Page images
PDF
EPUB

opportunity to the future ages, of making that an expiatory Sacrifice, which they did only teach to be commemorative, or representative of our SAVIOUR'S Passion. A Sacrifice they did confess it, Altars and Priests they did allow of, as necessary thereunto; not thinking fit to change those terms, which had been recommended to them from pure antiquity. Those blessed spirits were not λoyoμáxo, contentious about words and forms of speech, in which there was not manifest impiety. The Supper of the LORD they called sometimes a Sacrifice, and sometimes a memorial of the Sacrifice, and so St. Chrysostom on the 9th chapter to the Hebrews, sometimes a Sacrifice, and sometimes a Sacrament, and so St. Austin for example; for in his book de Civitate Dei, he calleth it a Sacrifice; and saith, that it succeeded in the place of those legal Sacrifices, mentioned in the Old Testament. The same St. Austin, as you tell us, doth in the same book call it a Sacrament of memory; . . . and I am sure, that in the very same book it is called "the Sacrament of the Altar :" which was a very common appellation among the Fathers, as was acknowledged by the Martyrs in queen Mary's time. So for the Minister thereof, they called him sometimes Presbyter, and sometimes Sacerdos, Elder, or Priest, indifferently, without doubt or scruple... The Table, or the Altar, were to them such indifferent words, that they used them both equally. . . . So that, in all this search into antiquity, we find a general consent in the Church of God, touching the business now in hand: the Sacrament of the LORD's Supper being confessed to be a Sacrifice; the Minister therein, entitled by the name of Priest; that on which the Priest did consecrate, being as usually called by the name of Altar, as by that of Table.....Not an improper Altar, and an improper Sacrifice, as you idly dream of: for Sacrifices, Priests, and Altars being relatives, as yourself confesseth, the Sacrifice and the Altar being improper, must needs infer that even our Priesthood is improper also; and we may speak in proper and significant terms, as the Fathers did, without approving either the Popish mass, or the Jewish sacrifices. pp. 155-8.

...

It were an infinite labour to sum up all places of and in the Rubrics, wherein the Minister is called by the name of Priest;

which being so, as so it is, and that your own self hath told us that Altar, Priest, and Sacrifice are relatives, the Church of England, keeping still as well the office of Priesthood, as the name of Priest, must needs admit of Altars, and of Sacrifices, as things peculiar to the Priesthood. But not to trust so great a matter to your rules of logic, we will next see, what is the judgment of the Church in the point of Sacrifice. Two ways there are by which the Church declares herself in the present business: first, positively, in the book of Articles and that of Homilies; and practically, in the Book of Common Prayer. First, in the Articles; (Art. xxxi.) "The offering of CHRIST once made," &c. . . . This Sacrifice or oblation, once for ever made, and never more to be repeated, was, by our SAVIOUR's own appointment, to be commemorated and represented to us, for the better quickening of our faith whereof, if there be nothing said in the Book of Articles, it is because the Articles related chiefly unto points in controversy; but in the Book of Homilies, which do relate unto the Articles, as confirmed in them, and are (though not dogmatical, but rather popular discourses,) a comment, as it were, on those points of doctrine, which are determined of elsewhere, we find it thus: (Hom. of the Sacrament, Part ii. p. 197.) "That the great love of our SAVIOUR CHRIST to mankind doth not only appear, in that dear bought benefit of our redemption, and satisfaction by His death and Passion, but also in that He hath so kindly provided that the same most merciful work might be had in continual remembrance. Amongst the which means is the public. celebration of the memory of His precious death at the LORD'S table-our SAVIOUR having ordained and established the remembrance of His great mercy expressed in His Passion, in the institution of His heavenly Supper." Here is a commemoration of that blessed Sacrifice which CHRIST once offered, a public celebration of the memory thereof, and a continual remembrance of it by Himself ordained. Which, if it seem not full enough for the commemorative Sacrifice, in the Church observed, the Homily will tell us further; that this LORD's Supper is in such wise to be done and ministered, as our LORD and SAVIOUR did, and commanded it to be done; as His holy Apostles used it; and

the good Fathers in the primitive Church frequented it." So that whatever hath been proved to be the purpose of the institution, the practice of the holy Apostles, and usage of the ancient Fathers, will fall within the meaning and intention of the Church of England.

For better manifesting of the which intention, we will next look into the Agenda, the public Liturgy of this Church. Where first we find it granted, that "CHRIST our SAVIOUR is the very Paschal Lamb that was offered for us, and hath taken away the sin of the world;" (Preface on Easter Day.) that suffering "death upon the cross for our redemption," He "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:" (Prayer of Consecration.)" and, to the end that we should always remember, &c. . . He hath instituted and ordained holy mysteries, as pledges of His love and continual remembrance of His death;" (Exhortation before the Communion.) "instituting, and in His holy Gospel commanding us to continue a perpetual memory of that His precious death till His coming again." (Prayer of Consecration.) Then followeth the consecration of the creatures of bread and wine, for a remembrance of His death and Passion, in the same words and phrases which CHRIST OUR SAVIOUR recommended unto His Apostles, and the Apostles to the Fathers of the primitive times: which now, as then, is to be done only by the Priest, ("then the Priest standing up, shall say as followeth,") to whom it properly belongeth, and upon whom his ordination doth confer a power of ministering the Sacraments, not given to any other order in the holy Ministry. The memory or commemoration of CHRIST's death thus celebrated, is called (Prayer after the Communion) a Sacrifice, a "Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving;" a Sacrifice, representative of that one and only expiatory Sacrifice, which CHRIST Once offered for us all: the whole communicants "beseeching God to grant, that," &c. . . . . Nor stay they there, but forthwith "offer and present unto the LORD themselves, their souls, and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively Sacrifice unto Him" and howsoever, as they most humbly do acknowledge, they are "unworthy through their manifold sins, to offer to Him

any Sacrifice, yet they beseech Him to accept that their bounden duty and service." In which last words, that present service which they do to ALMIGHTY GOD, according to their "bounden duties," in celebrating the "perpetual memory of CHRIST's precious death," and the oblation of themselves, and, with themselves "the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," in due acknowledgment of the benefits and comforts by His death received, is humbly offered unto God, for and as a Sacrifice, and publicly avowed for such, as from the tenour and coherence of the words doth appear most plainly. Put all together which hath been here delivered from the Book of Articles, the Homilies, and public Liturgy, and tell me if you ever found a more excellent concord, than this between Eusebius' and the Church of England, in the present business: our SAVIOUR'S Sacrifice upon the cross, called there, τὸ τοῦ παντὸς κόσμου καθάρσιον, and here acknowledged to be the "perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world."... The memory or commemoration of this His death, called there, τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος Tóμηov, and here, (Hom.) the public "celebration of the memory" of His precious death, at the LORD's table; there, μvýμnv Tой μeɣáλov Júμаros, here, (Hom.) the remembrance of His great mercy expressed in His Passion; there, for the offering of this Sacrifice to ALMIGHTY GOD, Távtws kai iepwovvns &c. there was a Priesthood thought to be very necessary, and, here, the Priest alone hath power to consecrate the creatures of bread and wine, for a remembrance of His death and Passion; there, the whole action, as it relates to Priest and people, is called Ivoíav aivéoɛws, and here, the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; there, ràs λoyikàs Ovolaç kai iepompeñèç Juμa, here, in the selfsame words, "a reasonable and holy Sacrifice:" there, the communicants do offer to the LoRD σφᾶς αὐτοὺς, σώματι καὶ ψυχῇ, and here they do present unto Him theirselves, souls, and bodies; finally, there it is said, θύομεν τὴν μνήμην τοῦ μεγάλου θύματος, that they do sacrifice unto the LORD the memory of that great oblation; i. e. as he expounds himself, they offer to Him the commemoration of the same, åvrì tñs Ivoías, for, and as a Sacrifice; and here, we do 1 Vid. sup. cit. p. 125..

VOL. IV. No. 81.

L

beseech the LORD to accept this our "bounden duty and service," for, and as a Sacrifice, which, notwithstanding, we confess ourselves "unworthy to offer" to Him. Never did Church agree more perfectly with the ancient patterns. pp. 159-164.

ID.-Life and Death of Archbishop Laud. Necessary Introduction.

The Sacrament of the LORD's Supper they (the first Reformers) called the Sacrament of the Altar, as appears plainly by the statute 1st Edward VI., entituled, "An Act against such as speak unreverently against the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of CHRIST, commonly called the Sacrament of the altar." For which consult the body of the Act itself. Or, secondly, by Bishop Ridley, (one of the chief Compilers of the Common Prayer Book,) who doth not only call it the " Sacrament of the Altar," affirming thus, "that in the Sacrament of the altar is the natural Body and Blood of CHRIST," &c. but in his reply to an argument of the Bishop of Lincoln's, taken out of St. Cyril, he doth resolve it thus, viz. "The word Altar' in the Scripture signifieth as well the altar whereon the Jews were wont to offer their burnt Sacrifice, as the Table of the LORD's Supper: and that St. Cyril meaneth by this word Altar, not the Jewish altar, but the Table of the LORD," &c. (Acts and Mon. part iii. p. 492. 497.) Thirdly, by Bishop Latimer, his fellow martyr, who plainly grants, "That the LORD's Table may be called an Altar, and that the Doctors called it so in many places, though there be no propitiatory Sacrifice, but only CHRIST." (Part ii. p. 85.) Fourthly, by the several affirmations of John Lambert, and John Philpot, two learned and religious men, whereof the one suffered death for religion under Henry VIII., the other in the fiery time of Queen Mary,— this Sacrament being called by both," the Sacrament of the altar" in their several times: for which consult the Acts and Monuments, commonly called the Book of Martyrs. p. 21.

Here, then, we have the word, the "altar," sed ubi est victima holocausti? (as Isaac said unto his father,) "but where is the lamb for the burnt-offering?" (Gen. xxii. 7.) Assuredly, if the Priest and Altar be so near, the lamb for the burnt-offering

« EelmineJätka »