LAUD, ARCHBISHOP AND MARTYR.-Conference with Fisher. § 35.

Punct. 3.

1

And since here's mention happened of Sacrifice, my third instance shall be in the Sacrifice which is offered up to God, in that great and high mystery of our redemption by the death of CHRIST. For as CHRIST offered up 1 Himself once for all, a full and all sufficient Sacrifice for the sin of the whole world. did He institute and command a memory of this Sacrifice in a Sacrament, even till His coming again. For at, and in the Eucharist, we offer up to God three Sacrifices. One by the Priest only; that's the commemorative Sacrifice of CHRIST'S Death

3

So

1 "CHRIST by His own blood entered once into the holy place, and obtained eternal redemption for us." Heb. ix. 12. And this was done by way of Sacrifice. "By the offering of the body of JESUS CHRIST once made." Heb. x. 10. "CHRIST gave Himself for us, to be an offering, and a Sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour unto GOD." Eph. v. 2. Out of which place the School infers, Passionem Christi verum Sacrificium fuisse. Thom. p. 3, qu. 48, art. 3. c. "CHRIST did suffer death upon the cross for our redemption, and made there by His one oblation of Himself once offered, a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world." Eccles. Angl. in Canone Consecrationis Eucharist.

2 And CHRIST "did institute, and in His holy Gospel command us to continue a perpetual memory of that His precious death, until His coming again." Eccles. Angl. ibid.

3" Sacramentum hoc est Commemorativum Dominicæ Passionis, quæ fuit verum Sacrificium; et sic nominatur Sacrificium." Thom. p. 3, qu. 73, art. 4, c. "CHRIST being offered up once for all in His own proper person, is yet said to be offered up, &c. in the celebration of the Sacrament; because His oblation, once for ever made, is thereby represented." Lambert in Fox's Martyrology, Vol. ii. Edit. Lond. 1597, p. 1053, et postea. ""Tis a memorial, or representation thereof." Ibid. "The Master of the Sentences judged truly in this point, saying: That which is offered and consecrated of the priest, is called a Sacrifice and oblation, because it is a Memory and Representation of the true Sacrifice, and holy oblation made on the altar of the cross." Archbishop Cranmer, in his Answer to Bishop Gardiner, concerning the most holy Sacrament.-Lib. v. p. 377. And, again, "This shortly is the mind of Lombardus, that the thing which is done at God's Board is a Sacrifice, and so is that also which was made upon the cross, but not after one manner of understanding, for this was the thing indeed, and that is the commemoration of the thing."-Ibid. So, likewise, Bishop Jewell acknowledgeth incruentum et rationabile Sacrificium, spoken of by Eusebius, de Demonstrat. Evang. lib.i. Jewell's Reply against Harding, Art. vii. Divis. 9. Again, "The ministration of the holy Communion is sometimes of the ancient Fathers called an

represented in bread broken, and wine poured out. Another by the Priest and the people, jointly; and that is the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, for all the benefits and graces we received by the precious Death of CHRIST. The third", by every particular man for himself only; and that is the Sacrifice of every man's body, and soul, to serve Him in both, all the rest of his life, for this blessing thus bestowed on him. Now thus far these dissenting Churches agree, that in the Eucharist there is a Sacrifice of duty, and a Sacrifice of praise, and a Sacrifice of commemoration of CHRIST. Therefore, according to the former rule, (and here in truth too) it is safest for a man to believe the commemorative, the praising, and the performing Sacrifice, and to offer them duly to GoD, and to leave the Church of Rome in this particular to her superstitions, that I may say no more.

unbloody Sacrifice, not in respect of any corporal or fleshly presence, that is imagined to be there without bloodshedding, but for that it representeth and reporteth to our minds, that one and everlasting Sacrifice that CHRIST made in His Body upon the cross." This Bishop Jewel disliketh not, in his Answer to Harding. Art. xvii. Divis. 14. "Patres Cœnam Dominicam duplici de causa vocarunt Sacrificium incruentum. Tum quod sit imago et solennis representatio illius Sacrificii quod Christus cum sanguinis effusione obtulit in cruce : tum quod sit etiam Eucharisticum Sacrificium, id est, Sacrificium laudis et gratiarum actionis, cum pro beneficiis omnibus, tum pro redemptione imprimis per Christi mortem peracta."-Zanch. in 2. Præcept. Decal. t. iv. p. 459. And Dr. Fulke also acknowledges a sacrifice in the Eucharist. In S. Matt. xxvi. 26. "Non dissimulaverint Christiani in cœna Domini, sive ut ipsi loquebantur, in Sacrificio Altaris peculiari quodam modo præsentem se venerari Deum Christianorum, sed quæ esset forma ejus Sacrificii quod per symbola panis et vini peragitur, hoc Veteres præ se non ferebant.”—Isa. Casaub. Exercit. 16. ad Annal. Baron. § 43. p. 560.

4 In the Liturgy of the Church of England, we pray to GOD, immediately after the reception of the Sacrament, that He would be pleased to accept this " our Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," &c. And Heb. xiii. 15. "The Sacrifice propitiatory was made by CHRIST Himself only, but the Sacrifice commemorative and gratulatory is made by the Priest and the people." Archbishop Cranmer in his Answer to Bishop Gardiner, 1. v. p. 377.

5 "I beseech you, brethren, by the mercies of GOD, that you give up your bodies a living Sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto God." Rom. xii. 1. "We offer, and present unto Thee, O LORD, ourselves, our souls, and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and living Sacrifice unto Thee," &c. So the Church of England in the Prayer after the receiving of the blessed Sacrament.

ID.-MS. Introduction to the Liturgy'.

It is objected by the Romanists, that to the very being of a Bishop, the order of Priesthood is essentially required, which they say is not to be found in the Church of England, neither in the one function of the power of sacrificing, nor in the other of absolution.

To which is answered, that by the Book of Common Prayer and ordinations, they are called and made Presbyters, Priests, as appears thereby. And as touching the function of sacrificing, whereby, they say, a true and proper Sacrifice is to be made for the sins of the quick and the dead, and an oblation of the very Body and Blood of CHRIST;

We say, that forasmuch as our Priests have authority to minister the Sacraments, and, consequently, the Eucharist, which is a representation of the Sacrifice of CHRIST; therefore they may be said to offer CHRIST in a mystery, and to sacrifice Him by way of commemoration.

And our Church by the Articles of 1562, Art. xxxi. teacheth, that the offering of CHRIST once made is sufficient and perfect, and that there needs no other satisfaction for sins, and consequently condemns the Mass for the quick and the dead as blasphemous. And by the place of Acts xiii. 2, there cannot be anything thence inferred, to prove that their ministering at that time, may warrant the Popish massing, in these times, as now it is used.

ID.-Daily Office.

O Thou that sittest on high with the Father, and art here invisibly present with us, &c. . . .

1 From An Introduction to the Liturgy of the Church of England, written by way of preface before Archbishop Laud's collection of various readings out of the several ancient Common Prayer Books, &c. .... Printed by a copy exactly compared with the original MS., in his Grace of Canterbury's library at Lambeth."-See Supplement to Nicholl's Commentary on the Book of Common Prayer, where reasons are given for attributing these MS. notes to Abp. Laud.

2 Vide sup. cit. p. 100.

ID.-History of his Troubles and Trial.

Now we are come to the arraignment of the [Scotch] Liturgy, and the Book of Common Prayer; . . . .for they say:

"1. This book inverteth the order of the Communion in the Book of England. . . .Of the divers secret reasons of this change we mention one only, enjoining the spiritual sacrifice and thanks. giving, which is in the book of England pertinently after the Communion, with the Prayer of Consecration, before the Communion; and that under the name of Memorial, or Oblation; for no other end, but that the Memorial and Sacrifice of praise mentioned in it, may be understood according to the Popish meaning: (Bellarm. de Missa, l. 2. c. 21,) not the spiritual sacrifice, but of the oblation of the Body of the LORD."...

As for the only reason given of this change, it is in my judgment a strange one. 'Tis, forsooth, for no other end (they say) but that the memorial and sacrifice of praise mentioned in it, may be understood according to the Popish meaning, not of the Spiritual Sacrifice, but of the Oblation of the Body of the LORD. Now, ignorance, and jealousy, whither will you? For the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, no man doubts but that it is to be offered up. Nor doth any man of learning question it, that I know, but that, according to our SAVIOUR'S Own command, we are to do whatsoever is done in this Office, as a memorial of His Body and Blood offered up, and shed for us. (Luke xxii.) Now 'tis one thing to offer up His Body, and another to offer up the memorial of His Body, with our praise and thanks for that infinite blessing; so that, were that change of order made for this end, (which is more than I know,) I do not yet see how any Popish meaning, so much feared, can be fastened upon it. And the words in that Prayer are plain, (as they are also in the Book of England,) that we offer and present unto God ourselves, our souls, and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively Sacrifice unto Him. What is there here that can be drawn to a Popish meaning, unless it be with the cords of these men's vanity?-pp. 109. 114-116.

Yet the charge goes on

"4. The Book of England abolishes all that may import the oblation of an unbloody Sacrifice: but here we have, besides the preparatory oblation of the elements, which is neither to be found in the Book of England now, nor in King Edward's Book of old, the oblation of the body and the blood of CHRIST, which Bellarmine calls, Sacrificium laudis, quia Deus per illud magnopere laudatur. This also agrees well with their late doctrine."

First, I think no man doubts, but that there is, and ought to be offered up to GoD, at the consecration and reception of this Sacrament, Sacrificium laudis, the Sacrifice of praise; and that this ought to be expressed in the Liturgy, for the instruction of the people. And these words, "We entirely desire Thy fatherly goodness, mercifully to accept this our Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," &c. are both in the Book of England, and in that which was prepared for Scotland. And if Bellarmine do call the oblation of the Body and the Blood of CHRIST a Sacrifice for praise, sure he doth well in it; (for so it is) if Bellarmine mean no more, by the oblation of the Body and the Blood of CHRIST, than a commemoration and a representation of that great Sacrifice offered up by CHRIST Himself: as Bishop Jewell very learnedly and fully acknowledges. But if Bellarmine go farther than this; and by the oblation of the body and the blood of CHRIST, mean, that the Priest offers up that which CHRIST Himself did, and not a commemoration of it only, he is erroneous in that, and can never make it good.-pp. 123, 4.

HALL, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR.-No Peace with Rome, § xix.

The priestly office of CHRIST is not a little impeached by the daily oblation of the Missal Sacrifice, and the number of mediators. For the first that in the sacred Supper there is a Sacrifice (in that sense wherein the Fathers spoke) none of us ever doubted; but that is there, either Latrieutical (as Bellarmine distinguishes it not ill) or Eucharistical: that is here (as Chrysostom speaks) a remembrance of a Sacrifice; that is, as Augustine interprets it, a memorial of CHRIST's passion, celebrated in the Church; and from this sweet commemoration of our