirurgeons and generally all other mechanick and handycraft Trades not permittedto gain or eat their bread in quiet But which is most doleful of all to consider the Ministers of the Gospel are forbidden to preach the word of God many of them slain imprisoned and banished their Churches pull'd down to the ground and their flock dispers'd over the face of the Earth into England Sweden Italy Denmark Germany c. as Sheep having no Shepherd just as it happened unto their Predecessors the Albigenses and Waldenses for the same cause above Five hundred Years ago and the few that remain in the Land of their Nativity waiting for the time that their King and Sovereign like an other Cyrus or Charlemain his Royal and Religious Ancestor will give and proclaim deliverance unto the dispersed Tribes from their cruel Bondage and from so great a Famine of the Word for at present they many times see their young Infants yield up their innocent Souls in carrying them unto places far distant to receive the Seal of the Covenant of Baptism others yielding up their Spirits without the Benefit or Help of their Spiritual Guide's consolation at the hour of Death besides many other great Miseries which they daily suffer in Body Soul and Estate So that the Parisian Maacssre was a kindness being compared with the present usage which the Protestants of France do receive by the diligence of Romish Emissaries and from their own unkind Countrymen for that gave them a speedy deliverance from all miseries whereas they are now as it were held on the Rack and made suffer a thousand Deaths before they are freed from the Burden of one miserable Life When our Neighbours and Brethrens Houses are burning and all in a Flame for the same common Faith and Reformation all Christians that have any sense of Religion and Piety have great reason to unite their Prayers unto the God of Heaven That he would be pleased to avert his just Judgments from falling upon us for our great Impieties and preserve our Church and Nation from the sad calamities which have ruined so many Christian Families in France c. and which threaten the like usage unto the rest of the Reformed World I own it is the singular Blessing of God and by the Liberality of the great Encourager of Virtue and Learning his Grace the Lord Primate and Chancellor of Ireland that I am happy this day in addressing my self unto you almost in the Words of S. Paul unto Felix the Roman Governour in adventuring to speak the more freely in this matter because you have been for many years a Righteous Judge unto this Nation living so that Envy it self dares not whisper the least Corruption or sign of fear or favour to Friends or Enemies and are perfectly sensible of the verity of these things which I have only hinted at to avoid Prolixity lest I may be thought to write a Book of Martyrs rather than an Epistle Dedicatory Our Gentry and Gallants formerly were wont in great numbers to flock and resort unto Montpellier Montauban Bergerac c. where they freely exchanged their English Gold for the Nourishment and Recreations they there found both for Body and Soul But now it may too truly be said of those places in particular and of other whole Provinces in general That the Ark of God their Glory is departed from them and they as the Asiatick Churches are over-spread with thick and dark Clouds of Profaneness Atheism Ignorance and Superstition so that those who travel that way may justly fear it will be to their damage both in Body and Soul What was the pleasant and beautiful Jerusalem when the Christians were sent out of it unto Pella and other places And what is France but an Aceldama now that the Protestants are expell'd contrary to the proceedings of the wise and valiant Dealings of Lewis the Twelfth who before he would ruine his Subjects for Religion sent Commissaries and not Dragoons into the several parts of his Dominions to be justly informed of the truth of matters who upon the Report made unto him by his Commissaries swore a great Oath in presence of his Officers and Counsellors of State That the Protestants were the best Subjects he had in his Kingdom and thenceforward commanded that they should not be molested in Body or Estate And it is well known that the present King has much better knowledge and experience of his Protestant Subjects Loyalty than that great Prince had occasion to know so that it is hoped the sinister Councils of a Plotting Jesuitical Faction will not always prevail to the Ruine of so many faithful good Subjects and of so flourishing a Kingdom I have presumed here to present unto you an Epitome of the chiefest revolutions which have occurred upon this tremendous Article of Christian Religion in the Eastern and Western Churches from the Apostles days unto the last Age wherein the truth of the chiefest matters negotiated by Emperors Kings Councils Popes Prelates and the eminentest Doctors of the Church in the several Centuries are retrieved and recited with as great integrity and moderation aspossible can be I have endeavoured to accommodate my self unto the Author's sense and terms as near as I could and if any passage seems to vary from the Doctrine of the Church of England which I do not observe through the whole Book I hope to find a favourable Censure being only a Translator and not the Author If the Work be duely weighed it will not stand in need of much recommendation for the buying and reading of it such generous WINE needs no Bush all is Loyal and Orthodox here it recommends it self unto all sorts of Persons that desire to see the weightiest matters of Religion interwoven with the pleasant light and truth of the purest History of all Ages whereby Faith as well as Mens Reason is improved and confirmed to the eternal silencing of that common question of the Gentlemen of the Roman Persuasion unto Protestants in asking Where their Religion was before Luther and Calvin Here are Depths where Elephants may swim the learned and curious may find sweetness and satisfaction also the weakest Lamb the pious and devout Soul may wade without fear and go away plung'd and pleas'd in pleasure and delight And how could I better expose this Sacred Treasure of Ecclesiastical Antiquity unto publick view than by recommending my weak endeavours herein unto your favourable acceptance and Patronage having received the first design of coming to light near the famous Mansion of your worthy Progenitors where for several years I spent some of the pleasantest days of all my life wherein I freely confess as God's Glory and the good of his Church was chiefly designed by me
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
to take notice that if in this History I have spoken of the Country of the Abassins as of the Kingdom of Prester John it was to accomnodate my self with the vulgar Opinion without making exact inquiry what it is and without troubling my self at this time to reconcile Historians and Travellers that have written diversly of it THE TABLE OF CHAPTERS PART I. Containing the outward form of Celebration CHAP. I. WHerein is treated of the Matter of the Sacrament Page 1 CHAP. II. Wherein is mention made of divers sorts of Hereticks as far only as may suffice to clear the Point in Question p. 7 CHAP. III. Progress of Considerations of the Matter of the Sacrament wherein is examined what is said by S. Ignatius of certain Hereticks that rejected the Sacrament the Heresie of one Tanchelin who also rejected it but by another principle the reproaches of Jews and other Enemies and the difference betwixt the Greek and Latin Churches about leavened and unleavened Bread p. 22 CHAP. IV. Wherein is shewed whence the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament was had and what was the form of the Bread with the innovations and changes which thereupon succeeded p. 30. CHAP. V. Of the Consecration of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament and first of the place where they were Consecrated and of the Matter of Chalices and Patins p. 39 CHAP. VI. Of the Language wherein Consecration and generally of all the Service p. 54 CHAP. VII Of the Ceremonies and form of Consecration p. 65 CHAP. VIII Of the Oblation or form of the Sacrifice p. 81 CHAP. IX Of the Elevation and breaking the Bread p. 101 CHAP. X. Of the Distribution and of the Communion and first of the Time the Place and Posture of Communicants p. 110 CHAP. XI Of him that distributes the Sacrament and of him that communicates with the words both of the one and the other p. 121 CHAP. XII Of the thing Distributed and Received p. 131 CHAP. XIII The Eucharist received with the Hand p. 150 CHAP. XIV Of the liberty of carrying the Eucharist home after having taken it in the Church and of carrying it in Journeys and Voyages p. 160 CHAP. XV. The Eucharist sâ—nt unto the absent and the Sick unto whom it was sometimes sent by Lay-persons Men Women Children c. p. 164 CHAP. XVI Divers Vses and divers Customs touching the Eucharist p. 169 PART II. Containing the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers CHAP. I. REflections made by the Holy Fathers upon the Institution of the Sacrament p. 187 CHAP. II. What the â—â—thers believed of the things we receive in the Sacrament and whâ—â— they said of them p. 199 CHAP. III. Of the use and office of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament p. 213 CHAP. IV. Consequences of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers p. 231 CHAP. V. Continuation of the Consequences of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers p. 246 CHAP. VI. Other proofs of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers with the Inferences drawn by Protestants from them p. 265 CHAP. VII Continuation of the Proofs of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers and of the Inductions of Protestants p. 277 CHAP. VIII Proofs of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers drawn by Protestants from some practices of the Ancient Church p. 291 CHAP. IX Other Proofs drawn from the silence of Pagans and of certain things objected against them by the Holy Fathers p. 298 CHAP. X. The last Proof drawn from what passed in regard of Hereticks either of their silence or of the Fathers dispute against them p. 308 CHAP. XI Of the change made in the Expressions or the History of the Seventh Century p. 361 CHAP. XII Wherein is Examined what ensued in the Eighth Century p. 365 CHAP. XIII Containing the History of the Ninth Century p. 385 CHAP. XIV Continuation of the Ninth Century wherein is treated of the Dignities and Promotions of Heribold p. 4â—5 CHAP. XV. Continuation of the History of the Ninth Century wherein is examined the silence of Pope Nicholas the First and Adrian the Second with two Observations touching the Greek Church p. 430 CHAP. XVI Of the State of the Tenth Century p. 439 CHAP. XVII Of what passed in the Eleventh Century p. 450 CHAP. XVIII Continuation of the History of the Eucharist or the state of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries p. 465 CHAP. XIX The History of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries p. 497 PART III. Wherein is treated of the worshipping the Sacrament CHAP. I. OF the Preparations which go before the Celebration p. 521 CHAP. II. Of Dispositions necessary for the Communion and first of the Motions of the believing Soul in regard of God and of Jesus Christ p. 541 CHAP. III. Of the motions and dispositions of the Receiver in regard of the Sacrament p. 548 CHAP. IV. Wherein the Question of Adoration is examined p. 556 THE HISTORY OF THE EUCHARIST VINCENTIUS Lerinensis hath left us for a Maxim above M C. years ago Vincent In common That great heed must be taken to retain in the Catholick Church what hath been believed every where always and by all This Maxim appears so just and reasonable that Christians should make no difficulty to submit unto it however divided they be otherwise in matters of Religion and although the Author was not wholly without blame seeing there are some which think that he fought under the Ensigns of the demy Pelagians that he was very opposite unto St. Austins Doctrine touching Predestination and that it was against him that St. Prosper did write in answering the Objections which go under the name of Vincentius Nevertheless I do not judge that any fault is to be found in his Maxim nor that any difficulty ought to be made in receiving it seeing that St. Austin himself whose name and memory shall ever be in veneration amongst good Men hath written something to the same purpose before Vincentius Lerinensis Aug. l. 4. de bapt c. 24. t. 7. It is very justly supposed saith he that what the Catholick Church believes and hath not been instituted by Councils but hath been always believed is derived only from Apostolical Authority Vndertaking then to treat Historically of the Eucharist and by Gods assistante to shew what hath been believed in all Ages in the Church touching this so important point of our Salvation there is a necessity that we should look back unto Jesus Christ the Author of this august Sacrament and the true beginning of the Antiquity we are to inquire into for as the blessed Martyr St. Cyprian said If Jesus Christ only ought to be heard Cyprian Ep. 63. ad Caecil we should not regard what some before us have thought fit to be done but what Jesus Christ who is before all hath first done for we ought not to follow the customs of Men but the truth of God To know what he hath said and done in the institution of this Mystery the Evangelists and St. Paul must be consulted who tell us
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
designed to ordain Reader Dominico interim legit nobis id est auspicatus est pacem dicit dedicat lectionem which Mr Rigaut did not understand no more than Mr Lombert who followed the Sentiment of Mr Rigaut in the fair and exact Translation which he hath given us of this Father 5. Upon the Letter of the Council of Antioch which condemned Paul of Samosatia 6. Upon the Tenth persecution which shall be found more exactly describ'd than in all the former Histories because Monsieur L'ARROQVE hath borrow'd great helps from Lactantius his Treatise de Mortibus Persecutorum published of late by Mr Baluze 7. De Sacerdotibus secundi Ordinis Archidiaconis 8. De Ordinibus ex quibus Episcopi sumebantur 9. De Epistolis Tractoriis 10. De Natura veteris Ecclesiae 11. De Energumenis c. 12. De Paenitentibus eorumque gradibus 13. De Antiquo ritu dimittendi ab Ecclesia Catechumenos Energumenos paenitentes 14. De dupliti Catechumenorum genere 15. De tempore quo obtinere caepit in Ecclesia orientali haec loquendi formula EPISCOPVS DEI GRATIA ET SEDES APOSTOLICAE 16. De pluralitate beneficiorum ut vulgo loquuntur 17. De Nudipedalibus As he from whom we expect these pieces of Ecclesiastical History is endow'd with much wit and learning it needs not be fear'd that they will in his hands lose any thing of their luster and beauty All we have hitherto said refers unto the Wisdom of Monsieur L'ARROQVE which indeed is a very vast and spacious Field but should we speak of the qualities of his Soul we should have much more matter to insist on He had a Soul so sincere as is scarcely to be found in this Age he without envy beheld the merits of other learned persons and esteemed their good qualities he was a great and strict observer of Discipline and contented not himself to declaim in the Pulpit against Vice in general but persecuted it in all places running the hazard of creating himself Enemies by the security of his life he preached by example and discover'd a true Christian Constancy in all the troubles of his life he discharged his Duty with so much exactness that he would never discontinue performing his Function during an Ague which held him ten Months after his being call'd to Saumur I say he would neither discontinue the Duties of his Ministry nor those of his studies although the Physitians told him that a distemper which often had fits of 36 hours would not be removed if he did not give himself some repose The Troubles of the Churches of France these last years were incomparably more grievous unto him than any particular Afflictions unto his own Family could have been and should these Misfortunes continue what Cicero said of another may be said of him Ii rempublicam casus sequuti sunt ut mihi non erepta L. Crasso a Diis immortalibus vita sed donata mors esse videatur THE HISTORY OF THE EUCHARIST PART I. Containing the exteriour Form of Celebration CHAP. I. Wherein is treated of the Matter of the Sacrament THE first thing that presents it self in the Celebration of the Eucharist is the matter of the Sacrament that is to say the Bread and Wine for three of the Evangelists and St. Paul testifie that Jesus Christ took Bread and a Cup wherein there was Wine and that he called the Wine the fruit of the Vine All the Holy Fathers unanimously avouch the same all the Liturgies which are come to our hands depose the same seeing we find these two Elements imployed in this mystery and the form of Celebration proposed unto us by St. Justin Martyr the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions St. Cyril of Jerusalem in his Mystagogicks the pretended Denis the Arcopagite in his Hierarchy and generally all those which have writ on this subject suffer us not to doubt of it as neither doth the defence which the Fathers and Councils have made of offering any thing else but Bread and Wine in celebrating the Sacrament Also all Christians generally agree herein therefore it would be superfluous to stand to prove it seeing the thing is clear and it is granted by all the World and all Christian Societies are agreed on this Subject It will only be necessary to consider that Jesus Christ which is the Wisdom of the Eternal Father and who never did any thing but with a Wisdom and Conduct worthy of himself did not chuse Bread and Wine to make them Symbols of his body and blood but that he was thereunto induced for considerable Reasons Nevertheless I will not now stand to examine the Reasons which obliged him to make this choice I refer that unto Divines whose drift it is to inquire into this matter it will serve our turn to say that our Saviour having a design by means of his Sacraments to raise up the minds of Christians unto the consideration of the comforts they find in his blessed Communion he made choice of Elements which had some likeness and relation unto those things which they were to signifie and represent as for Instance When he instituted the Sacrament of Baptism which is the Sacrament whereby we are born into his Church he made choice of water to be the sign and symbol of it because it is proper to represent the vertue of his Blood and of his Spirit for the purifying of our souls for as water hath the quality of cleansing our bodies from all uncleanness so also the Blood and Spirit of Jesus Christ have the vertue the force and efficacy of washing and purifying our souls from all filthiness and impurities therefore it is that the Apostle calls Baptism the washing of Regeneration â—it 3. that is of our New Birth and for that reason it is that he saith elsewhere Eph. 5. that Christ hath cleansed the Church by the washing of water by the Word in like manner when he instituted the Eucharist which is another Sacrament of his Covenant whereby he gives unto us life after having given us our being he chose Bread and Wine to represent unto us the vertue of his Sacrifice and of his Death and which is the food of our souls For as Bread Wine are food very proper for nourishing the body and for preserving this mortal and perishing life even so his Body broken and his Blood poured out do divinely feed and nourish our souls and do admirably preserve this heavenly and Spiritual life whereof we enjoy even here below some fore-tastes and first-fruits the accomplishment whereof we shall one day receive to our comfort in Heaven And it is in regard of this wonderful effect John 6. that his Flesh is meat indeed and his Blood is drink indeed and that those who eat this Flesh and drink this Blood have life everlasting and that they shall be raised unto glory and immortality in the last day Nevertheless it must be granted that the relation and resemblance which the
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
people of Antioch that of Anger of the Baptism of Jesus Christ that of the birth of our Saviour and the 17. Homily upon the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the other the 59th Epistle and first Book and 20. Chap. of Merits and of the Remission of Sins the 26. Treatise upon S. John to which may be joined S. Athanasius in his Epistle to the Hermits and in that which he writ unto the Orthodox S. Gregory Nazianzen's Orations 2 4 17 19 20 23 28. and 40. and at the end of his first Poem and in his Iambicks 11. and 15. S. Ambrose upon the 9. of S. Luke Hilary Deacon upon the 10. and 11. Chapters of the first to the Corinthians S. Basil Ep. 72. Synesius Epistle 67. Socrates in his Ecclesiastical History Lib. 1. c. 20 25. and Sozomen Lib. 6. c. 29. and Lib. 8. Cap. 7. and many others wherein the same expressions are to be found But this is not yet all these Altars or these Eucharistical Tables were made of wood which seems to imply that as yet in the IV. Century what the Father 's called Altars were no other than Tables whereunto they gave improperly the name of Altars S. Optatus Bishop of Milevis who lived in that Age doth formally say that the Altars were of Wood for describing the rage of the Donatists he reproaches them That they had broken torn and carryed them away Optaâ— l. 6. page 94. that they had warmed Water with the pieces of these Altars that in some places the great quantity of Wood moved them to break them and that in other places the want of Wood made them break them in other places partly for shame they caused them to be taken away and a little afterwards Who of the Believers saith he knows not that in celebrating the Mysteries the Table is covered with a linnen cloth Aug. liâ— 3. contra Cresâ— cap. 43. S. Austin makes mention of a Catholick Bishop who was killed by these barbarous and inhuman Schismaticks with the Wood or pieces of an Altar which they had broken S. Athanasius doth expresly observe in his Letter unto the Mourners Page 847. Ep. 67. That the Sacramental Table was of Wood And Synesius seems to teach us the same thing when he represents unto us this Table as to be born from one place to another also the first Canon which commands Altars of stone only to be consecrated is to the best of my remembrance the 26. Canon of a private Council of Epaume assembled Anno 517. Oration in Bapt Christ Hom. 20 in 2. Cor. although before this Decree Gregory of Nyssen and S. Chrysostom make mention of Altars of stone Secondly I observe that the Eucharistical Table was not made exactly in the form of an Altar but rather in the form of a Table where one eats and takes his usual Meals for men grown to full Age and Stature might lie along under these Tables which is impossible to do under an Altar after the manner that they are erected The Historian Socrates writes that Alexander Bishop of Constantinople did pray with tears lying along upon his face under the Holy Table and Zozomen Sâ—creaâ— l. i. â— l. 1. c. 25. Sozom 〈◊〉 l 8. c 7. that the Eunuch Eutropius seeking a safe Sanctuary in the Church lay down under the Communion Table it was the same course that Maximinian a Catholick Bishop of Bagaia took to preserve himself from the Cruelty of the Donatists which S. Austin tells us was slain by those cruel persons which slew him with the pieces of the Altar August l. 3. contra Crose c. 43. under which he lay Moreover it must be considered that when the Antients do speak of an Altar they do not mean the thing whereon the Eucharist was celebrated and which they promiscuously called Table and Altar they meant sometimes the place where the Holy Table was set whereupon the Consecration was made and the whole Celebration of the Sacrament It is in this sense it is taken in Socrates Lib. 1. C. 20. and 25 in some places of Gregory Nazianzen in the Canons 19. and 44. of the Council of Laodicea and the 69. of the Council of Trullo and elsewhere and that place was as hath been said called the Sanctuary and was separated from the rest of the Temple by Curtains Theodor. hist Eccl. lib. 1. c. 31. Synes Ep. 67. whence it is that Theodoret speaking of the Temple of Jerusalem saith That it was beautified with Curtains or Royal Tapestries this is in all likelihood what is intended by Synesius Bishop of Ptolemais by the mystical Veil if he did not thereby mean the Linnen-Cloth wherewith in some places they covered the Bread of the Sacrament And to the end that the place where the holy Table stood should not be accessible and alike common unto all persons Hist Eccl. l. 10. c. 4. it was compassed in with wooden Rails as is observed by Eusebius in the description of the Church of Tyre and as it appears by sundry other passages of the Ancients In fine we learn by the Writings of the Ancients That there was but one Altar or one Table in each Temple and Church Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea representing the Beauty and magnificent Building of the Temple of Tyre which Paulin Bishop of the place caused to be built and descending to particularise what was most curious and rare in it he observes amongst other things That there was but one sole Altar in it Id. l. 10. c. 4. and seeks in the unity of this Altar and its situation in the middle of the Church an image or representation of the Soul of Paulin its Pastour of whom he speaks as of its most holy place Chrysost hom 7. in Rom. Id. â—om 18. 2 Cor. Hier. Ep. 2. Id. in cap. 3. Amos. St. Chrysostom speaks plainly of the Altar of the Temple where he lived as having but one and elsewhere he takes occasion to exhort his hearers unto unity because there is but one Baptism one only Table and one Baptismal Fountain St. Hierom also speaks of the Altar of the Church in the singular number as being but one and elsewhere he saith That the Church hath but one Altar which he could not have said if there had been indeed several in one Church This is also what Socrates would intimate Soerat hist l. 5. c. 21. when observing that the Church of Antioch was contrived after a manner very different from other Churches Athan. ad Solit he gives this reason That the Altar therein stood to the West and not to the East St. Athanasius making mention of the plundering of the eminentest Church of Alexandria speaks of the holy Table in the Singular Number even as of the Episcopal Chair whereby he gives it plainly to be understood that there was but one Table or one Altar as there was but one Chair It is also the Language of Peter his Successor Apud Theod. l.
greater value was chosen to make their Chalices but of greater and less price according to the substance and stock of each Church but at first in sundry places they were made of Glass or of Wood as will appear and to speak the truth if at Rome in the beginning of the III. Century they used Glass Chalices it is very probable they did so in many other places Now that they used such at Rome at that time may be gathered from some passages of Tertullian for answering an argument which the Catholicks drew from a picture they had in their Chalices and which represented the good Shepherd carying the lost Sheep upon his back Put in practice saith he the very Pictures of your Chalices Tertul. de pudic c. 7. Ibid. c. 10 and to mark that these Chalices were Glass he opposeth unto this Painting The writing of the Shepherd which cannot be blotted out Exuperius Bishop of Tholouse towards the end of the IV. Century and at the beginning of the V. made use of no other Chalices but of Glass S. Jerom who presseth him very much Hieron ep 4. extr saith amongst other things of him That nothing is richer than him which carries the Body of our Lord in a little wicker Basket and his blood in a Glass In the VI. Century Cyprian not the famous Bishop of Carthage which was dead three hundred years before but another Cyprian a French Man Vi◠〈◊〉 Arel Author of the life of Caesarius Bishop of Arles who died towards the middle of the VI. Century observing as an action worthy of commendation that he redeemed a great many Slaves with the Gold and Silver of the Church saying that a great many praised him for so doing but would not follow his example he adds The blood of Christ is it not in a Glass And although this Author saith there were many who would not imitate him in an Action which they could not but commend yet I cannot be perswaded but that there were to be found other good Bishops who considering as Exuperius of Tholouse and S. Caesarius of Arles that the riches of the Church are the Patrimony of the Poor did in suffering and calamitous times imploy all the Gold and Silver of their Churches either to sustain their Poor or redeem Captives and that they had rather make use of Chalices of Glass as those did than to be wanting in this necessary duty of Christian charity Greg. 1. dialog l. 1. c. 7. In the Dialogues of Gregory the first there is mention of one Donatus who by his Prayers mended a Glass Chalice which had been broke but let us hear what Cardinal Baronius saith upon this Subject Baron Martyr Rom. 7. Agust The Chalices of Glass and Plates or Patins of Glass were antiently made use of in Livine Service there is mention made of Plates of Glass in the Pontifical in the life of Pope Zephyrin of a Glass Chalice in the 4th Epistle of S. Jerom to Rusticus speaking of S. Exuperius Bishop of Tholouse and also our French Cyprian in the life of Caesarius Bishop of Arles who flourished in the time of Theodorick King of Italy Is not saith he the Blood of Christ kept in a Glass for it seemeth that Glass Chalices have been used ever since the Apostles days whence 't is that Mark the Heretick who lived presently after their days to imitate the Catholick Church using a Glass Chalice in his divine Service betwitched the people with certain impostures and by Sorcery making the Wine which looked white in the Glass to turn Red by his slights so that the Wine seemed to be changed into Blood but in the Council of Rheems held under Charles the great Glass Chalices were forbidden and that very reasonably because of the danger there was in that brittle stuff you have thereupon the Canon ut Calix de Consecrat distinct 1. as also the Chalices of wood are forbidden in the Canon Vasa in quibus in the same distinction Binius relates almost the very same thing upon the life of Pope Zephyrin What Baronius saith of the prohibiting of Glass Chalices in the Reign of Charlemain T. 1. Concil p. 96. in one of the Councils of Rheems he takes from the Canonist Gratian whose authority is not always to be allowed no more than the other Collectors of Canons for as Monsieur de Launoy a Doctor of Sorbon hath judiciously observed in his Treatise of the times antiently appointed for administring holy Baptism Cap. 9. p. 184. The Antient Collectors do change and cut off from the Canons of Councils what things they suppose either to be abolished and useless or different from the customs of their times They have saith he fitted the Antient Canons to the discipline of their own times Ibid. And Cardinal Bellarmine in his Treatise of Ecclesiastical Writers In Grat. ad an 1145. saith in particular of Gratian That he had not well chosen the Authors from whence he had gathered his Decrees and he instances in some examples which he pretends to be so many mistakes in the Author and indeed to return to the prohibition of Glass Chalicesby a Council of Rheems we find no such matter if my memory fail not in any of the Councils held under Charlemain although we have a great number of them as for Wooden Chalices we have at this time the Canon whence Gratian took it it is the 18. of the council of Trybur assembled Anno 895. Tom. 7. Concil p. 151. That for the future no Priest dare presume in any wise to consecrate in Chalices of Wood the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Lord. But the Council doth observe in the same Canon that Boniface Bishop of Mayence being asked if it were lawful to consecrate the Sacraments in Vessels of Wood he made this answer Heretofore Golden Priests made use of Wooden Chalices and now on the contrary Wooden Priests do use Golden Chalices But it is plainly evident by what hath been said that Chalices of Glass and of Wood were used in the Church for the space of eight or nine hundred years and what is said of Chalices may also be said of Plates or Patins whereupon we have said was put the Bread of the Sacrament they were at least broad round Vessels a little hollow which cannot be resembled to any thing better than Dishes which were greater or less according to the number of Communicants The Latin Church doth not suffer Consecration to be made in any thing but a Gold or Silver Chalice or at least of Pewter and a Council of Albi assembled Anno. 1254 commanded all Churches whose Rents amounted yearly unto fifteen livres French Money to have a Silver Chalice T. 2. Spâ—cil c. 12. p. 638. I deny not but in the four first Ages of Christianity several Churches had Silver Chalices and it may be also of Gold such as whereof in all likelihood those were spoken of by Optatus Bishop of
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
he by the Churches the which as the more sacred are said to be inhabited by the presence of some Divinity having received into the Temples at their first Dedication or Consecration such Devils by curious invocations and Witchcrafts Arnobius brings in the Pagan answering the Christian after this manner You err and are deceived L. 6. advers Gent. for we do not believe that the Brass nor the Mass of Gold or Silver nor the other matter whereof Images are made are of themselves Gods and religious Deities but we serve and worship these Gods in them which holy Consecration doth introduce De vanitat Idolor and which it makes to inhabit in the Images which we caused to be made And did not St. Cyprian say in his time That these sorts of Spirits do lie hid under the Statues and consecrated Images In fine Lactantius speaking of this kind of Gods of the Gentiles Instit l. 2. c. 4. saith That when they were made they felt it not nor when they are worshiped they know it not for they became not sensible by Consecration But as for the Sanctification and Consecration of Christians it consisted only in retrieving things from a profane and common use and by applying them unto a holy use by desiring of God by their Prayers That he would sanctifie their use and Employment for his Glory and the Salvation of those who used them lawfully so that there being any Question for instance of the Water of Baptism or of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament their Consecration tended only to give them a quality which they had not before to employ them unto a Divine and Religious use and by praying God to make them Sacraments of his Religion and that he would render them efficacious by his holy Spirit in the lawful using of them out of which use they were no more but common Bread Wine and Water as they were before all the virtue they have in quality of Signs and Sacraments either to sanctifie our Souls or to nourish them depending upon the Holy and Religious use unto which they are apply'd and on the efficacy of the Spirit acting at the same time to the end that they should not only signifie but also that they should seal in our Souls and that they should exhibit and communicate when they are administred the things which they signifie and represent Now let us see if this were the belief of the Holy Fathers of the Church In Levit. Hom. 11. p. 100. Origen upon Levitiecus There is born in my house saith he the Firstling of a Cow I am not permitted to put it unto any common use for it is holy unto the Lord and therefore it is called Holy We know then by this dumb Beast Ibid. how the Law appoints that what it will have to be Holy must be set apart for God only And in the same place to sanctifie any thing is to devote it unto God The great St. Regul brevior q 53. p. 642. D. t. 2. Basil Sanctification consists in adhering locally and inseparably unto God at all times in studying and following what is well pleasing in his fight for also in the things offered and consecrated unto God deficient things are not accepted and without impiety and sin what hath been once consecrated unto God cannot be converted unto common and human use St. Austin in his questions upon Leviticus testifies that he was of the same Opinion when he saith thus When he saith the things which the Children of Israel sanctified L. 3. q. 85. t. 4. p. 98. it must be understood in offering them unto the Priests and by them unto the Lord and this kind of sanctification must be observed which is made by vow and by the Devotion of him who offers S. Cyrill of Alexandria in his Commentaries upon Esay L. 1. Orat. 6. p. 178. What is said to be sanctified shall not always partake of sanctification but rather it signifies to be consecrated unto the glory of God as what he saith unto Moses Sanctifie unto me all the first-born which open the Matrix all the Males unto the Lord L. 7. 8. in c. 10.34 Dial. 6. t. 5. part 1. p. 595. and in those places sanctifie imports to consecrate And upon St. John What is consecrated unto God is said to be sanctified And in his Dialogues of the Trinity What then Friend will not reason constrain us to confess that what is said to be sanctified was not before Holy for I judge that is called unto sanctification which is alter'd from what it was not Hom. 14. t. 5. part 2. p. 187. In Levit. l. 7. c. 27. when it is sanctified And in his Paschal Homilies To sanctifie is to consecrate and offer some excellent Oblation unto the God of the whole Vniverse Hesychius of Jerusalem That which is sanctified and offered begins to be sanctified even by being offered it was not then Holy before The Frier Jovius in the Library of the Patriarch Photius Codic 222. ex lib. 24 25. We say that the place or the Bread or the Wine are sanctified when they are set apart for God and that they are not imploy'd about any common use Even Thomas Aquinas himself who although he lived in an Age wherein the Doctrine of the Eucharist received an alteration and change yet acknowledged this kind of Consecration who nevertheless happily would not have that of the Eucharist to depend on it T. 2. q. 81. art 8. num 70. Not only Men but also the Churches Vessels and all other things of this kind are said to be sanctified from the very time that they be applyed unto the service of God I should here end the examination of the question of Consecration were I not obliged to say something of the manner of pronouncing the words of Consecration It cannot be doubted but Jesus Christ pronounced with an audible voice the words whereby the Latins pretend that he did consecrate seeing the Evangelists nor S. Paul do neither of them remark that there was any difference betwixt the pronouncing of these words This is my Body This is my Blood and that of all the rest The Amen which the People answered in the following Ages after the Consecration was made as it appears by Justin Martyr by Denys of Alexandria in Eusebius by Tentullian by St. Ambrose by St. Leo and by others This Amen I say doth clearly shew that they consecrated with a loud voice this also is justified by most of the Liturgies which remain unto us where it is expresly observed that the pronouncing of these words was done with a loud voice as in those attributed unto St. Peter St. Mark De Observ can t. 10. Bibl. Patr. Not. in Gregor Sar. page 389. Not. 131. in Miss Chrysost Euchol St. Basil and St. Chrysostom Raoul de Tongres writes that it was so practised even in the Church of Millan conformable unto the Liturgy of St. Ambrose
O God upon us and upon this reasonable service which we offer unto thee and receive them as thou didst the Oblations of Abel the Sacrifices of Noah the Priesthoods of Moses and Aaron the peaceable offerings of Samuel the repentance of David the Incense of Zacharias to the end that as thou receivedst from the hand of thine Apostles this true worship thou also of thy goodness wouldest receive of us who are sinners these gifts which we offer unto thee Grant that our Oblation may be agreeable being sanctified by the Holy Ghost for the propitiation of our Sins and of those which the People have committed through ignorance This action of the faithful people offering the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist for the Divine Service is called not only Oblation but also Sacrifice as we have shewn in examining whence the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist were taken Cypr. de oper Eleemos And in fine St. Cyprian doth positively call this Action a Sacrifice in that place of his formerly alledged When the Oblations are set upon the Altar or upon the Holy Table to be blessed they are again offered unto God by Prayer as hath been shewed in the foregoing Chapter but because that in some sort relates unto this first Oblation whereof we speak I would seek for the second in the Oblation made unto God of these same Oblations at the very instant of time that they are consecrated for we have seen that the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions Constit Apost l. 8. c. 12. at that instant addresses this Prayer unto God We offer unto thee O our God and our King this Bread and this Cup giving thee thanks by Jesus Christ because thou hast counted us worthy to appear in thy sight and to execute the Priesthood and we beseech thee O God who hast need of nothing to behold these Oblations with a favourable eye which are set before thee that thou wouldest accept them for the honour of thy Son and that thou wouldest send the Holy Ghost upon this Sacrifice c. It is very likely they did after this manner thinking that Jesus Christ who began the Celebration of his Eucharist with Prayer made a kind of Oblation unto God of the Bread and Wine and shewed at the same time his willingness of sacrificing himself soon after for the expiation of the Sins of the World therefore it is as I conceive that they grounded the Oblation whereof we treat wherein they desired of God that he would sanctifie unto them the use of these two things and that he would by his blessing make them the efficacious and Divine Sacraments of the Body broken and the Blood shed of his Christ for the Salvation and consolation of their Souls From hence it is that St. Cyprian in one of his Epistles saith in sundry places that Jesus Christ offered Bread and Wine in the Sacrament that we offer Wine and that Wine ought to be offered in the Cup of the Lord and not only so but that the Lord therein offered himself having in all likelihood regard unto the disposition wherein he shewed himself to be of exposing himself unto death for us when he instituted the Sacrament and memorial of it Cyprian Ep. 63. Our Lord saith he offered himself first unto his Father and commanded it should be so done in remembrance of him so that the Sacrificer which imitates what Jesus Christ hath done doth truly supply the place of Jesus Christ As for the third and last of the Oblations which I mentioned to be practised by Christians it was done after the Consecration of the Symbols after which they offered them unto God whereunto relates the warning made unto the People in the Apostolical Constitutions Const Apost l. 8. c. 13. To pray unto God by Jesus Christ for the gift offered unto our Lord to the end that he would receive it as an odour of a sweet savour upon his Heavenly Altar through the intercession of Jesus Christ In the Liturgy of St. James also Liturg. S. Jacob. They pray for the gifts which have been offered and sanctified to the end God would accept them and receiving them upon his Heavenly Altar as a sweet and spiritual savour he would in their stead send his Heavenly grace and the gift of his Holy Spirit and a little after they also pray That because he hath received as an odour of sweet savour Ibid. the Oblations and Presents which have been offered and hath been pleased to sanctifie and consecrate them by the grace of his Christ and the coming of the Holy Ghost he would also sanctifie their Souls their Spirits and Bodies c. in that of St. Chrysostom We offer unto thee of thy goods Liturg. Chrys Germ. Theor. p 403. or as Germain Patriarch of Constantinople explains it We offer unto thee the Antitypes It is true that considering the manner of the Greeks consecrating this Oblation should immediately precede the Prayer whereby they pretend to consecrate but if the Latins are considered this Oblation is not made unto God until after the Consecration be ended But there is seen in this Liturgy for the Oblation whereof we treat the same as in that of St. James In fine in all the Liturgies which we have although they be not all made by the Authors in whose names they pass the Oblation which is made unto God after the consecrating Liturgy of the Latins is an Oblation as is expresly said of Bread and Wine of Gifts and Fruits of the Earth But of all the Liturgies there is none that better informs us of the nature of this Oblation than that which is used by the Latin Church which thus speaks unto God Missa Can. We offer unto thy glorious Majesty of thy Gifts and of thy Presents a holy and immaculate Host the Holy Bread of Life and the Cup of Eternal health upon which things we beseech thee to look with a favourable and propitious Eye and to accept them as thou wert pleased to accept the Presents of thy righteous Son Abel and the Sacrifice of our Patriarch Abraham and the Holy Sacrifice the immaculate Host which thy Sovereign high Priest Melchisedeck offered unto thee we humbly beseech thee O Almighty Lord God to command that these things might be carried by thy Holy Angel upon thy high Altar into the presence of thy Divine Majesty And a little after continuing the like discourse they say unto God By the which Jesus Christ O Lord thou hast made all these things for us thou sanctifiest blessest and bestowest them upon us From whence it is that the Holy Fathers meditating upon this latter Oblation and considering that the Bread and Wine was the matter of it they spake as near as I can guess of the Sacrifice of the Christian Church as of a Sacrifice of Bread and Wine and although they have not all expressed themselves after one manner yet nevertheless their expressions however they seem to
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
adored by the people seeing there is no mention of lifting up the Sacrament in the Western Church before the XI Century as for the Eastern Church he confesseth that they elevated the Sacrament but after the Lords Prayer and some other Prayers at the very instant of Communicating and he proves it by the Liturgies of St. James St. Chrysostom by Anastasius the Sinaite by George Codin and by the Author of the life of St. Basil attributed unto Amphilochius but which in all likelihood was not his and he observes that the Christians of Ethiopia practise the same Ceremony which is quite different from the Elevation of the Latin Church it being only done to call the People to the Communion in saying Holy things are for the Saints and not to have them adore the Eucharist as amongst the Latins Therefore it is that whereas the Elevation of the Latin Church is joyned immediately after Consecration which according to their belief changing the Bread and Wine into the substance of the Body and blood of Christ renders that which that he celebrates holds in his hands an Object of Sovereign Adoration whereunto those which be present are invited by the elevating the Host presently after it is consecrated That of the Greek Church was not done till a good while after Consecration and as they were ready to communicate so that the intent of it was only to call Believers to the participation of the Sacrament But Maynard rests not there he answers as Goar doth those which wrest some words of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy under the name of Denys the Areopagite to prove that in his time there was an Elevation of the Sacrament joined unto Consecration in the Greek Church and he very judiciously observes that this pretended Denys speaks only of a Ceremony observed amongst the Greeks which is that they kept the Divine Symboles hid and covered until the very instant of communicating and that then they were uncovered to be shewed to the people to have them come to the holy Table in shewing them and although the Author but now mentioned speaks of this action yet there is not to be found any Elevation of the Host presently after Consecration in any of the Greek Liturgies I will add unto all this one thing very considerable which is That it appears by the antient customs of the Monastery of Cluny written about the end of the eleventh Century That even to that time the Elevation was not practised in the extent of the Latin Church not so much as that at first mentioned by Ives of Chartres Antiq. consue Cluniac Monast t. 4. Spicil Dach l. 2. c. 30. which tended only to represent the Elevation of the Body of Jesus Christ upon the Cross For in the thirtieth Chapter of the second Book of these customs of the Congregation of Cluny is exactly not to say scrupulously shewn all that was then practised in this famous Monastery nevertheless there is not one word said of the Elevation of the Eucharist only that 't is observed in one place That when he that celebrates saith throughout all Ages Ibid. p. 143. c. the Deacon lifteth up the Cup alittle it may easily be seen this little raising the Cup is nothing like the Elevation which we examine and that it was a little Ceremony quite different from what is at present called Elevation But if any ask me at what time they began in the Latin Church to turn the Elevation made in several parts of the West to represent the Elevation of our Lord on the Cross unto the adoration of the Sacrament practised after the Eleventh Century I affirm That William Durand towards the end of the Thirteenth Century was the first as far as I can discover who referred Adoration to the Elevation of the Host in his Rational of Divine Offices for amongst several reasons of this Elevation he alledges this last Duran Rat. Divin Oâ—lic l. 4. de pâ—rt can fol. 169. n. 51. contrary to the constant Doctrine of antient Interpreters of the Liturgy we have spoken of In the fifth place saith he the Host is lifted up that the people might not anticipate the Consecration but knowing thereby it is made and that Christ is come on the Altar they should how down to the ground with reverence It was also in this Thirteenth Century that Honorius the Third and Gregory the Ninth made their Constitutions for adoring the Sacrament after Elevation as shall be shewn in the third part of this Treatise where we are to discourse of the Worship and by consequence examine the question of Adoration In the mean time it is not amiss to observe that before any Elevation of the Sacrament was practised in the West Berengarius was spoken of in the World and his followers were dispersed into all parts in great abundance and the Albigenses and Waldenses which soon followed him had separated themselves from the Communion of the Latin Church a great while before the Adoration of the Host and the Elevation therewith enjoyned and by consequence there have always been Christians in the West who never practised Elevation nor Adoration in their Eucharist not to instance Christian Communions in the East and elsewhere which likewise never practised it After Elevation comes the fraction which in the Sacrament of Jesus Christ and in that of the primitive Christians immediately followed For the holy Writers testifie That the Lord had no sooner blessed the Bread but he brake it to distribute it and because the Hebrews Loaves were flat and spread round and something long like our Cakes and Biskets and for that reason were easily broken without any need of a Knife to cut them therefore the holy Scripture still mentions the breaking of Bread and not cutting Bread it is therefore not to be questioned but the Lord in celebrating his Supper made use of that sort of Bread and broke it after the manner of the Jews to distribute it to his Disciples Nevertheless seeing the Apostle St. Paul expresly observes of the Bread of the Eucharist that we break it The Bread which we break and that the Lord explaining this Mystery saith positively of the Bread That it is his Body broken for us he would teach us that this fraction of Bread is neither superfluous nor useless but that it makes part of the Sacrament and that it therein represents unto us the sufferings of Jesus Christ particularly those of his Cross it was the signification which Theodoret searched therein in his Dialogues Theod. Dial. 3. p. 147. when he saith O. Remember what the Lord took and broke and by what name he called that which he had taken E. I will speak mystically by reason of those which are not initiated he means that he will not name the Bread After that he had taken and broke it and distributed it to his Disciples he said This is my Body which is given for you or which is broken according to the Apostle and again
understood the sub-Deacons which shews that the Deacons were not comprised in the prohibition which was made unto these Ministers Also the IV. Council of Carthage suffers the Deacons to administer unto the people in case of necessity Concil Carthag 4. c. 38. Ambros de offic l. 1. c. 41. the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Lord even in the presence of the Priest but by his order St. Ambrose speaking of the Deacon and Martyr St. Lawrence saith that he distributed the Cup and St. Leo in a Sermon where he treats of his Martyrdom Serm. infestiv Laurent and of his Triumph advanceth his Dignity by administring of the Sacraments and elsewhere making the Panegyrick of St. Vincent who was also a Deacon and Levite In nativit Vincent c. 2. he saith that he administred the Cup of our Lord Jesus unto Believers for their Salvation George Cassander alledgeth in his Liturgies these words of a certain Book which treated of all the Divine Offices Apud Cassandr in liturg c. 31. The Deacons are those unto whom it belongs to set in order upon the Holy Table the offerings of the people which are to be consecrated and after the Consecration to distribute the Mysteries of the Body and Blood of our Lord unto the people And in the Dialogues of Gregory the First there is mention made of a certain Deacon who being affrighted at the cruelty of the Pagans Gregor l. in dial l. 1. c. 7. as he was administring the Cup unto the people let it fall to the ground whereby it was broken In Spain they administred the Bread and Wine in the VI. Century as appears by the first Canon of the Council of Ilerda assembled Anno 524. In the Greek Church it is the Deacons which administer the Sacrament unto the people and amongst the Abassins the Deacon gives the Bread in little bits and the sub-Deacon the other Symbol in a spoon of Gold Silver or of Wood. But it is needless to insist any longer on a matter so clear and besides which is not of the greatest moment therefore 't is sufficient to know that at the beginning of Christianity the Deacons gave both Symbols unto the Communicants that afterwards they administred but the Cup only he which celebrated giving the Bread although this custom was not so soon admitted in all parts there being some places where the Deacons in the IV. Century distributed the whole Sacrament unto the faithful people and if in some Churches they were disturbed in the possession of their Rights yet nevertheless they have commonly injoyed the priviledge of administring the Cup of our Lord unto Christians after he that consecrated had distributed the holy Bread and it is they who amongst the Greeks distribute the Communion unto the people In the Kingdom of Prester John the Deacon giveth the Bread and the sub-Deacon the Wine as well unto the Clergy as unto the People But this is worth the considering that in divers parts of the West Women were permitted to administer the Sacrament unto the people and forasmuch as this abuse as far as I remember began in Italy Gelas Ep. â— ad Episc â—ucan t. 3. Concil p. 636. Pope Gelasius was also the first if I am not mistaken who indeavoured to prevent it grievously censuring the Bishops of Lucania for giving this liberty to Women and suffering them to serve at the Altar Men being only called unto this Office But it seems that this censure of Gelasius had not all the success as could have been wished seeing that about 500. Years afterwards to wit about the end of the X. Century Ratherius Bishop of Verona in Italy T. 6. Concil p. 431. T. 2. Spicil p. 261. in his Synodal Letters unto the Priests of his Diocese which have passed until our daies for a Sermon of Pope Leo the Fourth was forced to forbid Women to come near the Altar or touch the Cup of our Lord because in all likelihood they administred it unto Communicants And it was not only in Italy this permission was given unto Women but also in divers Provinces of France whence it is That the VI. Council Assembled at Paris under Lewis the Debonair Anno 829. Concil Paris 6. l. 1. c. 15. forbids it in one of its Canons which is yet to be seen in the seventh Book Cap. 134. of the Capitularies of Charles the Great and of Lewis the Debonair his Son a Prohibition which Isaac Bishop of Langres Isaac Ling. can tit 5. c. 7. 11. c. 23. was constrained to renew some time after As for the persons admitted unto the Communion they were Believers therefore the Deacons made the Catechumeni the Energoumeni the penitents and generally all such as were not initiated in the Mysteries of Christian Religion to go out and those people were not only not suffered to participate of the Sacrament but they were not suffered to stay in the Assembly when it was celebrated Indeed that they were not suffered to assist at the Celebration of the Sacrament was not alwaies practis'd amongst Christians seeing that it is most certain that in the two first Centuries and probably a good part of the third they hid not their Mysteries and did not celebrate with the Doors shut as appears by the Works of Justin Martyr which shews plainly that the Liturgies which go in the name of S. James and S. Mark are forgeries for therein is mention of excluding these sorts of persons above mentioned the Deacon making them go out before the beginning of Consecrating the Divine Symbols which is also to be read in all the other Liturgies and I shall not stand to prove this matter being indisputable and owned by all the World the truth whereof is easily to be seen by such as please to read the Liturgies which we have remaining and which by the care taken therein by the Deacons to shut out the Catechumeni the Energoumeni the penitents and the uninitiated do manifestly shew that they have been made since the third Century whatever care the Authors of some of them have taken to shroud themselves under the name of some Apostle or Disciple of the Apostles And if only Belivers were obliged to Communicate this obligation regarded them all in general for the Penitents were not thought to be Believers during the time of their penance the sins they had committed and for which they had been censured to undergo the burden of this penance having made them fall from this priviledge and happy state when I speak of Believers I do not mean only such as were grown up and such as were of years of discretion but also Children Therefore we are necessarily ingaged to make two Considerations of the persons of Communicants the first shall treat of the Communion of Adults the second that of Children As for the Communion of persons of Age and years of discretion there is no question to be made but they were all obliged to Communicate when
Christ where the Reader may observe if he please that the case is by way of permission and farther of a permission grounded not upon the authority of a Council but upon the necessity that is alledged of the fear or danger of effusion something of like nature is to be found in the antient customs of the Monastery of Cluny which were written after the death of the Abbot Odilon who dyed about the middle of the XI Century but in such a manner as appears that this custom was peculiar to the Congregation of Cluny the other Churches distributing both Symbols severally L. 2. c. 30. p. 146. t. 4. spicil Vuto all those unto whom he gives the holy Body say these antient customs he first wets or steeps it in the Blood but in the Margent they make this observation Another Manuscript adds Although this be contrary to the practice of other Churches because some of our Novices are such slovens that should they receive the Blood by it self they would not fail of being guilty of some great neglect Non remaneret Which words Cassander alledged in his Treatise of the Communion under both kinds for he saw the Manuscripts before the customs were Printed as they have been within this six or seven years past but it appears by the words above alledged that in most Churches the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament were given apart and distinct from one another In the year 1095. Vrban the Second held a Council at Clermont in Auvergna that made a Decree which is variously reported Cardinal Baronius in his Ecclesiastical Annals gives it us in these terms T. 11. ad an 1095. That no Body presume to Communicate at the Altar without receiving the Body apart and also the Blood by it self unless it be by necessity and with precaution This necessity regards the sick above-mentioned and this care or precaution refers in all likelihood to the danger of spilling which might happen more especially at great and festival Communions by reason of the great number of people that comunicates and doubtless it was upon such occasions that John Bishop of Auranch intended it should be permitted to give the Sacrament steeped unto the people if it were not better to refer unto the same subject that is to say unto sick bed-rid Persons both the necessity and precaution of the Canon in Baronius In a word Oderic Vital in his ninth Book of his Ecclesiastical History upon the year 1095. upon the relation of Maynard in his Notes upon the same Book of Sacraments of Gregory thus represents unto us the Canon Page 379. That the Body of the Lord be received separately and also the Blood of the Lord he speaks neither of necessity nor precaution and without that the Canon is clear and intelligible and without any difficulty it is no easiy matter to judge in what manner the Council exprest it self it only can be said that it seems to express it self as Oderic Vital saith if it be considered in the first place that 't was in this Council of Clermont the Croysade was granted for recovering the Holy Land Secondly that it appears by a Letter written from Antioch by the Adventurers four years after the Council that is to say in the year 1099. and directed unto Manasses Archbishop of Rheims that the Christians resolving to make a sally upon those which held them closely besieged in Antioch did first Communicate but under both Symbols distinctly These things being heard T. 7. Spicil p. 195. the Christians being purified by cenfessing their sins and strongly armed by receiving the Body and Blood of the Lord and being prepared for the combat they marched out of the gate Unto which may be added that a little before the Council of Clermont most Churches did Communicate as we have been informed by the antient customs of Cluny under both kinds distinctly But Paschal the Second who succeeded unto Vrban Anno 1099. commands both Symbols to be distributed separately Pascal 2. Ep. 32. t. 7. part 1. p. 130. except it be unto young Children and such as are at the point of death for unto such he gives liberty they should be communicated with the holy Wine only because they cannot swallow down the Bread And about the same time the Micrologue observes that the Communion with the steeped Sacrament Cardinal Humbert against the Greeks t. 4. Bibl. patr part 2. p. 217. A. Microlog c. 18. is no lawful Communion and proves it by the authority of the Roman Order It appears also that about fifty years before this Council of Clermont the steeped Sacrament was not always given unto Persons ready to depart this life but the holy Bread and the sanctified Cup apart at least nothing hinders but it may so be gathered from the Chronicle of Fontanella otherwise St. Wandrill in Normandy for speaking of Gradulph one of its Abbots who dyed in the year 1047. C. 8. t. 3. Spicil p. 268. it saith That being at the point of death and having received the Communion of the Body and Blood of the Lord he dyed Nevertheless the best and most holy things absolutely degenerate from their institution let us see the manner that the Communion with the steeped Eucharist was introduced and established in several places but not universally We have a Letter of Ernulph or Arnulph or if you please of Arnold at first a Monk at S. Lueiens of Beauvais then at Canterbury in Lanfranck's time afterwards made a Prior by Anselm a little after Abbot of Burk and at last by Radulph Bishop of Rose now Rochester in England he died Anno 1124. T. 2. Spicil p. 432. in this Letter which he writes unto one Lambert who demanded wherefore the Sacrament was then given steept seeing our Saviour gave the Bread and Wine distinctly he approves this new manner of giving the Sacrament although he owns that Jesus Christ distributed it otherwise and he likes it for the danger of shedding especially upon Festival daies because of the great numbers of persons that then use to communicate also he touches the inconvenience might happen by reason of men that have long and great Beards representing that if at their Meals they wet their Whiskars in the Liquor before they receive it in their mouth it may be feared they do the same in the Consecrated Wine if they are admitted unto the Sacramental Cup which he accounts a great crime which he chargeth upon the Communicant and also him that celebrates besides to strengthen what he saith of the danger of effusion upon solemn Festival daies when great numbers of Men and Women must be communicated of all sorts and conditions he observes that he that officiates will be still in danger of spilling something out of the Sacred Cup let him take never so much care and caution in distributing it because he often runs the hazard of this effusion when he is about to drink of it himself which cannot be done as he
distribution of both Symbols separately in the latter Ages they came to administer the Bread in the Consecrated Wine so from the distributing the Eucharist steeped by little and little insensibly in some Churches of the West they gave the Communicants only the consecrated Bread a custom which in process of time introduced it self almost into all the Western Churches until that it was established in the year 1415. upon Saturday the 15. of June by this Decree of the Council of Constance Sess 13. t. 7. Concil part 2. p. 1042. This present holy general Council of Constance lawfully Assembled by the Holy Ghost declares discerns and defines that although Jesus Christ after Supper instituted and administred unto his Disciples this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of Bread and Wine yet nevertheless the commendable authority of holy Canons and the approved custom of the Church hath observed and doth observe that this Sacrament ought not to be celebrated after Supper nor to be received of Believers but fasting except in case of sickness or some other necessity allowed or admitted by Law or by the Church and in like manner that although in the Primitive Church Believers received the Sacrament under both kinds yet nevertheless to avoid certain perils inconveniencies and scandals this custom was fitly introduced that those who officiated should receive under both kinds and the Laity under the species of Bread only withall that they should firmly believe and nothing doubt that the intire Body of Christ and the Blood are truly contained as well under the species of Bread as under the species of Wine Therefore such a custom being reasonably introduced both by the Church and by the holy Fathers and that it was a long while observed it ought to pass for a Law which is not allowed to be rejected nor changed by every bodies fancy without the Authority of the Church Therefore they are to be judged erroneous that think it to be Sacrilegious or unjust to observe this custom or this Law and those who obstinately affirm the contrary of what is above said ought to be banished as Hereticks and severely punished by the Diocesans of the places or their Officials or by the Inquisitors of the Heretical evil in the Kingdoms or Provinces where by hazard or on purpose they have attempted or presumed any thing against this Decree according to the lawful Ordinances and Canons which have been seasonably made against Hereticks and their abettors against the Catholick Faith But notwithstanding the severity of this Decree Cassander hath left us upon Record in his Treatise of the Communion under both kinds formerly cited That it is read that Pope Martin the Fifth p. 1037 after the Council of Constance did practise in the solemn Office of Easter the Precept and Formulary of the Roman Order in giving the Communion unto the people under both kinds The same in the same place relates as from Thomas Waldensis That after the Synod of Constance the Pope of Rome did not forbear giving the Communion after the use of Rome that is to say under both kinds unto the Deacons the Ministers of the Altar and unto other persons eminent in Piety and Worth as also unto Rectors of places and considerable Monasteries his Brethren and unto others he thought worthy of so great a Gift He saith moreover That Cardinal Cusa in his Letter written unto the Clergy and learned Men of Bohemia Anno 1452. some years after the Council of Basle declares That until very near his time the Pope at the Feast of Easter suffered the Laity unto whom he had with his own hands given the Body of the Lord to receive the Blood from the hands of the Deacons And that Nicholas of Palerma who assisted at the Council of Basle saith That the opinion of Doctors is That it would not be ill done that the Communicant should also receive the Blood This Council of Basle whereat this Archbishop was present granted unto the Bohemians the Communion under both kinds provided that in all other things they should conform unto the Church of Rome and that they would instruct them to believe that Jesus Christ was contained wholly under the one and the other species All those who are any thing read in the History of those times know that those of Bohemia who differed nothing from the Church of Rome but only in the matter of the Communion under both kinds were called for that reason Calixtins different from the true Taborites but so 't is as it appears by a Letter from George Pogiebrac King of Bohemia that these Calixtins did not quietly enjoy this Grant for in this Letter which was written in the year 1468. and for which we are obliged unto Dom Luke d'Achery T. 4. Spicileg p. 413 414 415. a Benedictine Monk this Prince declares himself plainly to be a Calixtin That he was bred up in this manner of Communicating under both kinds That his Father Mother and Grand-mother had so practised That the Council of Basle had granted Liberty of it unto his Subjects not by way of permission as the Church sometimes tolerates Sins but to the end it should be allowed by the Authority of our Lord Jesus Christ and of our holy Mother the Church his Spouse That in all other things he agrees with the Church of Rome so that it appears by this apologetical Letter which he writes unto Matthias King of Hungary his Son-in-Law that he only desired liberty of Communicating under both kinds as he had been taught by his Father and Grandfather and I doubt not but a part of this Apology will in convenient time and place give sufficient ground for making a clear and certain Judgement of the Belief of the ancient Taborites upon the point of the Eucharist But after all these changes happened at sundry times the Council of Trent in the 21. Session being the Fifth under Pope Pius IV. Anno 1562. the 16. of July after having spoken of the Authority which the Church hath alwaies had in the dispensation of Sacraments to change in time and place what she thought fit the substance still remaining intire it adds Sess 21. c. 2. 3. de doctr That therefore the Holy Mother the Church being sensible of this wholsom Authority in the administration of Sacraments although that at the beginning of Christian Religion the use of both kinds was frequent nevertheless in process of time this custom being changed it was introduced for wise and solid reasons to approve this custom of communicating under one kind and hath commanded it to pass into a Law which shall not be allowed to be alter'd or laid aside at pleasure without the Authority of the same Church And in the following Chapter which is the Third of Doctrine It declares moreover That though our Redeemer as it is said in his last Supper instituted this Sacrament under both kinds and gave it unto his Apostles Yet it must be confessed that Jesus Christ intirely and
c. 31. Some saith he having divided the Eucharist according to the usual manner suffered each one of the people to take part of it Cardinal Cajetan was of opinion that Jesus Christ did after the same manner and that the Primitive Church Religiously followed his example and it is at this time the manner of Communicating amongst the Protestants in Holland yet this is still receiving the Sacrament with the hand which was observed in S. Cyprians time Cyprian Ep. 56. that is to say in the Third Century as appears by these words Let us arm the right hand with the Spiritual Sword that it may couragiously reject wicked Sacrifices being mindful of the Eucharist and that which receives the Body of the Lord might afterwards imbrace Christ himself that hand which is to receive the price of immortal Crowns So it is that Mr. Rigaut hath in his Notes corrected this passage by the Manuscript Copies of the Vatican And again Id. de laps p. 175. He that is fallen threatens those which stand those which are wounded them which are not and the sacrilegious Person is offended at the Priests because he doth not presently receive the Body of Christ with defiled hands or that he drinks not the Blood of the Lord with an impure mouth And in another Treatise where he teacheth that the works of the flesh are overcome by means of patience Id. de bono patient p. 226. Let patience saith he be strong and well rooted in the heart that the sanctified Body and Temple of God defile not it self by Adultery and that the hand after having received the Eucharist defile not it self with the Sword and Blood-shedding Cornelius Bishop of Rome contemporary with St. Cyprian also sheweth plainly that it was so practised in the Church of Rome when writing unto Fabius Bishop of Antioch he tells him that Novatian the Heretick made those who came unto him to receive the Communion to swear that they would be of his party Apud Euseb hist l. 6. c. 43. Vales After he had made the Oblations saith he and that he had distributed and given unto every one part of the Sacrament he constrained these wretches to swear unto him instead of the benediction and Prayers taking with both his hands the hands of him who received and letting them not loose till they had ingaged unto him by Oath We have again in the same Eusebius another example of this use and custom about the same time which Cornelius wrote for we there find that Denys Bishop of Alexandria writing unto Sixtus Bishop of Rome speaks unto him of a Brother that is to say a Believer who had lived a great while in the Church after he had entred into its Communion and forsaken the Hereticks amongst whom he had been Baptized and amongst many things which he saith he observes this circumstance That he presented himself at the holy Table Ibid. l. 7. c. 3. that he had stretched out his hands to receive this holy nourishment that he had received it and that he had been a great while partaker of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ It was unto this custom doubtless that Gregory Nazianzen had respect when he said of Julian the Apostate Greg. Nazian orat 1. in Jul. p. 70. He pollutes his hands to the end there should remain nothing of the unbloody Sacrifice whereby we communicate of Jesus Christ of his sufferings and of his Divinity The Abbot of Billy one of the Scholiasticks of Gregory subscribes thereunto and observes upon the place That almost all the Antients after Turtullian testifie that antiently the Eucharist was given into the peoples hand And in the funeral Oration of Gorgonia his Sister he sufficiently teacheth the same when he saith That her hand had hid some of the Antitypes of the Body and Blood of Id. orat 11. p. 187. Jesus Christ St. Basil his intimate friend deposeth in favour of this same practice about the end of the V. Century Basil Ep. 289. t. 3. In the Church saith he the Priest gives one part that is of the Sacrament and he which receiveth it keeps it with all freedom and so bears it with his own hand to his mouth St. Cyril of Jerusalem suffers us not to make any question of it when he speaks of receiving the Body of Jesus Christ in the hollow of the hand and that he warns the Communicant Cyril Hieros Mystag 5. Ambros Hex l. 6. p. 103. t. 1. id de el. jejun c. 10. Chrysost ad Pop. Antioch Hom. 21. t. 1. p. 266. That he take care that he lose none of it and that not a crum of it fall or be lost And St. Ambrose doth he not say That the hand is that whereby we receive the heavenly Sacraments And elsewhere he declares that we receive the Sacraments at the Altar St. Chrysostom who dyed the in beginning of the V. Century gives us several proofs of this antient custom Consider saith he what you receive with the hand and be not so inconsiderate as to strike any Body and after having honoured it with so great a gift do not dishonour it in imploying it to strike consider what 't is you receive with the hand and keep it free from all covetousness c. Think that not only you receive it with the hand but also that you put it unto the mouth Id. Hom. de simult p. 285. And in the same Tome See here I preach I conjure I warn with a loud voice that he who hath an Enemy should not approach unto the Holy Table and that he should not receive the Body of Jesus Christ Id. in Seraph p. 891. And in the third Tome The Seraphin durst not touch it with his hand but with the Tongs and you you receive him with the hand It is unto this time must be referred what Sozomâ—n the Historian hath left us upon Record of the Woman which being of the Sect of Macedonius who denyed the Divinity of the holy Ghost went through complaisance to her Husband who had quitted this Sect by the powerful Sermons of St Chrysostom Sozom. hist l. 8. c. 5. unto the Church of the Catholicks and disposed her self to communicate with them but he saith That retaining what she had received she bowed her self as if she would have prayed and that at the same instant her maid who was there with her gave her privately what she had in her hand and that she had brought along with her but she had it no sooner between her teeth but it became a stone Unto the same purpose may be applyed what St. Apud Theodoret Hist l. 5. c. 17. Isid Pelus l. 5. Ep. ult Ambrose said unto the great Theodosius after the severe vengeance which he used against the inhabitants of Thessalonica and St. Isidore of Damiette reproacheth a Priest called Zosimus that Believers rather chose to abstain from the Communion than receive it from his
c. 7. p. 94. and keep it would be an Act punishable saith the learned Petau and held for a Profanation of this Sacrament and I do not see that any one can justly blame this Severity of the Latin Church seeing they believe Transubstantiation and that what is received at the Lords Table is the adorable Body of the Son of God unto which a Sovereign respect is due the Protestants themselves who have not the same belief would not suffer this abuse and to say the truth it were to expose this august Sacrament unto many indecencies which must needs happen if Communicants should be suffered to carry it home along with them and keep it CHAP. XV. The Sacrament sent unto such as were absent unto the Sick and that sometimes by the Laity THE Sacrament of the Eucharist being a Sacrament of Communion not only with Jesus Christ but also with Believers who find in this Divine Mystery a pretious Earnest of the strict and intimate Union which they ought to have together the primitive Christians which were of one Heart and one Soul never celebrated the Sacrament but that they sent it unto such of their Brethren as could not be present in the Assembly at the time of Consecration to the end that by the participation of the same Bread it might appear they were but one Body with the rest St. Justin Martyr teacheth so much when he saith That the Deacon distributes unto every one of those who are present the consecrated Bread and Wine mingled with Water and that they should carry of it unto those that were absent and accordingly we read in the Acts of the Martyr St. Just Mart. Apol. 1. Lucian one of the Priests of the Church of Antioch who glorified God by suffering Death in the 311th year of our Lord and the last of the Persecution of Dioclesian That he celebrated the holy Sacrament in Prison with many other Christians who were detained for the Gospel sake making his Breast serve for the mystical Table the posture he was put in by the cruelty of his Persecutors not admitting him to do otherwise and that after he had participated himself of the Sacrament he sent of it unto those who were absent I have mentioned this passage as it is related by Cardinal Baronius in his Annals Apud Baron ad ann 311.9 S. although neither Philostorgius nor Nicephorus of Caliste which mention this business to the best of my remembrance say any thing of this circumstance but only that these Believers did visit him in Prison Saint Irenaeus in Eusebius tells us of a custom whereby the Bishops used to send the Eucharist unto each other in token of peace and Communion not considering the distance of place and the Seas over which it was sometimes to pass This holy man writing a Letter unto Pope Victor who had Excommunicated the Churches of Asia for celebrating Easter the fourteenth day of March in this Letter he speaks thus to the Pope 〈…〉 The Priests saith he which have been before you do send the Sacrament unto Priests of the Churches that used that custom And it appears that was commonly done at the Feast of Easter which the Council of Laodicea prohibited by one of its Canons Concil Laod. c. 14. The holy Sacrament must not be sent unto other Churches at the Feast of Easter under the name of Eulogies But so 't is that I find great difference betwixt what is said by Justin Martyr and what is said by Irenaeus the former speaketh of what was done towards the Members of the same Church which could not be present in the Assembly with their Brethren and unto whom was sent their share of the Sacrament at the time when it was celebrated in the Church and the latter touched what was practised by the conducters of Christian Churches one towards another but not at the very time of the Celebration of the Sacrament But if the Sacrament was sent unto the absent it was also sent unto sick Folks It is true great care must be taken in distinguishing betwixt sick Believers and Penitents by sick Believers is understood Christians Baptized who had preserved the purity of their Baptism or at least who had not commited any of those sins which reduced those which were convict into a state of Penance and by Penitents I mean such as after their Baptism were faln into some great Sin which made them liable unto the orders of the hard and painful Penance which was observed in the first Ages of Christianity As for the former I find not in what remains unto us of the three first Ages of the Christian Religion any proof that the Eucharist was given them at the hour of Death this custom not appearing till afterwards what Justin Martyr said not properly regarding the Sick but those that were absent as is confessed by the learned Mr. In. c. 24. l. 5. de Valois in his Notes upon Eusebius his Ecclesiastical History as for the latter I mean the Penitents as they were excluded out of the Communion of the Church this good and tender Mother feeling her self touched with compassion towards those of her Children which breathed after reconciliation and peace used this charitable condescension for their consolation that she commanded to absolve those of this Order which were in danger of Death and at the same time to give them the Sacrament of the Lords Supper as a seal of this reconciliation that they might depart this life full of joy and comfort So it was practised by Denys Bishop of Alexandria in all the extent of his Diocese as he testifies in Eusebius where he saith Aâ—ud Euseb hinor l. 6. c. 44. That he had commanded to absolve those which were in danger of Death if they desired it and especially if they had already desired it before their sickness There are to be seen in S. Cyprian's Epistles who lived at the same time several the like directions touching those which had fallen during the time of persecution but because many were not mindful of desiring reconciliation with the Church from whose Communion they had fallen by their Apostasy untill they were taken with some sickness which endangered their life the first Council of Arles assembled Anno 314. Concil Arclar 1. c. 22. forbids giving the Sacrament unto such as did so unless they recovered their health and did fruits worthy of repentance But this it self shews that it was not refused unto any of those which being fallen endeavoured to rise again by passing through the degrees of Penance and that without deferring to the end of their life ardently desired to be admitted into the peace of the Church The Councils are full of Canons which direct the time and manner of absolving Penitents which was inseparable from receiving of the Sacrament which was given them as the last Viaticum to assure them that they were reconciled unto God in their being so with the Church which was accustomed to seal
d'Achery hath given us those are the antient customs of the Monastry of Cluny written at the end of the Eleventh Century although that Congregation was founded at the beginning of the Tenth It appears by these customs that there were times wherein they caused to be eaten at the very instant in this famous Congregation all that remained after Communion which its true was not practised when these customs were written that is to say towards the end of the Eleventh Century although the Author doth confess that it was generally practised in all other Churches Antiq. consuetud Cluniac monast l. 1. c. 13. t. 4. Spicil Dach p. 58. Heretofore saith he so much care was taken that after all had Communicated the Priests themselves or as 't is in the Margent the Priors who had brought whereof to communicate did with a great deal of precaution and respect eat all that did remain without keeping any part of it till next day And I do not know that any other custom is used generally in all other Churches the which is not much here regarded at present but what remains after the Communion is kept We might it may be have referred unto this custom what is said in the Eighth Book of Apostolical Constitution chap. 13. and what is mentioned by Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria in his Canonical Letter in the Seventh Canon but because these two places may admit of another interpretation we forbear citing them the custom now in question being already sufficiently confirmed In the Fourth place the Antients made no difficulty sometimes to take consecrated Wine and mingle it with Ink afterwards dip their Pens in these two mingled Liquors the more authentically to sign what they intended to sign thus it was done by Pope Theodorus in the VII Century to sign the condemnation and deposition of Pyrrhus a Monothelite as is testified by Theophanes in Baronius Pyrrhus saith he having left Rome Apud Baron an 648. §. 15. and being arrived at Ravenna returned like the Dog unto his Vomit which Pope Theodorus understanding he assembled the whole Church and went unto the Sepulcher of the chief of the Apostles and asking for the holy Cup he poured the quickning Blood into the Ink and so with his own hand signed the deposition of Pyrrhus who had been excommunicated So it was also done by the eighth Council of Constantinople assembled against Photius In anteact Synod t. 6. Concil p. 896. in the year 869. For the Bishops subscribed the deposition of Photius with Pens dipt not in Ink only but in the Blood of Christ it self See here two remarkable instances which were usually produced to prove this fourth Observation but beside these two we have a third which is no less considerable we are obliged for it to Monsieur de Baluze and he unto Monsieur de Masnau Counsellor in the Parliament of Tholouse because he furnished it him having taken it out of an Historian called Odo Aribert who relating the Voyage of Charles the Bald unto Tholouse in the year 844 observes amongst other things that being there he sent for Bernard Count of Barcelona under a pretence of receiving him into his favour but indeed with a design to kill him which he did but Bernard did not proceed on his Journey till there was a treaty betwixt Charles and him Odo Aribert edit in not Baluz ad Agobard p. 129. And after the peace had been confirmed and interchangeably signed by the King and the Count with the Blood of the Sacrament To conclude there may be added unto all these customs the practice of the Greek Church which mingles hot Water with the Wine of the Sacrament after Consecration and just at the instant of Communicating as we find by their Ritual by German Patriarch of Constantinople Cabasilas Simon of Thessalonica Balsamon Patriarch of Antioch and several others and those who desire to see the Mystical reasons of this mixture Goar in Eucholog p. 148. n. 166 167. may only read what James Goar hath written in his Notes upon the Enchology of the Nation for we may finish this first part having exactly inquired if I mistake not into all things which relate unto the exteriour worship of the Sacrament But because as the actions of Jesus Celebrating and those of his Disciples Communicating have served as a Model unto this Celebration although in process of time inricht with sundry Ceremonies which were not practised at the beginning So also his words being the foundation of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers having given the first part of this work unto the outward form of Celebration we shall employ the Second in the examination of the Doctrine and 't is what we shall set about with Gods permission The end of the first Part. THE HISTORY OF THE EUCHARIST PART II. Containing the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers THOSE which travel into strange Countries if they are any thing curious fail not taking notice of the Things which they judg most considerable and worthy their Observation It is true all are not alike disposed some regard only their own private Satisfaction and look no farther but there be others which undertaking these long and painful Voyages make as it were a kind of Journal wherein they exactly set down all things which deserve to be known and being return'd home they digest and communicate them unto others who without stirring out of their Closet or running any Danger see what is most curious and remarkable in all Countries and Parts of the World And certainly all Men are oblig'd unto those Persons which are so good and charitable as to expose themselves unto a thousand Dangers and Inconveniences to inform and instruct us This is in some sort the case of those which undertake to travel into the Countries of Ecclesiastical Antiquity which is of a vast extent having no other Limits than those of the whole Vniverse as well as the Kingdom of Jesus Christ unto whom the heavenly Father hath given all Nations for his Heritage and the Earth for his Possession there are in this Country a multitude of different Climates very many considerable Rarities worthy the Curiosity of Christians but all which ingage in these Voyages are not of a humour to take pains for the Publick they keep themselves close and private and aiming only at their own particular Satisfaction they trouble themselves not much for others so that were there only such Persons which lanched forth to visit this large Empire we should neither be more learned nor better instructed But the Providence of God which is always vigilant for the good of Mankind puts it into the Heart of several to undertake this great Voyage with a Resolution and Design of communicating what they have observed unto the Publick that it may serve for the Instruction and Consolation of Christians It 's true some indeed discharge their Duty better than others thereafter as God is pleased to distribute his Gifts and Graces but
of the Canons of the Church of Africa and it is there inserted something different but yet in such a manner as doth not alter the Sense Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 17. c. 5. St. Austin is no less positive when he declares That to eat the Bread is under the New Testament the Sacrifice of Christians Cyril in Joan. l. 4. c. 14 l. 12. Hesych in Levit. l. 6. c. 2â— And St. Cyril of Alexandria saith That in the Eucharist Jesus Christ distributed and gave Bread unto his Disciples For the same Reason Hesychius assures us that The Oblation of Jesus Christ is performed in Bread and Wine Eudox. Bibl. Patr. t. 14. p. 130. The Princess Eudoxia Wife unto the Emperour Theodosius the younger may take place amongst all these Witnesses which we have alledged her Deposition being of no less moment than the rest seeing she speaks according to the Instructions given her in the Church when she saith That our Lord having broke Bread gave it unto his Friends Apud Phot. Bibl. Cod. 115. that is to say unto his Disciples An Anonymous Author in Photius his Library assures That Jesus Christ in his Mystical Supper gave unto his Disciples Bread and Wine The sixteenth Council of Toledo Concil Tolet. 16. c. 6. held in the Year 693 saith twice That the Lord breaking a whole Loaf gave it to be taken in parcels by his Disciples And the Council in Trullo Anno 691 Council in Trul. c. 32. take and apply unto themselves the 24th Canon of the Council of Carthage where it is forbidden to offer any thing but what Jesus Christ gave to wit Bread and Wine mingled with Water Secondly The same Fathers testify that the Bread of the Sacrament is Bread which is broken I will not here make use of the Testimonies of those which positively affirm that our Lord did break Bread in his Sacrament as Clement of Alexandria Origen Juvencus St. Hilary St. Austin St. Cyril of Alexandria the Empress Eudoxia the XVI Council of Toledo c. I will restrain my self at present unto those which say that we therein break Bread as the Author of the Epistles under the Name of St. Ignatius for he speaks of breaking one Bread and saith Ignat. ep ad Ephes ad Philad Recognit l. 6. ad sin Pasch 1. there is one Bread broken unto all And the Author of Recognitions observes of St. Peter that he broke the Eucharist Theophilus of Alexandria saith that we break the Bread for our own Sanctification St. Chrysostome that was the object of his Persecution and Harred was of the same Mind when he said Wherefore did the Apostle when he spake of Bread Chrysost hom 24. in 1 ad Cor. say which we break for that is seen to be done in the Sacrament This is also what St. Austin testifies when he saith Aust ep 86. ep 59. Id. Serm. 140. de Temp. c. 2. Fulg. de Bapt. Aeâ—hiop Isid Hispal de Off. Eccl. l. 1. cap. 18. Act. 2. 20. That the Bread is broken in the Sacrament of the Body of Jesus Christ and that what is upon the Lord's Table is divided into little Bits to be distributed And elsewhere that the breaking of the Bread should comfort us St. Fulgentius thus reads the Words of St. Paul The Loaves which we break And St. Isidore of Sevil The Bread saith he which we break is the Body of Jesus Christ. We see also that St. Luke means the Sacrament of the Eucharist by the breaking of Bread which the Syriac Interpreter hath expressed by the breaking of the Sacrament and where St. Luke saith that the Disciples were met together to break Bread he hath render'd it We were met together to break the Eucharist Therefore 't is that the holy Fathers which speak of breaking Bread speak also of dividing it in pieces As when Clement of Alexandria observes Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 1. pag. 271. Aug. cont Don post Col. c. 6. Cypr. de laps Cyril Aleâ— in Joan. l. 4. c. 14. that the Eucharist being divided each of the People took part of it And St. Austin that Judas and Peter received each of them a Piece And St. Cyprian speaks of a Woman which had lockt in her Chest a Portion of the Eucharist There 's nothing more common in their Writings whence came the Terms of Parts Morsels Portions which were common so long time in the Church and which made them say that Jesus Christ gave Morsels of Bread unto his Disciples And that but a little is taken witness what Eusebius saith of a Priest of Alexandria that he sent by a young Boy unto Serapion a little Euseb Hist l. 6. c. 441 Aug. Serm. 35. de verb. Dom. cap. 5. or part of the Eucharist And St. Austin that we receive but a little and are fatned by it inwardly in the Heart Unto this Consideration may be added the constant Tradition of the Church whereon we have largely insisted in the VIII Chapter of the first Part where we have shewn that the holy Fathers have unanimously deposed that the Sacrifice of Christians is a Sacrifice of Bread and Wine In the third place speaking of the Eucharist they say That it is a Aug. serm 34 de divers c. 28. Corn b Eudox. in § 36. Arnob in p. 4. Wheat c Theod. dial 1 Fruit of the Vine d Sedul in op Pasch c. 14. l. 4 the Fruit of the Harvest and the Joy of the Vine e Isid Hisp l. 6. orig c. 19. the Fruits of the Earth f Tertul. cont Marc. l. 1. c. 14. the Blessings of the Creator g Iren. l. 4. c. 34 l. 5. c. 4 8. Creatures of this World h Clem. Alex. Paedag. l. z c. 2. the Blood of the Vine the Liquor of Joy i Cypr. ep 76. 63. Bread made of several Grains Wine pressed out of several Grapes k Orig. contra Cels l. 8. Breads or Loaves in the plural number l Just Mart. contra Tryph. wet ard dry Food They say moreover That it is the Bread of the Eucharist as St. Basil m Basil de Sp. S. c. 27. the Mystery of Bread and Wine as St. Gaudentius Bishop of Bresscia n Gaud. tract 2. in Exod. 14. the Sacrament of Bread and Wine St. Austin o Aug. contra Faust l. 20. c. 13 the Sacrament of Bread and of the Cup as St. Fulgentius p Fulg. ad Monum c. 11. the Sacrament of Bread as Bede q Bed Hom. 2. Fer. de pasch that it is not common Bread as Justin Martyr in his second Apology Ireneus l. 4. c. 34. Cyril of Jerusalem Mystag 3. and Gregory of Nysse in Baptism Christ pag. 802. tom 2. The Fathers rest not there they positively affirm that it is Bread and Wine Clement of Alexandria r Clem. Alex. Paedag l. 2. c. 2. What our Saviour blessed saith he was Wine
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
in some sort they may bear the Name of a divine Substance whereas before Consecration they had only a Substance whose Qualities seemed but to nourish the Body and they find nothing therein more harsh than what is said by Ratran Bertram de corp fang Dom. Aug. annot in Job t. 4 ex c. 5. p. 394. Prosper ad Demetr That our Saviour did formerly in the Wilderness change the Manna and the Water of the Rock into his Flesh and Blood And St. Austin that Jesus Christ changeth us into his Body And in fine St. Prosper his Disciple speaking of our Lord Jesus Christ that the Body of Sin is converted or changed into his Body Caesarius himself say they deserves that Right and invites us thus to understand him for in the first place he teacheth in the same Sermon that Jesus Christ intending to transport his Body into Heaven left us his Sacrament to have always his holy Sacrifice in Remembrance who suffered Death for the Expiation of our Sins Because saith he Id. ibid. he was to remove from our Sight the Body which he had taken and place it in Heaven it was requisite he should in that Day consecrate the Sacrament of his Body and Blood to the end that by the Mystery that is by the Sacrament should be honoured what was once offered for the price of our Redemption and that because the Redemption for the Salvation of Man-kind had a continual Progress the Oblation also of the Redemption should be perpetual and that this everlasting Sacrifice should always live and be remembred in the State of Grace Secondly he compares the Change which comes to the Sacramental Symbols unto that which befalls Men in Baptism to shew us that both the one and the other being of the same nature it can be only a change of Vertue and Quality The Man renewed saith he by the saving Mysteries Id. ibid. passeth into the Body of the Church by the Water of Baptism and by the Fire of the Holy Ghost he is made the Bread of the Eternal Body After which he adds Let no Body then doubt but the Original Creatures may pass into the Nature of the Body of our Lord seeing he perceives Man by the Art of heavenly Mercy is made the Body of Jesus Christ As they say the honour of Caesarius is no way to be faved nor any good sense be given his Words but in saying that he intends to shew that as Man regenerated by Baptism is not made the Body of Christ but Mystically and Morally so also the Bread of the Sacrament doth not pass into the Nature of his Body but Sacramentally and Virtually using also the Word Nature for Quality In the same sense as St. Macarius used it Macar Hom. 44. Greg. Nyss in Cant. Hom. 9. Id. Orat. 1. in Christ Resur Id. de Virgin c. ult when he said That the truly Faithful Soul must be changed from this vile Nature unto a Divine Nature to intimate a Divine Quality Gregory of Nyss That we are changed into a spiritual Nature that is to say into a spiritual Quality And again That the Humanity of Jesus Christ is passed into the Divine Nature to signify that it hath been made to participate of the virtue of the Divinity And in fine That we may pass from the Nature and Dignity of Men into the Nature and Dignity of Angels There 's nothing more frequent than these kind of Expressions in all the Monuments of Antiquity I will add unto all these Considerations that I could not find the Homily of Easter now in question amongst many Homilies of Caesarius In Mr. Colbets And St. Victors which I have lately seen in two Libraries which may make it be suspected that it is of some Author much younger than Caesarius In the sixt place the holy Fathers teach that Church Fasts are broken Tertul. de Orat. c. 14. by participating of the Eucharist as Tertullian teacheth Many do think saith he that on Station-days they stay'd there till three a Clock without eating we should not attend Prayers and Sacrifices that is to say the celebration of the Eucharist because that in receiving the Lord's Body the Fast of the Station should be broke I cannot conceive saith the Protestant that those who believed that this Body whereof they speak and which is received at the holy Table was the true and natural Body of Jesus Christ could have this strange Fancy that the Fast should be broken in taking into their Mouths and Stomacks the holy and incorruptible Body of our Lord and Saviour And I cannot imagine those People could be so ignorant to believe it nor Tertullian so patient to suffer such an Indignity without sharply reproving it as it deserved he was too vehement not to do it and if one were much less so than him it would be very hard not to be concerned that People that made Profession of Christian Religion should so outragiously treat the glorify'd Body of Jesus Christ Id. ibid. Let the Reader judg with an unbyassed Mind if he please and he must agree with me that the Latins act very well according to their Hypothesis when they say that they believe the true Body of Christ doth not break the Fast What we say of these first Christians will appear yet more plainly if we consider the Council given them by Tertullian in the same place which is to receive the Sacrament and keep it to take it at Evening when the Station is ended In receiving saith he the Body of the Lord and keeping it you will save both you will partake of the Sacrifice and do the Duty of the Day I conceive I have discovered Marks of this Belief in our France in the VIth Century and to the end those which read this Work may the better judg if I am deceived I 'le here insert the Passage at large it is taken out of the Life of St. Melain Bishop of Phemes and is also found in the Supplement of the Councils of France where we have an Account of an Assembly of Bishops held at Anger 's Anno 530. In supplem Concil Gallic p. 49 50. Almost at the same time saith the Author the Man of God St. Milain and the Elect of God Albin and St. Victor Launus and St. Marsus assembled in the City of Anger 's in the Basilisk of St. Mary Mother of God St. Milain by common consent of the rest celebrated Mass at the beginning of the Fast of Lent and having ended before they went away the blessed Priest gave them in Charity the holy Eucharist with God's Grace and his Benediction But Marsus preferring the Fast of the Day before his Charity and neglecting the Eucharist whereof he should have communicated let fall the Portion he had received of St. Milain into his Bosom Being then permitted to return to their Church and having saluted each other they by the Grace of God began their Journey they had sâ—â—â—â—ce gone ten
that continues wicked to eat the Word made Flesh which is the living Word and Bread it would not have been written whosoever eateth of this Bread shall live for ever Id. Homil. 3. in Matth. And again The Good eat the Bread which came down from Heaven but the Wicked eat a dead Bread which is Death Ratherus Bishop of Verona hath transmitted unto us a Passage of Zeno Bishop of the same Place and one of his Predecessors which some make Contemporary with Origen and Martyr of Jesus Christ Zeno Veronens apud Rath t. 2. Spiciâ—eg Dach p. 181. under the Emperor Gallienus he cites it out of Zeno's Sermon touching the Patriarch Juda and his Daughter-in-law Thamar The Sermon is indeed Printed but the Passage whereof wespeak is not now to be seen in it it shall be here inserted and the Reader may see that he was of Origen's Opinion The Devil saith he is the Father of all wicked Livers and 't is much to be feared that he in whom the Devil inhabits by these three Sins Pride Hypocrisie and Luxury doth not eat the Body of Jesus Christ nor drink his Blood although he seems to communicate with Believers Our Saviour saying He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him which may be thus construed he that dwelleth in me and I in him eateth my Flesh and drinks my Blood for I cannot see how the Devil can reside in him in whom God liveth Hier in cap. 66. Esa and which liveth in God but he dwelleth in him that is empty and darkned by Hypocrisie or Pride and defiled by Luxury St. Jerom also speaks the same Language All those saith he which love their Pleasures more than God sanctified outwardly in Gardens and Doors but not in Body nor Mind do not eat the Body of Jesus Christ nor drink his Blood of which himself saith Whosoever eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood hath Life eternal because they cannot enter into the Mysteries of Truth and at the same time eat the Meats of Impiety It is the constant Doctrine of St. August de Civit. Dei l. 21. c. 25. Id. ibid. Augustin which he establisheth in several Places It must not be imagined saith he that a Man which doth not belong to the Body of Jesus Christ should eat the Body of Christ And again Let it not be said that those do eat the Body of Jesus Christ because they are not numbred amongst the Members of Christ For not to say any thing else they cannot at once be the Members of Jesus Christ and the Members of an Harlot And in fine himself saying Whosoever eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him doth shew what it is to eat the Body of Christ and to drink his Blood not in Sacrament only but in Truth for it is to dwell in Christ and to have Christ dwell in him It is as if he had said Let not him which dwelleth not in me and in whom I do not dwell think or imagine that he eateth my Flesh or drinketh my Blood Id. Tract 26. in Joan. p. 94. 6. And elsewhere speaking of the Sacrament of the Eucharist It is received saith he at the Lord's Table by some unto Life and by some others unto Death but the thing it self whereof it is a Sacrament is Life unto all Men and is not unto Destruction unto any which participate of him Id. ibid. And a little after He that dwelleth not in Jesus Christ and in whom Christ dwelleth not eateth not spiritually his Flesh and drinketh not his Blood although he grindeth visibly with his Teeth the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ but rather he eateth and drinketh unto his Damnation the Sacrament of so great a Thing Prosper sent 339. August de verb. Apost serm 2. c. 1. by presuming to come to the Sacraments of Jesus Christ being unclean St. Prosper allegeth this Passage in stronger Terms and such that in his Time it was read without the Word spiritually for he saith only of the Wicked That he eateth not the Flesh of Jesus Christ But let us again hear the same St. Austin faying Id. Tract 27. in Joan. That the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ shall be Life unto every one if what be received visibly in Sacrament is eaten and drank spiritually in the Truth it self therefore he exhorteth Believers not to eat the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in Sacrament only as the Wicked do Philo Carp t. â—1 Bibl. Pat. p. 228. in Cant. Let us then conclude the Examination of this second Tradition by the Words of Philo of Carpace That it is only unto those which are pure of Heart that this pleasant Food this heavenly Bread that this supersubstantial Drink is given until we arrive at the Place where it shall be shewn that it was also the Belief of the Greek Church in the XIth Century What remains to be treated of in this Chapter is the Question of Jesus Christs Presence upon Earth to wit if besides the Presence of his Divinity whereby he is always present with the Church Militant he is also really and effectually present by his Humanity Having applied my self with some diligence in inquiring into the Belief of the Holy Fathers upon this Article of our Faith I have found that when they explain how our Saviour is present and absent unto his Church they always touch the presence of his Divinity but they never say any thing of the Presence of his Humanity or if they do it is but absolutely to exclude it when at the same Time they establish the other for the Comfort of Believers Origen in Mat. tract 33. according to which Origen endeavouring to reconcile the Passages of Scripture which say That Jesus Christ shall be alway with us with others which say that he will go and depart he teacheth us that he is with us and will not depart as to the Nature of his Divinity but that he will depart and retire himself from us Id. ibid. according to the Oeconomy and Dispensation of the Body which he had taken that he departeth from us as Man but that he is every where present according to the Nature of his Divinity And a little under It is not the Man that is to say the human Nature which is every where where two or three are gathered together in his Name neither is it the Man that is to say the human Nature neither which is with us until the end of the World nor it is not the human Nature that is present with Believers wheresoever they are assembled but it is the Divine Vertue which was in Jesus Christ And St. Cyril Hierosol catech illum 14. extr Cyril of Jerusalem he saith he who is sitting there above is also here present with us he beholdeth the Strength and Order of the Faith of each one for because he is now
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
within Bounds it is necessary that it should naturally be contained in something that may be of another kind for what doth contain is greater than what is contained Which he also repeats in the following Page St. Epiphanius disputing against the Marcionites and combating the multiplicity of imaginary Gods which these Wretches did make Epiphan haeres 47. If each one of the Gods of Marcion saith he is bounded within its proper place these three Principles being circumscribed in certain places which contain them will not be found perfect but that which containeth will be found greater than what is contained and so that which is contained cannot be called a God but rather the place which containeth it It was also the Language of our France in the IXth Century as we shall learn by Bertram or Ratramn who tells us That the things which contain Bertram contr Graec. l. 1. c. 7. t. 2. Spicil Dâ—ch are greater than the things contained All these Testimonies are conceived in general Terms there is not to be seen any restriction or exception whatever and there is not to be discover'd any thing which should oblige us to lay apart the Subject of the Eucharist as if the contrary of what is intended by this Maxim may therein happen which fully justifies as 't is said that the Holy Fathers had no thoughts of it when they taught this Position which is infallibly true for it is believed they were too wise and too wary not to except the Sacrament of the Eucharist if they had believed that there happened in the celebration of this Divine Mystery any thing directly contrary unto the Declarations which they but now made In the fifth place the existing of Accidents without their Subject is another inevitable Consequence of the belief of the Latins it not being possible to admit the one without the other by the natural Consequence of things it is not then to be questioned but if the Fathers were of the same Belief but that they also believed the other Doctrine which follows it inseparably I mean that the Protestants will conclude that the Fathers believed that there might be roundness whiteness redness without having any thing that is round white or red or if they believed with all the Disciples of Nature and the Law with the Pagan Philosophers and Jewish Doctors that naturally that could not be they would not have failed to declare that what cannot be done in the order of Nature is nevertheless miraculously effected in the Sacrament either by a Miracle that imposeth silence unto the testimonies of our natural Senses and the purest light of Reason that there are Savours without any thing savoured Colours without any thing coloured Whiteness without any thing white Redness and nothing red Length and nothing long Figures and nothing figured Appearances and nothing apparent a Liquor and nothing liquid a Weight and nothing weighty and the like but if on the contrary they have not thought of making any such Declaration in the place where they were particularly obliged to do it it may be concluded say they that as they have not admitted this necessary Consequence of the substantial Conversion they have not also believed this Conversion Let us then examin what they have said upon this Subject and report their Testimonies not all for we should be too tedious the number is so great but as many only as may suffice for a full and sufficient Proof and Evidence Eusebius in the Evangelical Preparation and Basil and Gregory Nazianzen in their Philocalie of Origen relate a Passage of Maximius a Man of great Reputation in the second Century Apud Euseb de praepar Evang. l. 7. c. ult in Philoc. Orig. c. 24. Apud Phot. cod 232. p. 927. ult edit where he speaks thus It is impossible that Art should subsist of it self because it is an Accident and one of those things which receives its being when it is in a Substance for a Man may subsist without Architecture but this cannot be if Man be not first Methodius in the Library of Photius saith That the Quality cannot be separated from the Matter in regard of its Substance and that it is only by Imagination that Qualities are separated from the Matter and the Matter from the Qualities Greg. Nyss in Hexam p. 13. Epiphan haer 73. Gregory of Nyss That the Figure is not without a Body St. Epiphanius That by the word Substance is shewed the difference which is betwixt that which subsists of it self and that which doth not subsist of it self Isidore of Damieta Isidor Pelus l. 2. Ep. 7. That the Substance is the Vehicle of the Quality which cannot exist if the Substance doth not exist The Author of the Exposition of Faith in the Works of St. Justin Martyr Just Mart. in expo fid p. 386. Aug. ep 57. Id. ibid. Id. l. 2. Solil c. 13. 19. That the Accident cannot subsist of it self but that it exists in things which were before St. Austin That if the Quality of Bodies be taken from the Bodies themselves they will be nothing and so of necessity they fail and if the Mass it self of the Body whether it be great or little is quite taken away its Qualities will have no Being altho they are not to be equall'd to the whole if what is in a Subject subsists its necessary also that the Subject should subsist and the Subject being destroy'd Cyril Alex. Dial. 2. de Trin. p. 451. Ib. p. 421. that which is in the Subject cannot subsist St. Cyril of Alexandria If whiteness and blackness are not inherent in the Subject whereof they are Accidents they cannot exist of themselves and that the Accidents which are naturally in Substances have not of themselves any proper or determinated Existence Isid Hispal Orig. l. 2. c. 26. Iâ—en l. â— c. 14. Method apud Phot. cod 234. Basil ep 43. Aug. Sol. l. l. 2. c. 12. St. Isidore Arch-bishop of Sevil That the Quantity the Quality and the Scituation cannot be without the Substance In fine to conclude I find that these Holy Doctors denying the existence of Accidents without Subjects do positively declare That it is inconceiveable and impossible that Nature will not suffer it that it is a thing monstrous and quite contrary to Truth that this separation may be made by thought but not really so that the Accident should subsist alone Cyril Alex. in Joan. Ibid. Athan. Orat. 5. contr Arrian p. 520. Bertram contr Graec. l. 2. c. 7. t. 2. Spicil that the Accident and its Subject are in the main but one thing and that if God himself had Accidents they should exist in his Substance And therefore it was that Bertram writing for the Latin Church against the Greek Church said that the Holy Ghost was not in Jesus Christ as in his Subject Because saith he the Holy Ghost is not an Accident that cannot exist without his Subject if there were but one or two
Testimony but now alledged amongst the things whereof he fears that Truth may be endangered if the Faith of the Senses are mistrusted he mentions expresly the Wine of the Sacrament Tert. de anim Christians saith he are not permitted to call the Testimony of their Senses in question fearing least they should say that Jesus Christ tasted some other savour than that of Wine which he consecrated in remembrance of his Blood He alledges to defend the Fidelity of the Senses the Savour of the Wine of the Sacrament but say they it cannot be imagined that he could have reasoned after that manner if he had believed what the Latins now believe because according to their Hypothesis our Senses are grosly deceived in taking that to be Wine which is nothing less than Wine but another substance infinitely different Shall we then conclude say they that he indiscreetly betray'd his Cause and that he ignorantly chose for a convincing Proof that which was an unsurmountable Difficulty but should we say so we should undoubtedly draw upon us all the Learned who look'd upon him as one of the greatest Wits of his Time whose Mind being so enlightned and his Judgment so solid could not be charged with such a Mistake and not to call his great Reputation in question they had rather conclude according to all appearance that he was not of the belief of the present Latin Church which I refer unto the Reader 's Discretion but that nothing may be wanting to the clearing the question we now treat of and not to make the Holy Fathers contradict one another it must be observed that they considered two things as some say in the Sacrament of Christians I mean the sign and the thing signified As for the thing signified all the World agree that it falls not under the Senses and that so we should not expect that they should render us any Testimony It is Faith that must instruct and give us a Testimony it is of Faith to direct and apply to us the Efficacy and Vertue As to the Signs and Symbols they also say that they have therein also distinguished two things the Substance and their Nature and their Use and Employment that is to say the quality of the Sacraments wherewith they are qualified by favour of the Benediction For example in Baptism they pretend that Water which is the Symbol hath two Relations one of the bare Element of the Nature which keeps its Substance and the other of the Sacrament of Religion which Consecration gives it It is the same in the Eucharist for besides the Nature and Substance of Bread and Wine which are the Signs and Symbols they bear the quality of Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and it is Grace which God adds unto Nature Now to apply this unto our Subject they say that the Senses being Organs purely Natural they cannot lift themselves above Nature nor make us a true report of what doth not depend upon their Laws but whilst they keep within the bounds of their Nature and that they undertake nothing beyond their Strength and the Priviledges granted unto them their Testimony is infallible and their Deposition true and certain therefore when they shew us that the Water in Baptism is truly Water according to its Substance and the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist but Bread and Wine also in regard of their Substance they judge that we ought to believe them after what the Fathers have told us because then they do not pass the limits that God hath set them but when they will pass further and tell us that the Water of Baptism is but bare Water and the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament but bare Bread and Wine we should command their silence because they pass beyond their Bounds and passing beyond the Limits of Nature they take upon them to penetrate into the Mysteries of Grace which have been only given unto Faith to dispose of they also observe that 't is in these occasions that the same Fathers forbid us to hearken unto them or receive their Testimony and that 't is so must be understood the Author of the Book of them which are initiated in St. Ambrose What have you seen Ambros l. 3. de init c. 3. l. 4. saith he I have seen Water indeed but not Water only I also see the Deacons saying Service and the Bishop examining and consecrating for the Apostle hath taught you that before all things you should look not to the things seen which are temporary Ibid. but unto those which are invisible which be eternal and again believe not the Eyes of the Body only what is not seen is most seen because the one is Temporal and the other Eternal and that which is Eternal is not perceived by the Eyes but is seen by the Spirit and by the Understanding And the Author of the Book of Sacraments Apud Ambros l. 1. de Sacram. c. 3. You have seen what may be seen with the Eyes of the Body and human Perception but you have not seen the things which operate because they are invisible those which are not seen are much more considerable than those which are seen because the things which are visible are Temporal and the things invisible are Eternal And because there is this difference betwixt the Believer and the Unbeliever that the Unbeliever hath only the Eyes of the Body and of Nature whereas the Believer hath besides the Eyes of the Body and of Nature those of the Spirit and of Faith St. Chrysostom saith that the Infidel seeth only the substance of the Symbols staying at the exterior of the Sacraments but as for the Believer he understands the Excellency the Vertue and the Meaning that is to say with the Eyes of Faith when he seeth as well as the Unbeliever the matter and substance of the Symbols with the Eyes of Nature and of the Body Câ—rysost Hom. 7. in 1 ad Cor. p. 378. The Unbeliever saith he hearing mention made of Baptism thinks that it is but Water but as for me I do not only look upon what is seen I consider also the cleansing of the Soul which is done by the Holy Ghost he thinks that my Body only is washed and I do believe my Soul is also purified and sanctified for I do not judge by the bodily Eyes of what is seen but by those of the Understanding I hear the Body of Christ named I conceive it after one manner and the Unbeliever understands it after another Which he illustrates by this excellent Comparison An illiterate Person saith he receiving a Letter takes it only for Paper and Ink but a Person that understands Letters finds quite another thing he hears a Voice and speaks with a Person absent and will in his time say what he lists and will make himself to be understood by means of Letters It is the same with the Mysteries for Unbelievers understand nothing of what they hear spoken
and consider with himself with what Doctrine they best agree either with that which teacheth that what is therein seen and touched are meer Accidents or with that which holds that they are true Substances of Bread and Wine CHAP. VI. Other Proofs of the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers with the Inferences made by Protestants ALthough we have hitherto represented several Things which have been believed and practised in the Country of Ecclesiastical Antiquity yet it is not all which I observed during the Time of my residing in that Country I will then continue the History of my Travels not to conceal any Thing from the Publick of the Laws and Customs of that spacious Empire upon the Point which we have undertaken to examine For it would not be just after having had Communication of their Records and Registers wherein all that relates unto this august Sacrament is faithfully contained that I should omit any Thing that I have there found not to fail then of my Duty nor the fidelity due to the Quality which I have taken I say that besides the Things which I have already observed I find that about two hundred Years after the first Beginning of this great Empire those which had the Direction and Government of it applied their Thoughts very much in giving divers mystical Significations unto the holy Sacrament and that those which followed them applied themselves thereunto also for they thought that the Bread of the Eucharist being a Body composed of several Grains and the Wine a Liquor pressed from several Grapes they very well represented the Body of the Church composed of several Believers united into one Society It is the Doctrine of Theophilus of Antioch of St. Cyprian St. Chrysostom St. Austin St. Isidor of Sevil of Bede Wallafridus Strabo of Raban and others but he Testimony of the blessed Martyr St. Cyprian shall suffice in a Thing which is not contested Cyprian â—p 76. When saith he the Lord called his Body Bread which is made of several Grains of Wheat he would shew the faithful People which he carried in himself in as much as it is but one People and when he called his Blood Wine made of several Grapes pressed together and made one he also signified this faithful People composed of several Persons united into one Body The Foundation of this mystical Signification can be nothing else if the Protestant be believed but the Nature and the Substance of these two Symbols unto which the holy Fathers have given this Signification after the Consecration which hath rendred them fit for this Use In fine going to represent the Unity of Believers which are sundry Persons really subsisting but united into one Body by the Bonds of the same Spirit I do not see saith he but that the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament whereof the one is moulded of sundry Grains the other prest from several Grapes may be proper to represent this Unity at least that the Substance of several Grains of Wheat and of several Grapes may continue moulded and mixt together See there after what manner he understands this constant Doctrine of the holy Fathers Moreover he desires to be suffered to add that what confirms him in this Opinion is That if any other Sense be given unto this Doctrine of the ancient Fathers this Inconvenience will scarce be avoided to wit that one shall be forced to say of the true and proper Body of Jesus Christ This Bread composed of sundry Grains represents unto us the Church composed of sundry Believers which Thing truly Christian Ears would scarce be able to endure Besides we have observed in the first Chapter of the first Part that the ancient Church was wont to mingle Water with the Wine in the Celebration of the Sacrament and that in the beginning of the third Century there was a Mystery sought for in this Mixture The Reader may please to view the Place where even those of the holy Fathers are named which have so spoken it being needless here to repeat what hath been there mentioned but only to make some few Reflections which we were not there permitted to do and which nevertheless may serve very much to clear up the Intention of these holy Doctors The first is That they have given two several Significations unto the Water and the Wine saying That the Water represents the faithful People and the Wine the Blood of Jesus Christ For I cannot conceive that these two Usages could take place if both these Things did not remain distinct the one from the other because each of them hath a several Object to represent so that the one of them cannot represent the Object which the other doth signifie Secondly they have established betwixt the Wine and the Blood of Jesus Christ the same Relation which they have established betwixt the Water and the faithful People it not being to be seen that they have given any more Vertue unto the Wine to signifie the Blood of the Son of God than they have given to the Water to represent the Christian People and without giving notice that the Wine is the Blood of Jesus Christ in a more particular manner than the Water is the faithful People On the contrary they have spoken so equally of them both in regard of the two Significations which they attributed unto them that it is impossible to discover the least difference In fine the holy Fathers declare That the Wine and Water mingled together signifie the Union of Jesus Christ and Believers which they could not discern but in the Thoughts of the Union of these two Elements I speak of the Water and Wine which subsisted firm and indissoble and the Firmness of the Union of these two Things could not subsist if their Nature and the Truth of their Being did not subsist also And to say the Truth as far as I can judge these good Doctors have not made this Signification which they gave to the Wine and Water to depend barely upon their mingling only but principally of the Subsistance of this Mixture which was absolutely necessary that it might represent the Truth and Solidity of the spiritual Union of Jesus Christ and his People There is an admirable fine Passage of St. Cyprian upon this Subject but which I shall dispense my self from inserting here because 't is to be seen at large in the Place above-mention'd Whilst I shall join unto this mystical Signification two others which we have touched in the same Place in the first Part. By the one the Wine and Water mingled in the consecrated Cup were to represent the Water and Blood which run down the Side of our Lord Jesus at the time of his Passion and by the other the Union of the Eternal Word with the Humanity But all these mystical Significations are destroyed if the Nature and Substance of Things are abolished in the which they had their only Foundation After this manner the Protestant doth reason upon these Observations The Hereticks
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
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
condemns by one of its Canons which is the 18th in the Code of Canons of the Church of Africa as we already observed in our first Part the Custom of putting the Eucharist in the Mouth of the Dead Cod. can Eccles Afric Justel c. 18. It hath been resolved saith the Council that the Eucharist should not be given unto the Bodies of the Dead for it is written Take and eat Now dead Bodies can neither take nor eat A Defence which the Council of the East was obliged to renew in the year 691. but in the same Terms of that of Carthage it is something in condemning this Abuse But certainly say some if the Church of the Vth and VIIth Century believed that it is the real Body of the Son of God it was too slightly condemned This Profanation deserved a ruder Censure and deserved a much stricter Prohibition The third Council of Braga in Gallicia assembled Anno 675. censured those which offered Milk instead of Wine for the holy Sacrament and see here the Terms that it useth Council Bracar 3. c. 2 â— 4. Council p. 833. Let them forbear then to offer Milk at the Sacrifice because the manifest and clear Example of the Truth of the Gospel appears plainly to our Eyes which admits not of offering any thing but Bread and Wine The Protestants think that the Censure of the Council had been better applied if it had been represented unto those which dared to offer Milk instead of Wine that it was not Milk but Wine which was to be converted into the proper Substance of the Blood of Jesus Christ and that it is very likely that if the Fathers had believed this substantial Conversion they would not have failed to have done so because the Occasion invited them thereunto The XVIth Council of Toledo assembled the Year of our Lord 693. do censure another Abuse which is That some Priests bethought themselves of offering for the Communion little Crusts of Bread which they raised round from Loaves intended for their own use instead of offering of whole Loaves The Council-reproves this Liberty whereunto it opposeth the Example of Jesus Christ who took an intire Loaf but it said not unto those People that they were to blame slightly to offer bits of Bread without considering that the Bread of the Eucharist is changed into the Substance of the Body of Jesus Christ which nevertheless might have been of great weight unto them On the contrary it commands to offer midling Loaves fearing if they were too big the over-plus which remained after the Communion might by its Grossness and Quantity incommode the Stomach of them which eat it which as 't is supposed drew them quite from any Thought of Reality and conducted them unto the Consideration of the Sacrament In fine when Ratherius Bishop of Verona prohibits at the End of the Xth Century committing the Eucharist unto Lay-persons to be carried unto sick Folks he doth not shew in censuring this Abuse that there is any Crime in putting into prophane Hands the real Body of our Saviour there being none but the Persons which he hath consecrated unto his own Service which ought to enjoy this Priviledge which in all probability he would not have failed to do had he been thoroughly perswaded of the Truth of the real Presence he only commands T. 2. Spicil Dacher p. 261. That none presume to give the Eucharist unto any Lay-man or Woman to be carried unto the Sick But 't is not yet time to end these Proofs the Instructions which the Holy Fathers gave their Neophytes and new Baptised will very likely afford us others For although they never spake against their Judgment not even in their Homilies and popular Sermons where according to the Circumstance of the Times they used some Restriction of not giving the Eucharist the Name of Bread and Wine thinking there might be present some Catechumeny and Persons not initiated which might hear them and in whom the Names of Bread and Wine might have created too low and mean Thoughts of the Excellency of our Mysteries Nevertheless because it is supposed that they have expressed themselves clearer in instructing these young Plants but newly grafted into the mystical Stock of the Church by holy Baptism let us see what Succour we can draw from these sorts of Catechisms wherein to give their Neophytes a great Idea of the Sacrament they forbear not using strong and elevated Expressions but yet in such a manner as they plainly discover in what Way they are to be understood For instance Cyril Hierosol Mystag 5. p. 244 246. St. Cyril of Jerusalem thus speaketh unto his Catechumeny newly Baptised In coming to the Sacrament come not with Hands stretched out nor with the Fingers open but laying your right Hand in the left as being to receive the King and hallowing the Palm of the Hand receive the Body of Jesus Christ in saying Amen And having communicated of the Body of Christ draw near unto the Cup of his Blood not in stretching out the Hands but in bowing by an Act which shews a kind of Adoration or Veneration and of Worship saying Amen sanctifie your selves in receiving the Blood of Christ. Se here a fair and great Idea of the Sacrament but that his Neophyte should carry his Thoughts no farther than he ought he explains unto him in the same place that he speaks of a Body of Jesus Christ of which he may lose some Part of which a Crumb may fall to the Ground and of a Blood whereof a Moisture and Humidity rests upon the Lips and wherewith one may wet the the Eyes Ibid. the Face and other Organs of the Body Having then saith he with assurance sanctified your Eyes by the touch of the sacred Body receive it taking heed thou lose none of it for what you lose of it is as if you should lose one of your Members Tell me if any one should give you Lingots of Gold would you not keep them with all manner of Diligence taking care not to lose any Part of them and not to suffer Damage And should you not take care that there fall not any Crumb of this which is more precious than Gold and than Pearls And afterwards passing to the consideration of the Blood whereof he exhorted him to participate with profound Respect he teacheth him of what Blood he should understand it when he adds Ibid. And as the Moisture and Humidity is yet upon the Lips touching with your Hand the Eyes the Face and other Organs of the Senses sanctifie them and having attended the Prayers give Thanks unto God for that he hath rendred you worthy to participate of these great Mysteries Hitherto our Neophyte hath not been ill instructed but let us again hear how he spake unto him in the foregoing Catechism Id. Catech. Myst 4. p. 237. Ibid. Jesus Christ affirming and saying of the Bread This is my Body who is it that can yet make any doubt of
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
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
c. 31. in Exod cap. 22. That the Bread and Wine is the undoubted Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord Id. in Sentent l. 1. c. 16. Vide lib. 1. Offic cap. 37. And that it is this Sacrament which Believers offer and which they call an Oblation of Bread and Wine Agreeable unto this Doctrine he speaks elsewhere of the Flesh of Jesus Christ as of the Nourishment of Saints which preserves from Eternal Death and which maketh those that eat it to live Spiritually Id. in lib. 2. Reg. ca. 3. p. 49. and he saith That Jesus Christ ascending into Heaven is gone in regard of his Body but is present according to his Majesty Concil Hispal 2. Concil Eracar t. 4. p. 832. as he said Behold I am with you even to the end of the World And he borrows these words from St. Austin That our Saviour gave unto his Disciples the Figure of his Body and Blood The second Council of Sevil assembled Anno 619. forbids Priests to make the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ in presence of the Bishop The Council of Braga Anno 675. testifies That Jesus Christ gave the Bread apart and the Wine apart He calls that which our Lord gave his Disciples bread And the 16th of Tolledo Assembled Anno 693. Concil Tollet 16. to 5. Concil p. 430. cap. 6. Eligius Noveom in vita ejus l. 2. cap. 15. p. 216. t. 5. Spicil Dacher Ib. p. 217. declares two several times That Jesus Christ having taken a whole Loaf distributed it by parcels unto his Apostles It speaks also of what remains after the Communion as of that whereof too great a quantity may burden the Stomach of him that Eats it The true St. Eloy Bishop of Noyon gave this Precept unto those whom he instructed Let him that is Sick confide wholly in the Mercy of God and receive with Faith and Devotion the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ And forbidding them to Sing the Songs of Pagan he alledges for a reason of this Defence That it is not fit to hear Diabolical Songs proceed out of a Christian Mouth wherein enters the Sacrament of Jesus Christ He retains as may be seen the Ancient Expressions and Doctrine According to which St. Ouen Archbishop of Roan his intimate Friend and Author of his Life which he wrote at large doth observe that as he drew near his Death he said That he would be no longer absent from Jesus Christ Ibid. l. 2. c. 32. p. 264. It was thus the true St. Eloy spake and in so speaking he rejects as false and forged some Homilies that have been published in his name especially the 8th and the 15th the former of these being only a Rapsody composed by several Authors some of which are of the 8th and 9th Centuries whereas St. Eloy died towards the end of the 7th Century Neither doth he that wrote his Life make any mention of these pretended Homilies Thus several do reason CHAP. XII Wherein is examined what passed in the Eighth Century AS Anastatius a Frier of Mount Sinai had rejected the name of Sign or Figure not allowing to say that the Sacrament is only the Sign of the Body of Jesus Christ words which might receive a good Construction as hath been declared in the precedent Chapter so John Damascen surnamed Mansur another Frier of the East extraordinarily given to the worshiping of Images and therefore Anathematized by 338 Bishops Anno 754. bethought himself in the Eighth Century of condemning the terms of Image of Type and Figure but because he stopped not at Expressions but proceeded to the Doctrine it is requisite to see if he therein made any Alteration and if his Innovation favoured the Belief of the Latin Church See here then what he saith Damasc de Fide Orthod l. 4. c. 14. The Bread offered the Wine and the Water are supernaturally changed by the Invocation and coming of the Holy Ghost into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and are not two but one and the same thing Ibid. And a little after The Bread and Wine are not the Type or the Figure of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ Ah God forbid but the Body it self of our Lord Deified our Lord himself saying Ibid. This is not the Figure of my Body but my Body not the Figure of my Blood but my Blood And again If some have called the Bread and Wine Figures or Signs of the Body and Blood as St. Basil they spake not after Consecration but they called them so before the Oblation was consecrated As there are two things in these words of Damascen the one regarding the Terms the other the Doctrine we are obliged to examine both to give the Reader all the Information he may expect of us in this matter I will begin with the Doctrine to see if it agreeth with that of the Latin Church If Damascen said that the substance of the Symbols were quite destroyed and that if passed into the substance it self of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ so that there remained no part of the Bread and Wine but the bare Accidents only which subsisted miraculously without their Subject it must be granted that he was of the same Opinion that Roman Catholicks are of at this time and it were very unjust to deny it But if on the other hand he so plainly expressed himself that it cannot be doubted but he believed that the substance of the Symbols remained whatever Change it was that intervened by Consecration it must of necessity be concluded that his Belief upon this Point was not the Belief of the Latin Church The better to succeed in this Enquiry it must be noted that he lays this down for a certain Maxim Id. Dialect c. 1. That the Accident cannot subsist in it self but hath its Being in another Subject Ibid. that the Soul is a Substance and Wisdom an Accident that the Soul being taken away Wisdom also perisheth Ibid. c. 28. That which subsisteth not of it self but hath its Existence in another Id. de Fide Orthod l. 1. c. 17. is an Accident He affirms again That nothing but the Divinity is infinite that Bodies have beginning and ending and a bodily place Ibid. c. 4. and that they may be held that what is invisible and impassible is not a Body All which things do not well accord with the Real Presence Ibid. no more than his restraining the Invisible Presence whereby our Saviour is with us unto the Presence of his Divinity Moreover he affirms positively that the substance of Bread remains and that it nourisheth our Body by turning into our substance Id. l. 4. c. 14. The Shew-bread saith he did represent this Bread and it is the pure and unbloody Sacrifice which our Lord foretold by the Prophet which should be offered unto him throughout the whole World to wit the Body and Blood
make the Bread is meant the Union of the whole Church which is baked into one body by the fire of the Holy Ghost to the end the Members should be united unto their Head c. And by the Wine the Blood of the Passion of our Lord is exhibited and so when in the Sacraments the Water is mingled with the Flower and the Wine the faithful People is incorporated and joyned unto Jesus Christ He follows the steps of St. Cyprian from whence he borrowed the expression And elsewhere he disputeth against Christ's Presence upon Earth Id. in Joan. l. 5. c. 28. He was saith he to continue but a little time corporally with his Church but as for the Poor they were to remain always so that we might always give unto them Ibid. l. 6. c. 34 35. And in the same Treatise If I depart by the absence of my Body I will come by the presence of my Divinity whereby I will be with you unto the end of the World And again in the sense of venerable Bede Ibid. c. 37. It is expedient that I should remove from before your eyes the form of a Servant to the end that the love of the Divinity might sink deeper into your hearts It is necessary I should carry into Heaven this Form which is known unto you to the end you should the more ardently desire to be in that place And according to what St. Austin said in explaining the 6th Chapter of St. John Whosoever eateth my flesh Ibid. l. 3. c. 15. and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him This eating saith he his Flesh and drinking his Blood is to dwell in Jesus Christ and to have Jesus Christ dwelling in us And so he that dwelleth not in Jesus Christ and in whom Jesus Christ dwelleth not for certain eateth not spiritually the Flesh although he visibly and carnally doth eat the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ but rather he eateth and drinketh unto his Condemnation the Sacrament of so great a thing because being impure he presumed to come to the Sacraments of Jesus Christ which none receive worthily but those that are holy After all this let it be judged which side Alcuin was of Although the Book called the Roman Order is not of any certain date and that the Learned do not agree at what time it first appeared Nevertheless because there be some that judge that it was written about the time that the Books of Images were composed under the name of Charlemain but they are deceived Ord. Rom. de Offic. Miss t. 10 Bibl. Pat. ed. 4. p. 5. the Author being much younger We will make no difficulty of joyning it unto what we have alledged of those Books and of the Works of Alcuin The Sub-Deacons saith he having seen the Chalice wherein is the Blood of our Lord covered with a Linnen Cloth and having heard Deliver us from Evil depart and prepare the Cups and clean Cloaths wherein they receive the Body of the Lord fearing it should fall to the ground and be turned to dust Let it be imagined if that could befall the true Body of Jesus Christ And again Ibid. in the same place The Bishop breaketh the Oblation that is to say the Bread on the right side and leaves the piece he broke upon the Altar He speaks of a Subject that may be broken into bits and pieces Ibid p. 6. And in the following Page The Fraction or as 't is read in the Margin the Consecration being done the youngest of the Deacons taking the pattern from the Sub-Deacon carries it unto the place where the Bishop is to the end he may communicate and having communicated he delivers unto the Arch-Deacon the holy Host which he had bit See again if the Flesh of Jesus Christ could be bit and if it could be said of the real Blood of Jesus Christ what he observes in the same place Ibid. That it is made in the Cup where there is put a portion of the holy Host a mixture of the Body and Blood of our Lord. Ibid. p. 10. And in the same Treatise That the Deacon saith he holding the Cup and the Quill doth stand before the Bishop until he hath taken what he thinks fit of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ I cannot tell if one may take more or less of the true Body of Jesus Christ and whether it depends on the free Will of men to take as they list and as much as they please In fine Ibid. he will have the Deacon take care with much precaution that there be nothing left remaining in the Cup and Plate of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ Is it to to be conceived say the Protestants that any drop of the Blood of our Saviour could remain in the Cup or any part of his glorified Body in the Paten In the Roman Order of those times which this Author afterward relates there is to be read what we have alledged of the Cannon of the Mass in the 8th Chapter of the first Part. Whence it is inferred that the Oblation presented unto God was after Consecration an Oblation of Bread and Wine according to the Inference which was made at the end of the 6th Chapter of this Second Part which 't is not needful to repeat again in this place CHAP. XIII Containing the History of the IX Century WHatever change hapned unto the Ancient Expressions relating to the point of the Sacrament nevertheless the Belief of the Church received no alteration during the eight first Centuries the Doctrine still continued sound as I think hath been fully justified hitherto but at last in the IX Century Paschas Radbert a Friar of Corby near Amiens yet bolder than Anastatius of Mount Sina who contented himself in giving an assault unto the ancient manner of Expressions about the year 818. attacked the Doctrine it self the Providence of God permitting that the Innovations which arose in the terms and in the belief took beginning by two Friars which being both of them inclosed in their Cloisters departed in their meditations the one from the Expressions the other from the Belief of their Ancestors I said that Paschas began to write of this matter in the year 818. because it was in that year he composed his Treatise of the Body and Blood of the Lord as may be collected from the Preface to his Scholar Placidus where speaking unto Adelard his Abbot under the name of one Arsenius an old Hermit he sufficiently shews that he wrote in the year that Bernard King of Italy and some others had their eyes put out for conspiring against Lewis the Debonaire and that some Bishops that were of the same Combination were banish'd and depos'd which hapned exactly in the year 818. the Rebellion having begun in the year 817. as the Historians of those times inform us I will not mention that Paschas appears sometimes to be disturbed at what
and unto Jonas Bishop of Orleans when he sent them to Rome unto Pope Eugenius upon the Subject of the Images he thus begins Tom. 2. Conc. Gall. p. 461. The Bishops Halitgarius and Amalarius are come unto me c. Let us conclude then from what hath been said that Amalarius was in his time in Esteem and great Consideration in Church and State Amalar. de Offic Eccles l. 1. c. 1. And now let us examine what he said of the Sacrament directly or indirectly After saith he that our Saviour had appeared according to his own pleasure unto his Disciples whom he would have to be Witnesses of his Resurrection he ascended up into Heaven and became invisible unto Men as he himself testifies I came forth from the Father and came into the World and now I leave the World and go unto the Father Which is plainly to say I made my self visible unto men returning unto my Father I shall be invisible Although we do not see his bodily presence yet we daily salute him in adoring of him Id. de Ordine Antiphon c. 9. And elswhere We cannot think of the absence of Jesus Christ without sadness But what he is going to tell us is yet more plain and positive Id. de Offic. l. 3. c. 29. because he testifies that Bread and Wine is consecrated and made the Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ We saith he call Institution the Tradition which our Saviour left us when he made the Sacrament of his Body and Blood And to the end it should be known what he meant by the word Sacrament he gives us this Definition of it Sacrament that is a holy Sign Id. l. 1. c. 15. He saith moreover that the Sacrament is in the stead of Jesus Christ The Priest bows and recommends unto God the Father that which was offered in the place of Jesus Christ Id. l. 3. c. 23. He distinguisheth what was sacrificed from Jesus Christ himself and considers what is offered and Jesus Christ as two different Subjects whereof the one serves us instead of the other Id. l. 3. c. 25. for it cannot be conceived that a person or a thing can be instead of it self He yet goes farther and declares expresly that that which is offered instead of Jesus Christ is Bread and Wine Id. de Offic. prafat sâ—cunda and that this Bread and Wine are the Sacraments of his Body and Blood The things saith he which are done in the Celebration of Mass are done in the Sacrament that is to say in representing the Passion of our Saviour as himself commanded us saying As often as ye do this ye do it in remembrance of me Therefore the Priest which sacrificeth the Bread the Wine and Water doth it as a Sacrament of Jesus Christ that is in the place of Jesus Christ and represents him the Bread the Wine and the Water in the Sacrament of the Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ The Sacraments should have some resemblance of the things whereof they be Sacraments Let the Priest then be like Jesus Christ as the Bread and the Liquor is like the Body of Jesus Christ These words are easie to be understood and need no Commentary because every body may perceive without help of others that Amalarius considers the Act of the Sacrament as a mysterious Representation where the Priest celebrating is in the place of Jesus Christ the Bread Wine and Water instead of his Body and Blood and will have a Relation of Resemblance to be betwixt these things and those whereof they be Sacraments which according to some is plainly contrary unto the Identity taught by Paschas Id. de Offic. l. 3. c. 26. The Oblation saith he again and the Cup do signifie the Body of our Saviour When Jesus Christ said This is the Cup of my Blood he signified his Blood which Blood was in the Body as the Wine is in the Cup. And in another place Id. l. 4. c. 47. Id. l. 3. c. 25. Id. l. 3. c. 24. Ibid. c. 34. Ibid. c. 31. Ibid. c. 35. The Bread set forth upon the Altar signifies the Body of our Lord upon the Cross the Wine and Water in the Cup do represent the Sacraments which flowed out of our Saviours side upon the Cross He calls the Eucharist the Sacrament of Bread and Wine and saith That Jesus Christ in the Bread recommended his Body and his Blood in the Cup. And with Bede that the Apostle recommends the Unity of the Church in the Sacrament of Bread He observes the Bread is put into the Wine Ibid. l. 1. c. 15. And in the passage which gave occasion of the Censure of Paschas and of Florus he speaks of what is received in Communicating as of a thing broken into several peices In fine he affirms that Jesus Christ did drink Wine in his Sacrament Our Saviour said I will no more drink of this Fruit of the Vine until I drink it new with you which the Lesson read the second Sunday after the Resurrection of our Lord sheweth to have been done Peter saying Unto us who eat and drank with him after he was risen from the dead He will have it that this fruit of the Vine which our Saviour drank when he celebrated his Sacrament was of the same nature with that which he drank with his Apostles after his Resurrection But besides all these Testimonies which are commonly alledged out of the Writings of Amalarius we have others for which we are beholden unto Dom Luke d'Achery a Benedictine Friar Rantgarius Bishop of Noyon demanded of him how he understood these words of the Institution of the Sacrament This is the Cup of my Blood of the New and Eternal Testament with this Addition which is in the Canon of the Mass The Mystery of Faith Amalarius answers him by Letter wherein after having spoken unto him of the Paschal Cup he passeth unto the Sacramental and having alledged what St. Luke saith Amalar. ad Rantgar t. 7. Spicile p. 166. he adds This Cup is in figure of my Body wherein is the Blood which shall flow out of my side to fulfil the old Law and after it is shed it shall be the New Covenant He sheweth that the Cup is the Figure of the Body of Jesus Christ because as the Wine of the Sacrament was contained in his Body not to be poured out until his death that he shed it on the Cross for the Salvation of Men and in the same Letter he makes the eating the Flesh of Christ to consist in the Participation of his Death The same Cup saith he is called the Mystery of Faith Ibid. because he that believes that he was redeemed by this blood and that doth imitate his passion is profited thereby unto Salvation and Eternal Life which made our Saviour himself to say If you eat not the Flesh of the Son of Man nor drink his Blood you have no life in
At Troys is solemnized the memory of St. Prudens Bishop and Confessor this Saint was born in Spain endowed with Divine Graces and Illustrious by his Zeal for Religion and his knowledge of the Holy Scriptures having been driven out of Spain by the Saracens and being come into France he drew the Admiration and Love of all men therefore after the Death of Adelbert Bishop of Troys whither he had retired himself and had given proofs of his Vertue and Merit he was Elected and appointed the 37th Bishop of that Church by the common consent of the Clergy and People being so advanced unto the Episcopal Dignity he shined like a Light set in a Candlestick not unto this Church alone but also throughout all France by the example of a most holy Life and by the splendour of Divine Wisdom he was the Ornament and Delight of the Bishops of his time a Defender of the Purity of the Faith and an Oracle of Ecclesiastical Knowledge As for the Deacon Florus he hath transmitted unto us himself evidences of his belief in his Explication of the Mass at least if that be the work of this Florus Deacon of the Church of Lyons who in this Explication is styâ—â—â— Master Florus for Trithemius attributes this little Treatise whereof we speak unto one Florus a Benedictine Friar in the Abby of Trom in the Country of Liege and others make its Author to be the Deacon Florus that wrote against Amalarius and against John Scot upon the Subject of Predestination This latter Opinion seems the most likely and the reason which makes me not to doubt of it is that I observe the Author of this Interpretation of the Mass hath copied ten lines verbatim out of the Book which Agobard Bishop of Lyons under Lewis the Debonair Son of Charles the Bald wrote against Amalarius Vid. Flor. Bibl. Patr. t. 6. edit ult p. 171. unde Eccles c. Et Agobard contr Amalar. c. 13. p. 115. Florus in Exposit Missae Bibl. Patr. t. 6. p. 170. Now there 's much more probability to say that it was written by a Deacon of the same Church then by a Monk of the Country of Liege It being then evident after this remark if I mistake not that this little Treatise is to be attributed unto the Deacon Florus Let us hear what he hath designed to inform us The Oblation saith he although taken from the simple fruits of the Earth is made unto Believers the Body and Blood of the only Son of God by the ineffable virtue of Divine Benediction He seems to make a difference betwixt the Wicked and the Good and saith the Sacrament is made unto the latter the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ but unto the former it is nothing less because they have not Faith a Declaration which as the Protestants say agrees not with the Doctrine of the Real Presence by which the Eucharist is made the Body of Jesus Christ not only unto the Good but unto the Wicked also Florus explains himself very clearly Ibid. when he adds This Body and this Blood is not gather'd in the Ears of Corn and in the Grapes Nature gives it not unto us but it is Consecration that maketh it unto us mystically Jesus Christ is eaten when the Creature of Bread and Wine pass into the the Sacrament of his Flesh and Blood by the ineffable Sanctification of the Holy Ghost he is eaten by parcels in the Sacrament and he remains entire in Heaven and entire in your heart He would say that the Eucharist is naturally Bread and Wine that Consecration makes it the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ which is eaten in Morsels under the Sign which represents him but as to himself he is whole and entire in Heaven as he is whole and entire in the heart of every Believer in quality of a quickning and saving Object embraced by Faith so to find Life and Salvation in partaking of him because it is he that hath merited Salvation for us by his Death and purchased Life for us by his Sufferings And as the Eucharist is the Memorial of this Death and these Sufferings Florus makes no difficulty to say that it is made unto Believers the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ because in participating of this Divine Mystery Faith looks unto him as the only Object of its Contemplation Manducation and Participation Thus much these other words of the same Author import Ibid. p. 171. All that is done in the Oblation of the Body and Blood of our Lord is mystical we see one thing and we understand another what is seen is corporal what is understood hath a spiritual Fruit. Moreover he saith plainly that what our Saviour commanded his Disciples to take and eat was Bread He said unto them of the Bread Take and eat ye all of this Ibid. And speaking of the Cup The Wine said he was the Mystery of our Redemption And he proves it by these words I will no more drink of this Fruit of the Vine In fine expounding these last words of the Mass Whereby O Lord Ibid. thou always createst for us all these good things c. which is a kind of Thanksgiving which in the Latin Liturgy doth follow the Consecration he sufficiently gives to understand that he believed not that the Bread and Wine were changed into the substance of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ seeing he speaks of them as of things which God had created from the beginning of the World which he maketh still every year by Propagation and by Reparation which he sanctifieth and fills with his Grace and Heavenly Blessing which himself interprets to be of Corn and of Wine Thus it is that many do explain the meaning of this Author About the same time that the Deacon Florus wrote at Lyons Christian Druthmar Priest and Friar of Corby and Companion or Ratramn in the same Monastery composed his Commentary upon St. Matthew's Gospel and we should forthwith see what he wrote of the Eucharist if Sixtus Senensis did not stop us a little moment This famous Library-keeper doth accuse Protestants of having corrupted the Text of Druthmar in Reading in the Sacrament whereas he pretends upon the Credit of the Copy of a Manuscript to be seen in the Library of the Franciscans at Lyons that it should be read Subsisting really in the Sacrament The first thing we should do then is to consider the nature of this Accusation for the faith of Sixtus is look'd upon by many as the faith of a Man that approves very well of Expurgatory Indexes and one that hath laid two other Accusations unto the same Protestants Charge which are believed to be false Bibl. Sanct. in Ep. ad Pium V. Id. l. 6. Annot. 72. One is to have corrupted and altered a passage of Ferus a Franciscan Friar concerning the Temporal Power of the Pope although Ferus his Commentary upon St. Matthew wherein the passage in dispute is contained was
to be guilty of some great neglect Secondly It was the custom in this Monastery not to keep any part of the Communion until the next day but they caused to be eaten at the same time all that remained which say some would not have been done if they had believed that it had been the real Body of Jesus Christ because they just before received it in Communicating which makes them easily believe that the abolishing of this Custom Ibid. l. â—â— 13. p. 58. which was not observed when the Friar Ulrick wrote did follow the change of belief Formerly saith he there was such care taken that after all had Communicated the very Priests and Priors which had brought whereof to Communicate did with a great deal of respect and caution Eat all that remained of the Eucharist without keeping any part of it until next day of which Custom nevertheless little heed is taken here at present but all is kept that remains after the Communion In the third place we therein find that the day before the Preparation that is to say on Holy Thursday Ibid. p. 58. There was so much of the Sacrament kept as needed for to Communicate them all Ibid. l. 2. c. 30 p. 140. that it was broken and distributed as they could conveniently take it And elsewhere The Cup is carefully rubbed without fearing there should remain any part of the Wine and of the Water and being Consecrated that it might be lost They believed then that the Wine and Water did still subsist after Consecration Ibid. p. 141. for the true Body of Jesus Christ cannot be lost And again The Priest divides the Host and puts part of it into the Blood of one half he Communicates himself and with the rest he Communicates the Deacon Ibid. p. 145. Many think it cannot be so spoken of the glorious Body and Blood of Jesus Christ And then again When the Priest hath broken the Host he puts part of it into the Cup according to the custom and two parts upon the Patten and he covers both with the Corporal but first of all he carefully rubs the outside of the Challice and shakes it with the same Fingers wherewith he touched it fearing lest that in performing the fraction there might not remain some part of the Body of our Lord which cannot be spoken of the real Body of the Son of God And in another place Ibid. p. 148. it is prescribed what ought to be done If it so happens that there remains ever so little of the Body of Christ which is expounded to be a very little crum and as it may be said indivisible part like to an Atom In fine treating of the Communicating sick Folks Ibid. l. 3. c. 28. it is observed That the Body of our Lord is brought from the Church that it is broken and that the Priest holds upon the Cup the portion that he should bring Now let any body judge if a part of the real Body of Christ can be separated from the whole and be carried into some other place and that after all that hath been alledged of these Ancient Customs it ought not to be concluded that this famous Congregation was not always of the belief it is at this time in the point of the Sacrament and that during the X. Century they embraced not the Opinion of Paschas This is the Inference which persons draw from these Customs But it is not yet time to have done with this Age we must first take a view of Italy and of Rome it self to be informed of Ratherius Bishop of Verona who departed this Life in the year 974. what the belief of the Church was in Italy in his time touching the Eucharist I do not intend here to write the History of this Prelate nor the Vicissitudes which happened him during his life for of a Friar that he was in the Monastery of Lobes he became Bishop of Verona from whence some time after he was expell'd and made Bishop of Liege but for three years only and then he lost this Dignity Those which desire to be particularly informed of his Adventures and of the Reputation which he had acquired by his Learning although it may be he cannot be wholly excused of inconstancy in his conduct may read the Preface of the Second Tome of the Collection of Dom Luke d'Achery from whom we take what shall be alledged I will not insist upon his speaking Ratherius Veron Serm. 2 de Pasch p. 314 315. t. 2. Spicil Serm. 3. p. 317. alibi Id. Serm. 1. de quadrag p. 282 of giving the holy Bread of presenting the morsel of receiving the holy things and the gift of so great a Sacrament although these expressions are not much after the practise of the present Latin Church no more than when he saith That he which observeth the Fast of Holy Thursday suppeth with our Saviour that is to say that he receives the Sacraments of his Body and Blood which were instituted on that day I will insist upon one part of his works wherein he plainly sheweth as is pretended that the Doctrine of the real Presence was not yet received in his time in the Church that is to say after his promotion unto the Diocess of Verona whereof he had been twice dispossessed for he wrote what we are about to alledge whilst he was Bishop This Ratherius having cited a passage of Zeno of Verona which restrains the eating of the Flesh of Christ unto believers only Id. de contempt canon part â— p. 181. as hath been shewed he adds As to the Corporal Substance which the Communicant doth receive seeing that it is I that do now state the question I must therefore answer and I thereunto willingly agree for because unto him that receiveth worthily it is true Flesh although it is seen that the Bread is the same it was before and also true Blood although the Wine is seen to be what it was I confess I cannot think nor say what it is unto him which receiveth unworthily that is to say unto him which dwelleth not in God By the Doctrine of the real Presence what is received at the Holy Table is the real Body of Jesus Christ unto the good and to the wicked there is no examining if the proper Body of the Son of God be received worthily or unworthily they only say that if this Doctrine had been in vogue in Ratherius his time he would not have been to seek to know what it was the wicked did receive in the Communion because he could not but have known that it is the real Body of Jesus Christ nevertheless he declares positively that he is throughly persuaded that the Corporal substance which is received in the Sacrament is unto Believers the true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and truly with great reason because then the Sacrament is accompanied with all the Vertue and Efficacy of this holy Flesh and of this precious
that on the contrary it serves to justifie them and to make the reproaches which they have been charged with to pass for malicious slanders I will not here insist upon their taxing the same Albigensis and Waldensis of denying Marriage because besides their positive Declaration on this matter their very Enemies confess that they do even condemn the abuse and intemperance of Marriage so it is that Reynerus their persecutor speaks who had often assisted at their Examinations Cap. 5. They condemn Marriage saith he in saying that married persons sin mortally if they marry without hopes of begetting Children Coussard also makes this remark They say that Marriage is sworn Adultery Coussard fol. 60. if it be not accompanied with Continency that is to say if the bounds of reasonable moderation and natural usodesty be not observed Wherefore then may it be asked were the Albegensis and Waldensis accused by some of being Manicheans for what appearance is there that they should have been accused of this cursed Heresie if they had been no way guilty of it Unto this the Protestants which undertake to defend their Innocency will not fail to answer that it happened unto them as it did unto the primitive Christians who were charged with grievous crimes and unheard of wickednesses although the World was never blessed with more pure and innocent Souls The thing appears sufficiently by the testimonies of their very Enemies who were constrained to confess they were neither Manicheans nor Arians but only Adversaries of the Doctrine and Worship of the Latins and so their Innocency it self is sufficiently vindicated if it were so that we could not discover the motive of these Accusations Nevertheless it is very probable they were induced to lay these Accusations unto their charge because there was in their time in France and elsewhere in the West great numbers of Manicheans Catharians Arians and other Hereticks so that inhabiting many times in the same places some through ignorance as the common people and others through Malice as the Doctors made no difficulty of charging them with the Impieties of these Hereticks who lived at the same time and in the same places And it was so much the easier to make the people believe it in seeing these Hereticks to be opposite unto the Latin Church as well as the Albigensis and Waldensis although by very different motives that they easily thought they had been all united together against her and by consequence of the same Belief and of the same Opinion It is true that the same Authors which wrote against the Albigensis and the Waldensis whom we have already mentioned wrote also against the Catharians Manicheans Arians and other Hereticks which sheweth that there were considerable numbers of them at the time that they wrote against the Waldensis And as for the Catharians and Manicheans in particular we cannot doubt but that Italy France and Germany was infected with them Ad An. 10 22. after what several Historians have written Nicholas Vignier reports in his Ecclesiastical History the Testimony of a certain Author who writes that these Catharians or Manicheans had passed from Bulgaria and Slavonia into Italy and saith that they were very numerous in Lombardy from whence they passed afterwards into France Wherefore about the Year 1017. some of them were put to death at Orleans in the presence of King Robert and of Constance his Wife after Judgment being given by the Prelates assembled in that City for retrieving these miserable Creatures from their impieties but it was in vain for they therein persisted to the last gasp excepting one of them who was a Clergy-man of Orleans and a Nun which acknowledged their error but as for all the rest especially two Priests of the same City Stephen and Lisoius they were burnt alive which if my memory fail not is the first Execution unto death practised against Hereticks ever since what had been done against the Priscilianists in the days of St. Martin Bishop of Tours in the IV. Tom. 2. Spicil p. 670 671 c. Century Dom Luke d'Achery hath inserted in one of the Tomes of his Collections the Acts of this Synod of Orleans held against the Manicheans Several Historians make mention of this Execution and have observed that ten of the Prebends of the Church of Holy Cross of Orleans who seemed to have more piety than the rest were chiefly comprised in this Condemnation Tom. 2. Bibl. l'Abbe p. 180 181. Amongst others the Friar Ademar who wrote his Chronicle at that time and who besides these Manicheans at Orleans makes mention of several others which were discovered at Tholouse and he observes with other Authors that there were great numbers of them in several Countries in the West But I cannot tell but the knowledge of another Assembly convocated against the Manicheans is due unto Ademar Ibid. p. 184. for thus he speaks at the end of his Chronicle Of late Duke William assembled at Charrou a Council of Bishops and Abbots to suppress the Heresies which the Manicheans went dispersing about And Herman Contract writes upon the Year 1052. Hom. Domin 8 post Trinitat that the Emperor Henry caused several to be hang'd at Goslar And Radolphus Ardens at the end of the XI Century doth in his Sermons at Agen in Guyen vigorously pursue the Manicheans The Manicheans then to re-assume our History being in so great numbers in France in the time of the Albigensis and Waldensis these latter might through ignorance or malice be charged with the Errors of the former But having shewn what the Enemies of the Waldensis and Albigensis wrote of their Doctrine and what they themselves declared in their Confessions it will be requisite to say something of their Life and Manners If we enquire of Reynerus their Persecutor Cap. 7. he will informs us That they were to be known by their life and by their words because they were modest and civil in their manners without pride in their Apparel which was neither vile nor over-costly That to avoid lying swearing and fraud they gave not themselves much unto Merchandizing that they had no great desire of gathering much Wealth contenting themselves with things necessary that they were sober and chaste not frequenting Taverns not Dances nor other vanities of this nature that they suffered themselves not to be overcome with passion that they laboured continually and were always employed in teaching others or instructing themselves that they spoke but little and modestly that they would not suffer jesting nor sharp reflections avoiding indiscreet words censusuring lying and swearing And another Author without name which wrote against them whom the Jesuit Gretzer hath printed with Pilichdorfius testifies of their Teachers whom he calls Arch-Hereticks That they shewed them the good examlpes of Humility Liberality Chastity Sobriety of Peace Mildness and Charity Therefore others have left upon Record â—â—cob de Repiria in collâ—crand de urb â—olos Gaill de Podio â—aurent
them when they were most spoken of and which is Printed with Reynerius and Pilichdorffius observes amongst other things that they called themselves Brethren Bibl. Patr. t. 4. edit 4. p. 819. By this and other Writings saith he it is necessary to prevent the Hereticks the Waldensis c. amongst them they call the Hereticks Brethren It is then of the Waldensis in all probability that Platina Secretary unto the Popes doth speak in the life of Boniface the VIII when marking the year 1302. that is to say the second year after the Institution of the Jubilees by Boniface In Bonifacio VIII There are some that write that at that time Boniface caused to be dis-interred and burnt the Body of one Herman which was reputed at Ferrara to be a Saint 20 years before but having made a strict inquiry into his Heresie I am inclined to believe that he was of the number of the Fraticelli which Sect increased very much at that time In Clement V. And in the Life of Clement V. at Novara saith he Dulcin and Margret invented a new Heresie which allowed Men and Women to cohabit together and to satisfie their filthy lusts These were called Fraticelli Clement set about suppressing of them and speedily dispatcht thither Soldiers under the conduct of an Apostolical Legat who finding them setled in the Alps destroyed them some by the Sword some by Famine and some by Cold and other Cruelties And as for Dulcin and Margret being taken alive they were dismembred and having burnt their Bones the Ashes was flung into the Air. Decad. 2. lib. 9 ad ann 1307. Blondus saith the same with Platina Sabellius writes that some seem to make a distinction from these latter and the former but in the main speaking of those which were called Fratelli Fraterculi Fratricelli whom as he saith were spread abroad into several Cities of Italy in some whereof there was some remaining in his time that is to say Enead 9. l. 7. in the last Century He reproacheth them of Nocturnal meetings putting out of Candles unlawful lying together the cruel murder of Children begotten and born in these Criminal Copulations In a word all that was charged upon the Primitive Christians although the most innocent and pure of all mankind as hath been observed in our First Part and according unto what is said by Minutius Felix in his Octavius Whereto might be added what is written by Monsieur de Thoul in his History that the same Crimes were imputed unto the Protestants of France when they separated themselves from the Communion of the Latins I say then to return unto those which were called Fratelli that if they were Waldensis as it is most probable they were without great injustice the testimony of Sabellicus a late Author ought not to be preferred before Authors of the same Age and their Enemies who in the precedent Chapter as hath been shewed have declared very favourably of their Life and Conversations what aversion soever they had against them And as touching their Faith they fully acquitted them from all suspition of Arianism or of Manicheanism and declared that they had sound and good Opinions as to what regarded the Essence of God and all the Symbol of the Apostles Creed But let us yet see what this Anonymous Author will tell us which but now informed us Bibl. Patr. Tom 4. part 2. p. 8. 19 820. that they called one another Brethren for having observed That they preached in private unto a few persons in some Corner of a House and for the most part by Night in all likelihood to avoid persecutions he adds That they pronounced pernicious Doctrines against the truth of the Roman Church under a pretext and shew of sweet and holy Doctrines c. Therefore although they teach some truths as these That it is not lawful to Steal nor commit Adultery nor Slander nor Cheat nor Lye c. yet they instill amongst these guilded Sentences the wicked poison of Heretical Articles which have been condemned by the Holy Church of Rome they seduce the ignorant hinder Souls from Salvation and introduce infinite Evils And proceeding afterwards to the particularizing these Heretical Articles condemned by the Church of Rome Ibid. p. 820 821 825 827. they are found to be the same which are disowned by the Protestants at this day for instance The Invocation of Saints Humane Traditions Indulgences and some others as we were informed in the foregoing Chapter and by their Confessions of Faith and by the Testimonies of Writers of their times their Adversaries That they believed of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper the very same that those called Calvinists do believe of it I do not here say any thing of the Bull which Clement the V. made for the observation of the Feast of the Sacrament Instituted by Urban the IV. nor of the Institution of the Procession because I shall be obliged to speak of them when I come to treat of the Worship I will only observe that besides the Waldensis and Albigensis there was at Herbipolis about the year 1340. one Conrad Hagar who as appears by the Bull of Otho Bishop of the place as Hospinian observes confessed that during the space of 24 years Hist Sacram. l. 4. c 13. catalog testium verit l. 18. he had believed and taught that the Mass was not a Sacrifice that it was not profitable unto the Quick nor the Dead and that therefore no body ought to Celebrate it But that was nothing in regard of the noise which John Wickliff Doctor in the University of Oxford and Professor in Divinity made in England about the middle of the XIV Century The Friar Walsingham who hated him mortally for having spoken freely against those of his Order and who represents him as having many followers at Oxford and elsewhere chargeth him amongst other things of teaching In Edwardo III ad an 1377 T. 2. c. 19. 20. That the Eucharist after Consecration is not the real Body of Jesus Christ but the Figure And Thomas Waldensis He believes absolutely saith he that the Natural Bread remains in the Eucharist and that after a kind of Figurative Speech it is the Body of Jesus Christ that the Body of Jesus Christ is only in Heaven as to its nature and substance and in the Sacrament figuratively as John Baptist was said to be Elias the Rock Christ and the seven Ears of Corn seven years And Widford which undertook to refute Wickliff by order of Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury lays down for the first Article he intended to handle In sasciculo rer expetend sugiend p. 96. Apud Usser de success statu Christ Eccles c. 3. That the substance of Bread remains upon the Altar after Consecration and that it ceaseth not to be Bread And Wickliff affirmed in a Manuscript Treatise of Thomas Waldensis which was in the hands of Dr. Usher Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of Ireland That
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
hath made who is later then him Therefore I make no question but the answer of the Martyrs Fostin and Jovita made unto the Emperor Adrian as Molanus reports it in his Supplements of Ussuard's Martyrology is forged and false for after the railing Speeches which they make against the Emperor and speaking unto his person he makes them say Die Feb. 15. We will cause no Incense to be burnt to the honour of thy Gods but we offer continually Incense and Sprinkling unto God our maker We find in the Library of the Holy Fathers a prayer of St. Hypollitus touching the end of the World and Antichrist Besides the title of Martyr they also give him that of Bishop and at this time they will needs have him to be in the first place Bishop in Arabia and afterwards Bishop of Port in Italy although St. Jerom doth witness in his Treatise of Ecclesiastical Writers That he could not find of what place he was Bishop If that prayer was really of Hypollitus it may seem to intimate that the Greek Church in his time that is to say in the third Century used Perfume and Incense in its Service and Worship for speaking of the harm which Antichrist shall do at the end of the World he saith amongst other things That the Churches shall mourn and lament Bibl. Paâ—â—â— 2. Graeco Lat. because there shall be no more Oblation nor Incense nor Worship pleasing unto God Not but it may very well be said that the Author designed only to represent the Worship of Christians by terms borrowed from the service of the Law without being necessary to infer That they did really employ Incense and Perfumes in the Worship of God But if we should take what he saith in a literal sense I do not suppose there could any great stress be laid upon it And to speak the truth there are so many things in this small Treatise which are so unworthy of the true St. Hypollitus that I should be very loth to attribute them unto him St. Jerom its true reckons amongst his Works a Treatise of Antichrist but it is evident it cannot be the same which is now extant for it is entituled A Prayer of St. Hypolitus Bishop and Martyr of the End of the World of Antichrist and of the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ Moreover the same S. Jerom in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers observes That he had made a Sermon in the praise of Jesus Christ and that the Author saith in this Sermon That he repeated it in the presence of Origen Now it is most certain that in Origen's time the Greeks knew not what Perfumes and Incense meant in their Worship for Expounding these words of Levit. 24. Thou shalt put pure Incense upon each Row that is to say of the Shew-bread he speaks in such a manner as sufficiently sheweth that Christians had not then admitted the use of Incense into their Worship Hom. 13. in Levit. c. 24. tom 1. p. 106. I. Do not imagine saith he that Almighty God hath commanded nor appointed in his Law to bring him Incense from Arabia but this is the Incense which he requires Men should offer unto him and wherein he findeth a sweet smell and savour to wit Prayers proceeding from a pure heart and from a good Conscience the sweet smell whereof ascends up unto him I allow that Origen here departs a little from the literal sense in respect of the Law but his language doth clearly evidence that Incense and Perfumes were not then received into the Worship of the Eastern Christians Let us then own that this use was introduced into the Greek Church after Origen's days who departed this life towards the latter end of the third Century and by consequence the Canons which falsly bear the Apostles names have been made since that time seeing therein it is ordained to offer Perfumes for the Celebration of the Sacrament And because it appears by the prayer of the Emperor Constantine at the Assembly of the Saints or in the Church of God whose words have been already alledged that even the Eastern Christians did not use Perfume in the Celebration of their Eucharist for the greatest part of the IV. Century at least when they celebrated it at the Tombs of Martyrs I cannot tell but it ought to be granted that the fourth pretended Canon of the Apostles was made since Constantine's time who departed this life in the year of our Lord Canon Apost 4. 337. for see here what it enjoyns That nothing else should be offered at the Altar but of the first Ears of Corn Grapes Oyl for the Lights and Incense for the time of the holy Oblation And as it is the first testimony of the Greek Fathers wherein there is mention made of Perfume in the celebration of the Sacrament that of Hypollitus not being to be credited and being moreover capable of being conveniently interpreted of an Allegorical Perfume it must be granted that the Latins received the use of Perfumes later into their Worship than the Greeks seeing St. Austin doth not make any mention of it in the V. Century for I take little heed of the second Decretal of Soter wherein Women are forbidden to bring any Perfume unto the Altar because this Decretal and all them of the other Popes until Siritius are the Works of an Impostor When I say that the Latins have received the practise of Incense and Perfume later than the Greeks I conclude that these latter followed the Ordinance of the pretended Canon of the Apostles which in all appearance was not made but very forward in the IV. Century And nevertheless it is not certain that the Greek Church put this Ordinance in execution presently after it was made In fine the first true and candid passage of Antiquity after the fourth Canon of Apostles wherein there is mention made of offering Incense or as it is in the Greek good Odours Act. 3. Concil Chalced. is a Request of Ischyrion Deacon of the Church of Alexandria presented unto the Council of Chalcedon assembled Anno 451. against Dioscorus his Bishop Act. 5. t. 4. Con. cil p. 102 103. and afterwards at Constantinople under Agapet and under Menna in the Year 536. there is mention of assembling in the Church with Flambeaus and Perfumes but it is not positively affirmed that it was to celebrate the Eucharist no more than the action of the Friar Zozimus Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 7. reported by Evagrius in his Ecclesiastical History saying That after having deplored the ruin of Antioch which he had foretold he demanded a Senser and having filled the place where he was with Perfume he bowed himself to the ground to appease the wrath of God by his prayers The same Historian speaking of the Presents which Chosroes King of Persia offered unto the Martyr Sergius Ibid. l. 6. c. 20. he forgets not to speak of a Golden Senser for celebrating of the Sacrament which
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
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
confessed that they very ill instructed the people which God had committed unto their charge if the Sacrament is a Subject to be adored because all these plain and formal expressions served only to estrange the Mind from the Idea of this Soveraign Worship of Religion in making them conclude it was nothing but Bread and Wine in regard of their nature but otherwise the Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ And what confirmed them the more in this thought is that the Fathers never warned them to take their words figuratively when they say that the Eucharist is Bread and Wine but when they call it the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ they use many precautions as hath been shewed in the third Chapter saying that almost all do call the Sacrament his Body that our Saviour hath honoured the Symbols with the names of his Body and Blood that they be his Body and Blood not simply and absolutely but after some sort being so called by reason of the resemblance because they be the Sacraments the Signs the Figures the Memorials of his Person and Death and that they are in the stead of his Body and Blood What need all these Limitations and Illustrations if their design had been that the people should have adored the Eucharist for you would say that they seem to be afraid that they should take it for an Object worthy of this Worship and Homage so much care is taken by them to make them comprehend what sense they should give unto their words when they say that it is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ a precaution absolutely inconsistent with the intention and thought of inspiring unto them the Doctrine of Adoration This is the reasoning of those which admit not of the Adoration of the Sacrament But if from the consideration of the words of the holy Fathers we pass unto that of several things which were practised by the ancient Church in regard of the holy Sacrament and which hath been examined by us in the first Part we may draw Inferences by the help whereof we shall the easier discover the truth of what we do examine For example the Christians for several Ages made use of Glass Chalices in the Celebration of the Sacrament They gave the Sacrament for a long time unto young Children although very uncapable of the act of Adoration They obliged Communicants to receive it in their hands they permitted them to carry it home along with them unto their houses and to keep it as long as they pleased even to carry it along with them in their Travels without ever finding that they gave it any particular Worship whilst they kept it locked in their Chests or Closets They sent it unto the Absent and unto the Sick without any Ceremony not only by Priests and Deacons but even by Lay-persons by Men Women and young Boys Bishops for above three Centuries sent it unto each other in token of Love and Communion without any noise or giving it any homage or honour by the way and without the peoples assembling in the ways by which it passed to receive it as an Object of their Service and Adoration They also sometimes communicated without any scruple of Conscience after Dinner or Supper and so mingled the Eucharist with their other food Were not this to answer very ill unto the soveraign respect which one should have for a Divinity one adores to mingle it in the same Stomach with ordinary food and to communicate standing as they did But besides all these Customs observed in the Ancient Church see here others also observed by them and which have been considered by us in treating of the exteriour form of Celebration In some places what was left of the Eucharist after Consecration was burnt in the Fire in other places it was eaten by little Children which were sent for from School The Sacrament was employed to make Plaisters it was buried with the Dead and sometimes Ink was mingled with the Consecrated Wine and then they dipt their Pens in these two mixed Liquors Can it be imagined say the Protestants that Christians so zealous as they were should Adore the Sacrament seeing it was employed by them unto uses so far distant from this Adoration and so contrary unto the Worship which is due unto God All these Customs could they consist with a Worship of this Nature and with this Soveraign respect which is due only unto the sole object of our Devotion and of our Religion let the Reader judge And the better to judge hereof let him compare the conduct of the Ancient Church in this particular with that of the Latin Church since the XI Century for these kinds of oppositions do not a little contribute unto the Illustrating the matters now in question practices so different upon the same subject not proceeding but from divers principles nor such various effects but from as different causes I ought not to pass in silence the custom of this same Church in turning out of the Assembly all those that could not or would not Communicate I speak of the Catechumeny the Energumeny and the Penitents which could not be admitted unto the participation of this Divine Sacrament and of those amongst Believers which voluntarily deprived themselves of it for it is most certain that all those which remained in the Assembly did communicate both great and small as hath been shewed in the first Part of this Book And nevertheless if besides the use of the Communion for which they confessed the Eucharist had been instituted they believed that the Sacrament was an object of Adoration What did they mean in forbidding those People which were not in a state of communicating the acts of Piety and Christian Humility A thing so much the more strange that the Holy Fathers believed for certain that prayers made unto God at the time of celebrating the Sacrament were more efficacious then those made unto him at other times by reason of the Commemoration which is there made of the Death of Jesus Christ in whose Name and for whose Merits we pray unto him By what principle and motive were they deprived of the fruit and comfort which they might receive from the homage which they would have given unto God at that blessed moment The sinner addressing himself unto the object of this Worship and Adoration I mean unto the Sacrament would have prayed unto it with a flood of tears and with sincere marks of his Repentance and Contrition to grant him pardon of his sins and to seal the Absolution of them unto his Soul The Energumeny would have implored the assistance of his holy Spirit for his deliverance from the slavery of the Devil The Catechumeny would have presented unto him his prayers for the augmentation of his knowledge and to be e're long honoured by being Baptized into his Church and then afterwards to be admitted unto the holy Sacrament And in fine the Believer in the sense of his unworthiness would
Fourth did institute this Holy Day in that Year if we do not also know that he was inclined thereunto by the desires and upon the Revelations of certain Women of the Country of Liege particularly of a Nun called Eve unto whom he wrote a Letter upon this Subject and another unto all the Bishops the which is contained in the Bull of Clement the Fifth in the third Book of Clementines tit 16. as we are fully informed by John Diesteim Blaerus Prior of St. James of Leige which he composed after having made as he saith an exact enquiry of what had passed in this Institution And to inform the Reader of the nature of these Revelations he adds That the first of these Women called Juliana in praying perceived a marvellous Aparition viz. The Moon as it were at Full but having some kind of Spots Whereupon she was divinely inspired that the Moon was the Church and that the Spot which appeared therein was the want of a Holy Day which as yet was wanting So that she received a Command from Heaven to begin this Solemnity and to pubish unto the World that it ought to be celebrated He saith moreover That this Juliana having communicated her Revelations unto one Isabella this Isabella knowing the troubles Juliana was in upon this Subject she desired of God by earnest Prayers that he would impart unto her the knowledge of these things and that going to visit Eve a Nun of the Church of St. Martins of Leige she no sooner kneeled down before the Crucifix but being ravished in mind she was shewed from Heaven that this particular Holy Day of the Eucharist had always been in the Council of the Soveraign Trinity and that now the time of revealing it unto Men was come for she affirmed that in her Extasie she saw all the Heavenly Host demand of God by their Prayers that he would speedily manifest this Solemnity unto the wavering World to confirm the Faith of the Church Militant I am not ignorant but that there be some which would attribute the cause of this Institution unto a Miracle of Blood which as they say fell from an Hosty in the hands of a Priest as he sang Mass But Besides what Diesteim and after him several others have related unto us we have touching the first cause of this Institution the Declaration of Urban himself which made it For in the Letter which he wrote unto all the Bishops inserted in the Bull of Clement the Fifth he thus speaks We have understood heretofore being in a lower Office that is to say when he was Arch-Deacon of the Church of Leige that it was revealed unto some Catholicks which were the three Women mentioned by Diesteim Juliana Isabella and Eve that such a Holy Day was to be generally celebrated in the Church And in that which he wrote unto Eve We are sensible Daughter that your Soul hath desired with great desire that a solemn Holy Day of the Body of Jesus Christ might be instituted in the Church to be celebrated by Believers unto perpetuity This is the ground and foundation of this Feast and the true cause of its Institution even according to the Testimony of the Life of Juliana the first of these three Women a Testimony whose proper terms is related by Molanus in his Martyrology of Saints in Flanders on the 5th of April But how great soever the Authority of Popes at that time was in the West the Decree of Urban was not observed in all Churches by reason of the newness of the thing therefore Clement the Fifth caused it to be published again about fifty years after as the Gloss upon the Decretal of Clement the Fifth wherein that of Urban is inserted expresly observes But notwithstanding all this it was not hitherto kept as Diesteim informs us in the ninth Article of his Book Although saith he the Apostolical Commands touching the Celebration of the new Holy Day of the venerable Sacrament hath been addressed unto all the Churches yet so it is nevertheless that none of the Churches were careful to give Obedience thereunto excepting the Church of Leige which as soon as it had with honour received the Apostolical Nuncio with the Bulls the Decretals and the Office which he had brought presently as a dutiful Daughter gave Obedience thereunto rejecting the Office which the Virgin Juliana caused to be made and using that which had been composed by Thomas Aquinas And so ever since those Bulls came the Diocess of Liege and no other else hath solemnized this Holy Day until the days of our Lord Pope John the Twenty second who lived in the Year of our Lord Jesus Christ 1315. who published all the Constitutions of Clement and sent them unto the Universities And now if it be demanded of Urban Clement lib. 3 tit 16. si Dominum what profit was made by this Institution he will answer That this Holy Day properly belongs unto the Sacrament because there is no Saint but hath its Holy Day although there is remembrance had of them in the Masses and in the Litanies That it must be celebrated once every year particularly to confound the Unbelief and Extravagance of Hereticks to make a solemn and more particular Commemoration of it to the end to frequent Churches with more and greater Devotion there to repair by attention by humility of Spirit and by purity of heart all the defaults wherein we have fallen in all the other Masses either by the disquiet of worldly cares or by the dulness and weakness of humane frailty and there with respect to receive this Sacrament and to receive increase of Graces Almost the very same thing is to be seen in the Breviary of the Latin Church The Feast of the Sacrament was attended by Procession wherein the Host is born with Pomp and Magnificence Diesteim saith Offic. fir 6. infra Oct. Corp. Christ lect 4. 5. that it was Pope John the Twenty second which introduced this custom But Bossius in his Chronicles and after him Genebrard in his Chronology Book IV. place it much later and say that it began a hundred years after the Institution of the Holy Day to be practised at Pavia from whence it spread it self abroad into all the Western Churches and especially at Anger 's where Berengarius had been Arch-Deacon Upon which several observe that this Institution is directly contrary unto the practice of the ancient Church that very far from carrying in Procession the sacred Symbols of the Body and Blood of our Saviour did administer them the Doors shut even from the III. Century and concealed them not only from Unbelievers and Idolaters but even also from the Catechumeny which were made to go out when this divine Sacrament was to be administred They add that this Procession was very ill resented by many persons that lived in the Communion of the Roman Church In fine Queen Catherine de Medicis wrote unto the Pope in the Year 1561. as Monsieur de Thoul
relates in his History to demand of him Thuan. Hist l. 28. That the Holy Day of the Body of Jesus Christ which had been newly invented might be abolished because it was the occasion of many Scandals and that it was no way necessary for said she this Mystery was instituted for a spiritual Worship and Adoration and not for Pomp and Pageantry And George Cassander in his Consultation addressed unto the Emperors Cassand Consult de circumgest Euchar Ferdinand the First and Maximilian the Second The practice saith he of carrying publickly the Bread of the Sacrament in publick pomp and often to expose it unto the sight of all the World seemeth to have been introduced and received not very long ago contrary unto the practice and intentions of the Ancients for they had this Mystery in so great veneration that they suffered none so much as to see or receive it but the Faithful whom they esteemed to be Members of Jesus Christ and such as were worthy to partake of so great a Mystery therefore before Consecration the Catechumeny the Possessed the Penitents and in a word all those which were not fit to receive were by the voice of the Deacon commanded to withdraw and were turned out by the care of the Door-keepers This practice therefore of thus carrying this Bread ought to be abolished without any prejudice unto the Church on the contrary it would receive great advantage thereby provided the thing were prudently done seeing it is but a late thing and that without this Procession the honour of the Sacrament is nothing lessened and may still at this time be discontinued seeing for the most part this Ceremony seems rather for Pageantry and Shew than for the peoples Devotion By reason whereof continues he Albert Crantz a man of very great Judgment doth commend in his Metropolis Nicholas de Cusa Legat in Germany to have taken away the abuse which was committed in too often carrying about the Sacrament of the Eucharist in Procession upon Holy Days and commanded that it should not be carried out in publick but betwixt the Octave of the Feast dedicated unto the Sacrament And Albert adds a memorable reason for it Because saith he the Heavenly Master instituted this Sacrament for Use and not for Ostentation And as for the Feast it self it is certain it was instituted by Urban not to carry the Sacrament in Procession but to make the Assembly the greater and to the end Men should so well prepare themselves by works of Piety that they might on that day participate of this precious Sacrament and receive it with respect for it is what the words of the Decree do import and if the Institution were duly kept I think there would be nothing absurd in it The silence of the Gentiles and the ancient Disputes of Christians against them and of theirs against the Christians doth very much contribute unto the Illustration of the question which we examine We have seen in the 9th Chapter of the second part that the Pagans as well as Hereticks had a particular knowledge of all that was believed and practised in the Church and that there was scarce one of our Mysteries but they opposed and upon which they made not some opposition against Christians But they never disputed against them upon the point of the Eucharist even not then it self when the holy Fathers reproached them of adoring things which might be stolen away and which must be kept under Lock and Key things which sometimes was given in pawn From whence several do infer That the Adoration of the Sacrament was not practised amongst these Christians there being no probability that the Gentiles would have spared them upon the Adoration of the Sacrament which is subject unto all these inconveniences wherewith they charged their false Divinities They farther observe In octav Orat. pro contra Graec. That when Minutius Foelix and Tatian called it an impious and ridiculous thing to adore what one sanctified the former said unto them You adore the Ox with the Egyptians and you eat him afterwards And that Theodoret wrote Minut. Foel Ibid. Quaest in Genes 9.55 That it is the greatest folly in the World to adore that which one eats They observe I say that these Pagans would not have been without a reply had the Church at that time given unto the Sacrament the Soveraign Worship of Religion seeing it had been very easie for them to have retorted back these shameful reproaches upon this Object of their Adoration and to say unto them that they had not justice to condemn them for that which they eat seeing that Christians did the very same thing And because they never reply'd this unto the Church it is concluded That the Church did not adore the Sacrament And what doth the more confirm these People in this Opinion is That the Heathens of these times do not fail to reproach the Latins That they do eat the God which they Worship as hath been represented in the 9th Chapter of the second Part above recited St. Austin establisheth this Maxim Serm. 12. de Divers That the God which the Christians Worship cannot be shewed with pointing the Finger Do not dispute with me I beseech you saith he and do not importune me in asking me What is the God that I adore for it is not an Idol towards which I may point my Finger and tell you That is the God which I adore Neither is it a Planet nor a Star nor the Sun nor the Moon that I may stretch out my hand towards Heaven and shew you That is the God which I adore He also applies this Maxim particularly unto Jesus Christ Incarnate Serm. 74. de Divers Serm. 120. de Divers Whilest saith he we are in this Body we are absent from the Lord and if it were called in question or denied and that we were asked Where is your God we are not able to shew him Jesus Christ is always with his Father as to the presence of his Glory and of his Divinity As to his bodily presence he is now above the Heavens at the right hand of his Father but he is in all Christians by a presence of Faith It is in this sense that St. Cyril of Jerusalem said Catech. 14. He is now absent in regard of his Flesh but he is present in the midst of us in Spirit The Protestants hence do draw this induction that these Maxims are inconsistent with the Adoration of the Sacrament and that they cannot reasonably be established by persons which make the Eucharist an Object of Divine Adoration because it cannot be denied but that the Sacrament is a visible Object which is apprehended by our senses and by consequence an Object which can be shewed with the Finger and of which it may be said See there the God which I adore They also pretend that the Holy Fathers Disputes against the Ebionites and the Docetes two Sects of Hereticks the former of
I may become happy by the sight of thy Glory And this other I salute thee Light of the World Gloss ad decret Greg. l. 3. tit 41. de Miss celebr c. 10. sane Word of the Father true Hosty living Flesh perfect God true Man It must not be forgot that just at the beginning of the XIII Century a few years before Honorius the Third had made his Constitution for the Adoration of the Sacrament Odo Bishop of Paris ordained Statut Synod c. 5. t. 6. Bibl. Pat. That the people should often be exhorted to bow the knee before the Body as before their Maker and Lord as often as they should see it pass before them This Prelate caused several precautions to be added unto this Decree in case it should happen that any part of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ should fall to the ground or that any Fly or Spider should chance to fall into the Blood 'T is true Odo was not the first that prescribed these kinds of precautions for from the VIII Century somewhat of this nature is to be seen in a Penitential attributed unto Pope Gregory the XIII which held the Chair according unto Bellarmine's computation from the Year 731. unto the Year 741. I say this Penitential is attributed unto him for it is not very certain that it is his but in fine it is in this Book which is inserted in one of the Tomes of the Councils Tom. 5. p. 471. that Precautions like unto those established by Odo Bishop of Paris are to be seen And it is as I conceive of this Penitential Book De Consecr distinct 2. c. si per negligentiam attributed unto Gregory the Thirteenth that the Canonist Gratian hath taken the words he cites in his Decrete under the name of Pope Pius the first who lived about the middle of the II. Century In fine besides that they agree much better with the time of Gregory than with that of Pius who as yet was ignorant of these kinds of Precautions The words related by Gratian as spoken by Pius are at this day to be found verbatim in the Penitential given us under the name of Gregory the XIII The first Christians were careful that no part of the sacred Symbols of the Eucharist should fall to the ground but we do not find that they made any Ordinance touching what might through neglect fall to the ground of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament that was an effect of after Ages which being in process of time become infinitely more scrupulous than former Christians became also more liberal of their Decrees and Constitutions especially in what concerned the Sacrament of the Eucharist insomuch that Hubert Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and Legat of Pope Celestine made this Decree at the end of the XII Century never regarding the simplicity with which the Sacrament was sent unto sick people in the first Ages of Christianity Apud Roger. de Hoveden in Richard I. That Priests as often as there is need to communicate the Sick should themselves carry the Host in their Priestly Habits suitable unto so great a Sacrament and that Lights should be carried before it if stormy Weather the badness of the Ways or some other reason doth not hinder Odo Bishop of Paris did moreover ordain That all persons should kneel down unto it when it passed by which if my Memory fail not is the first Decree made for adoring the Host yet it must not be imagined that the Adoration of the Sacrament was not at all practised in the Latin Church before this Ordinance of Odo which was made in the beginning of the XIII Century There be some which think that it was established by Durandus Abbot of Troarn in the XI Century a little after Berengarius had declared himself against the Dostrine of the Real Presence But if Durandus made no mention of the Adoration of the Sacrament as in effect there be those which refer his words unto the blessed Humanity of our Redeemer whereof he maketh mention in the same place and unto which they pretend that the act of Adoration should be addressed according to the design of this Abbot it cannot be denied but Alger formally taught it in the XII Century De Sacram. l. 2. c. 3. for as to what we read in the ancient Customs of the Monastery of Cluny That all those which meet the Priest Lib. 3. c. 18. t. 4. Spicil p. 217. bearing the Body of the Lord unto a sick person should demand Forgiveness I do not see that all do explain this action after one manner Dom Luke d'Achery which caused them to be printed understands it of Adoration having caused this little Annotation to be put in the Margin That is to say that they should prostrate and adore Others say that these words Demand Pardon do only signifie that those which meet the Sacrament should demand Forgiveness either of the Priest the same as in communicating Ibid. l. 2. c. 30. p. 145. for they all demanded Pardon of each other and kissed the Priest's hand before they received the holy Sacrament or of God in consideration of the death of Jesus Christ Ibid. l. 1. c. 13. p. 58. c. 38. p. 92. whereof the Sacrament is a Memorial Whereunto they add that the same was practised in this famous Assembly when the Cross was uncovered on Good-Friday and the day called The Exaltation of the Holy Cross and that the Pardon which they asked upon these two occasions is distinguished from Adoration Moreover they say that in the thirtieth Chapter of the second Book of these Customs wherein is exactly represented what was practised in those times in this famous Monastery in the Consecration and in the Communion of the Eucharist there is not one word said of the Elevation of the Host Whence they infer that they did not practise the Adoration of the Sacrament which in the Latin Church for some Ages past doth immediately follow the Elevation of it After all should the words in question be applied unto the Adoration of the Host no other consequence could from thence be drawn but this to wit that in the XI Century at the end whereof was collected together in three Books all these ancient Customs this Adoration began to be practised that is to say after the Condemnation of Berengarius although there was no Decree for it until the XIII Century And as before the XIII Century there was no Decree made touching the Adoration of the Sacrament so also before that time there was no Holy Day dedicated unto its honour from whence the Protestants do not fail to make their advantage against the Adoration of the Eucharist saying That if this Adoration had been practised in the ancient Church Christians would not have referred it unto Urban the Fourth the care of instituting the Feast of the Sacrament which he did in the Year 1264. But it is not sufficient to know that Urban the