<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2012-05-30</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Pip Willcox</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>proofed text and revised markup</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="OX" ID="A96332">
<STC T="W">W1721A</STC>
<STC T="C">R226161</STC>
<BIBNO T="umi">99899421</BIBNO>
<VID>153754</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB N="64" REF="1">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>A DEMONSTRATION THAT THE <HI>Church of Rome,</HI> AND HER COUNCILS HAVE ERRED: BY SHEWING, That the COUNCILS of <HI>Con&s;tance, Ba&s;il,</HI> and <HI>Trent,</HI> have, in all their Decrees touching Commu|nion in one Kind, contradicted the Received Do|ctrine of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>WITH AN APPENDIX, In ANSWER to The XXI. Chapter of the Author of <HI>A Papi&s;t Mi&s;repre&s;ented, and Repre&s;ented.</HI></P>
<P><HI>LONDON,</HI> Printed by <HI>J. Leake,</HI> for <HI>Awn&s;ham Churchill,</HI> at the <HI>Black-Swan</HI> in <HI>Ave-Mary-Lane,</HI> MDCLXXXVIII.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="imprimatur">
<PB REF="2">
<P>IMPRIMATUR.</P>
<CLOSER><DATE><HI>Apr.</HI> 11. 1688.</DATE>
<SIGNED>Guil. Needham.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="preface">
<PB N="iii" REF="2">
<HEAD>THE PREFACE TO THE READER.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub"><HI>The</HI> Contents <HI>of the</HI> Preface.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P>This Di&s;cour&s;e plainly overthrows all the Foundations of the Romi&s;h Faith, &s;hewing 1. That the Romi&s;h Councils and the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> cannot be the &s;ole authentick Inter|preters of Scripture, or the true Judges of Tradition, &sect;. 1. <HI>2ly.</HI> That they were not a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the Holy Gho&s;t in mak|ing this Decree touching Communion in one King, &sect;. 2. <HI>3ly.</HI> That the Councils of <HI>Con&s;tance, Ba&s;il,</HI> and <HI>Trent</HI> were not true General Councils, or that &s;uch Councils mu&s;t be &s;ubject un|to Error, &sect;. 3. <HI>4ly.</HI> That there is no Certainty of the Ro|mi&s;h Faith by oral Tradition, &sect;. 4. <HI>5ly.</HI> That the&s;e Councils ridiculou&s;ly do a&s;&s;ert, That they made their Decrees touch|ing Communion in one King con&s;ulting the Advantage and Salvation of Chri&s;tian People, &sect;. 5. <HI>6ly.</HI> That the Decrees of the Councils of <HI>Pi&s;a, Con&s;tance,</HI> and <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> concerning the Su|periority of a Genral Council over the Pope, and their Authority to decree matters of Faith without him, mu&s;t be allowed to be valid, or we can have no A&s;&s;urance of the Validity and Infallibility of any of their Councils, &sect;. 6.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>BY way of Preface to this Di&s;cour&s;e I &s;hall endeavour briefly, and plainly to demon&s;trate,</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>That it plainly overthroweth all the Certainty of the</HI> Romi&s;h <HI>Faith, and that if they have made the&s;e</HI> Definitions <HI>and</HI> Decrees <HI>in oppo&s;ition to the plain Sence of</HI> Scripture, <HI>and the Inter|pretations
<PB N="iv" REF="3">of it by the Holy</HI> Fathers, <HI>and to the full Tradition of the</HI> Church <HI>in former Ages, the&s;e their received</HI> Councils <HI>cannot be by Gods Appointment, the</HI> Judges <HI>of our</HI> Controver&s;ies, <HI>the</HI> authen|tick Interpreters of Scripture, <HI>or a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the</HI> Holy Gho&s;t <HI>in making the&s;e Deci&s;ions, nor can they be A&s;&s;ertors of, or Adherers to</HI> primitive Tradition, <HI>but rather plain De&s;ertors of it. And,</HI></P>
<P>Fir&s;t, <HI>Whereas they challenge as their undoubted Right, Authority to be the &s;ole</HI> authentick Interpreters of the Sence of Scripture, <HI>and the true Judges of the</HI> Tradition <HI>of the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Chri&s;t. <HI>Hence we may learn what excellent</HI> Interpreters <HI>they are of</HI> Scri|pture <HI>and</HI> Tradition; <HI>For, whereas the</HI> Trent Council <HI>hath in General defined that it belongeth to the</HI> Church <HI>alone,</HI><NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>4.</HI></NOTE> Judicare de vero &s;en&s;u, &amp; interpretatione Sanctarum Scripturarum, To judge of the true &s;ence and meaning of the Holy Scriptures: <HI>And particularly, That</HI> being taught by the Holy Spirit,<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>21.</HI> c. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Atque ip&s;ius Eccle&s;iae judicium &amp; con&s;uetudinem &s;ecuta,</HI> And following the Judgment and Cu&s;tom of the Church, <HI>&s;he made the forementioned</HI> Decrees <HI>touching</HI> Communion <HI>in one Kind.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly. <HI>Whereas the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance <HI>&s;aith, That they made their Decrees concerning the &s;ame Matter,</HI><NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> Plurium doctorum tam divini quam humani juris deliberatione praeha|bit&acirc;, After mature Deliberation had with many Doctors, skil|ful both in divine and humane Laws. <HI>And la&s;tly, whereas the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Ba&s;il <HI>hath declared, That they determined the &s;ame Matter,</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>30.</HI></NOTE> Po&s;t diligentem per&s;crutationem divinarum Scripturarum &s;acrorumque Canonum, &amp; doctrinarum &agrave; Sanctis patribus, &amp; Doctoribus traditarum, in hac Synodo, longis temporibus habitam; After a diligent Search made, in this Sy|nod, for a long time, of holy Scriptures, of the &s;acred Canons, and of the Doctrines delivered by the holy Fathers. <HI>I &s;ay, Whereas they do expre&s;ly, and confidently pretend the&s;e things; I think it will be evident from this Di&s;cour&s;e, That in tho&s;e Matters they plainly have decreed again&s;t the clear and formerly received Sence of</HI> Scriptures, <HI>again&s;t the</HI> Doctrines <HI>delivered by the</HI> Holy Fathers, <HI>and by the &s;acred</HI> Canons, <HI>and again&s;t the Judgment and Cu&s;tom of the</HI> Church <HI>of God in former Ages. So that if it belong unto the</HI> Church <HI>alone</HI> to judge of the true Sen&s;e and Meaning of the Holy Scriptures, <HI>the&s;e</HI> Councils, <HI>and tho&s;e</HI> Churches <HI>which have embraced their Interpretations of the</HI> Scriptures <HI>concerned in this
<PB N="v" REF="3">Di&s;pute, could not be the</HI> Church Repre&s;entative <HI>or</HI> Catholick, <HI>but fal&s;ly did, and do pretend to the&s;e Titles. If it belong unto the</HI> Church <HI>to teach us what is</HI> Tradition, <HI>they who a&s;&s;ert the&s;e things as &s;uitable to the Doctrines delivered by the Holy</HI> Fathers, <HI>and to the Judgment of the</HI> Church, <HI>cannot de&s;erve that Title.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>Again,</HI> Thirdly, <HI>Whereas the</HI> Trent Council <HI>&s;aith, That in making the&s;e Decrees &s;he was</HI><NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Ip&s;a Syno|dus &agrave; Spiritu Sancto, qui e&s;t Spiritus &s;apien|tiae &amp; intelle|ctus, Spiritus con&s;ilii &amp; pie|tatis, edocta. Se&s;&s;. <HI>21.</HI> c. <HI>1.</HI> Ibid.</NOTE> In&s;tructed by the Holy Gho&s;t, who is the Spirit of Wi&s;dom and of Under&s;tanding, of Coun&s;el and of Pieyt, <HI>whereas the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance <HI>and of</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>in making their</HI> Decrees <HI>touching this Article; Declare they were</HI> a Holy Ge|neral Synod, <HI>in Spiritu Sancto legitim&egrave; congregata,</HI> Met rightly together in the holy Gho&s;t: <HI>Hence it is evident that,</HI> 1. <HI>They fal&s;ly pretended to the A&s;&s;i&s;tance of the Holy</HI> Spirit, <HI>who being the</HI> &s;pirit of Truth, <HI>the Inditer of the Sacred</HI> Scripture, <HI>would not a&s;&s;i&s;t them to determine contrary to the Truth delivered there; and being al&s;o the Spirit promi&s;ed to a&s;&s;i&s;t his</HI> Church, <HI>and guide her true and living Members</HI> into all <HI>&s;aving</HI> Truth, <HI>could not a&s;&s;i&s;t them to Decree again&s;t the Practice, and the Judgment of the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Chri&s;t <HI>for a Thou&s;and years.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Hence al&s;o it mu&s;t follow that the&s;e</HI> Councils, <HI>tho, as to the&s;e Definitions, they are own'd as truly</HI> General, <HI>by the whole</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Rome, <HI>were not true</HI> General Councils, <HI>or that true</HI> General Councils <HI>confirmed by the</HI> Pope, <HI>and owned by the whole</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Rome, <HI>may erre in Matters of Faith, in the Interpretation of the Holy</HI> Scriptures, <HI>and in their Judgment of</HI> Tradition.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>And whereas our late</HI> Roman Di&s;putants <HI>have laid the whole Certainty of their Faith upon the Infallibility of</HI> oral Tradition,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect;. 4. <HI>Mr.</HI> G. <HI>&amp; Mr.</HI> M.</NOTE> de|livering to them the &s;ame Doctrine to day which was delivered ye&s;terday, and &s;o up to the time of our Saviour, <HI>it mu&s;t be as evident they have no Certainty of</HI> Roman <HI>Faith, as it is evident from this, and other late Treati&s;es, That they have varied from the</HI> Tra|dition <HI>of the</HI> Church <HI>in the Practice of</HI> latin Service, <HI>the</HI> Veneration of Images, <HI>and the</HI> Sub&s;traction <HI>of the</HI> Cup, <HI>and we de&s;ire nothing more of the mo&s;t wavering Per&s;ons, than that they would not go over to that</HI> Church <HI>till they &s;ee greater Evidence that they have never va|ried from what was once taught and delivered in the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Chri&s;t, <HI>than the&s;e Di&s;cour&s;es offer to evince that they have actually done it.</HI></P>
<PB N="vi" REF="4">
<P N="4"><MILESTONE N="5" UNIT="&sect;"> 4. <HI>Moreover hence we may learn how excellently the&s;e</HI> Councils <HI>have con&s;ulted for the Advantage, and the Salvation of Chri&s;tian People. The Fathers of the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance <HI>pretend to have made their Decrees in reference to this Matter,</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> Saluti fidelium providere &s;atagentes, Endeavouring to provide for the Salva|tion of the Faithful, <HI>The</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Ba&s;il <HI>preface their Decree again&s;t Communion in both Kinds, with a Pretence that they had hone&s;tly con&s;ulted</HI><NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>30.</HI></NOTE> Quid circa perceptionem S. Euchari&s;tiae tenendum &s;it &amp; agendum pro utilitate &amp; &s;alute populi Chri|&s;tiani, What was to be held or done about the receiving of the Euchari&s;t for the Advantage and Salvation of Chri&s;tian People. <HI>The</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Trent <HI>in&s;inuates that &s;he hath e&s;tabli&s;hed this Cu&s;tom, becau&s;e it was only &s;uch a Change in Di&s;pen&s;ation of this Sacrament as the</HI> Church<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>21.</HI> c. <HI>2.</HI></NOTE> Utilitati &s;u&s;cipientium magis ex|pedire judicaret, Judged mo&s;t expedient for the Benefit of the Receivers.</P>
<P><HI>It therefore &s;eems our</HI> Lord, <HI>and his</HI> Apo&s;tles, <HI>and the whole</HI> primitive Church <HI>for a Thou&s;and Years, &s;aith their</HI><NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Con&s;ult. Art. <HI>22.</HI> p. <HI>981.</HI></NOTE> Ca&s;&s;ander, <HI>for a Thou&s;and and two hundred Years, &s;aith</HI><NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Rerum li|turg. l. <HI>2.</HI> c. <HI>18.</HI> p. <HI>862.</HI></NOTE> Cardinal Bona, <HI>were wickedly unmindful of the</HI> Advantage <HI>and</HI> Salvation of Chri&s;tian People, <HI>for our</HI> Lord <HI>in&s;tituted, and in compliance with his In&s;titution, his</HI> Apo&s;tles <HI>and the whole</HI> Chri&s;tian Church, <HI>for the forementioned</HI> Centuries, <HI>did mini&s;ter the</HI> Sacrament <HI>in both Kinds, till tho&s;e good Souls, filled with true Zeal for the</HI> Salvation of all chri&s;tian People, <HI>Et &s;piritu pietatis edocti,</HI> And taught by the Spirit of true Piety, <HI>forbad them to receive</HI> the Cup of Life; <HI>the</HI> Apo&s;tles, <HI>and all the ancient</HI> Fathers <HI>and</HI> Councils <HI>of the</HI> Church <HI>were either &s;o ignorant, or heedle&s;s, as that they never thought of making any Laws again&s;t</HI> Chri&s;t's In&s;titution, <HI>till the</HI> Councils <HI>of</HI> Ba&s;il, Con&s;tance <HI>and</HI> Trent, a&s;&s;i&s;ted with the Spirit of Wi&s;dom, Under&s;tanding and Coun&s;el, <HI>found it expedient &s;o to do, and for the Benefit and</HI> Salvation <HI>of the Laity, to decree pe|remptorily that they hereafter never &s;hould receive</HI> the Cup of Ble&s;&s;ing and Salvation, <HI>That they &s;hould never drink of</HI> the Blood of the New Covenant, <HI>the Blood of their</HI> Redemption, the Blood &s;hed for the Remi&s;&s;ion of their Sins. <HI>They were &s;o ignorant, or &s;o regardle&s;s of the Reverence due to the</HI> Holy Euchari&s;t, <HI>That neither the Perils which might happen to it from</HI> the long Beards of the Communicants, <HI>or by</HI> growing acid, <HI>or by being</HI> &s;hed, <HI>could make them think it fit to alter the In&s;titution of our</HI> Lord, <HI>or the
<PB N="vii" REF="4">Practice of the</HI> Church. <HI>They thought &s;o little of</HI> the Scarcity of Wine <HI>in &s;ome Countries, and of the</HI> Aver&s;ation <HI>that &s;ome others had unto the ta&s;t or the &s;mell of it, that none of all the&s;e weighty Rea&s;ons, though they were the &s;ame in the Fir&s;t Ages of the</HI> Church, <HI>as in the Thirteenth and the Fourteenth</HI> Centuries, <HI>could move them, out of Reverence to our</HI> Lord<HI>'s In&s;titution, to forbid the Practice of it, till the&s;e</HI><NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Catech. Trid. Part. <HI>2.</HI> c. <HI>4.</HI> Sect. <HI>66.</HI></NOTE> Gravi&s;&s;imae Rationes, Mo&s;t weighty Rea&s;ons, <HI>being deliberately con&s;idered by the</HI> Roman Catholick Church, <HI>She, to prevent tho&s;e dreadful Perils, and the&s;e Scandals, introduced this new Cu&s;tom, and confirmed it</HI> for a Law <HI>in Oppo&s;ition both to our</HI> Saviour's In&s;titution, <HI>and to the Practice of the</HI> Church <HI>in which &s;he had continued for a Thou&s;and Years to the great Damage, and the Hindrance of the Salvation of her People, till the&s;e</HI> Councils <HI>&s;o happily be&s;tir'd them&s;elves for their</HI> Advantage <HI>and</HI> Salvation.</P>
<P><HI>And Thirdly, Whereas the&s;e</HI> Councils, <HI>in framing the&s;e Decrees &s;tyle the Practice of Communicating under one Kind</HI><NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Concil. Con&s;t. Se&s;&s;. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> Romanae &amp; Univer&s;alis Eccle&s;iae con&s;uetuod approbata, The approved Cu&s;tom of the Roman and Univer&s;al Church, <HI>and of the</HI><NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Con&s;i. Trid. Se&s;&s;. <HI>21.</HI> Can. <HI>2.</HI></NOTE> Holy Catholick Church, <HI>and the Declaration made concerning it at</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>is called</HI> Declaratio Catholicae veritatis,<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>30.</HI></NOTE> The Decla|ration of the Catholick Truth: <HI>Not to ob&s;erve at pre&s;ent how horribly &V;ncharitable the&s;e</HI> Councils <HI>are, in excluding out of the</HI> Catholick Church, <HI>and con&s;equently from Salvation, all who had not con&s;ented to the Violation of our</HI> Lord's In&s;titution, <HI>and to the Alteration of the Practice of the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Chri&s;t, <HI>for a whole Thou&s;and Years; That is, not only all who in the</HI> We&s;t <HI>refu&s;ed to make &s;o bold with our</HI> Lord's In&s;titution, <HI>but all the</HI> Greek <HI>and</HI> Ea&s;tern Churches; <HI>I &s;ay, not to in&s;i&s;t on this, hence it is evident, That the pre&s;ent Practice and Judgment of what they call the</HI> Ca|tholick and Univer&s;al Church, <HI>can be no certain or &s;ufficient Proof of</HI> Tradition Apo&s;tolical, <HI>&s;ince in this Matter, &s;he hath both practi&s;ed and decreed in Oppo&s;ition to the plain Judgment and</HI> Tra|dition <HI>of the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Chri&s;t <HI>for Ten whole Centuries.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="6" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>To the&s;e Con&s;iderations, which concern the Definitions of the&s;e</HI> Councils <HI>touching Communion in one Kind, I add the&s;e following Remarks touching the&s;e</HI> Councils, <HI>and the</HI> Decrees <HI>which they con|firmed in their</HI> A&s;&s;emblies.</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Therefore, touching the</HI> Councils <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance <HI>and of</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>let it be con&s;idered, that they con&s;tantly declare, That they were</HI>
<PB N="viii" REF="5">Holy Synods, a&s;&s;embled in the Holy Gho&s;t, and repre&s;enting the Church Catholick. <HI>The</HI> General Council <HI>of</HI><NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg"><HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 8.14.</NOTE> Pi&s;a <HI>which agreed with them in their Sentiments, and met about the &s;ame Affairs a&s;cribes unto it &s;elf the &s;ame great Titles.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Note that there were pre&s;ent at the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Pi&s;a, <HI>&s;aith</HI><NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Council. To. <HI>7.</HI> p. <HI>994.</HI></NOTE> binius, Three Patriarchs, Twenty three Cardinals, Thirty Arch-Bi&s;hops, Two hundred and eighty Governors of Mona|&s;teries, the Divines, and Legats of the Princes of <HI>Europe. There were pre&s;ent at that</HI> Council, <HI>&s;aith</HI><NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">Hi&s;t. Con&s;il. General. l. <HI>2.</HI> c. <HI>1.</HI> p. <HI>35.</HI></NOTE> Richerius, an Hundred and eighty Arch-Bi&s;hops and Bi&s;hops, Three hundred Gover|nours of Mona&s;teries, an Hundred and twenty Ma&s;ters in Theo|logy, Three hundred Doctors of the canon and the civil Law, the Legats of Chri&s;tian Princes, and the Legats and Procura|tors of all the Univer&s;ities of Europe.</P>
<P><HI>At the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance, <HI>&s;aith</HI><NOTE N="(&s;)" PLACE="marg">To. <HI>7.</HI> p. <HI>1134.</HI></NOTE> Binius, <HI>there were</HI> Four Patriarchs, Twenty nine Cardinals, Forty &s;even Arch-Bi&s;hops, an Hundred and &s;ixty Bi&s;hops, and of Abbots, Provo&s;ts, and Priors, and of all &s;orts of Clerks a very great Number.</P>
<P><HI>To the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>&s;aith the &s;ame</HI><NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">To. <HI>8.</HI> p. <HI>525.</HI></NOTE> Binius, <HI>came</HI> a ve|ry great Multitude of Prelates from the whole Latin World.</P>
<P><HI>Having premi&s;ed the&s;e things, I ask whether the&s;e</HI> Councils <HI>knew them&s;elves full and entire Repre&s;entatives of the</HI> Church Catholick, <HI>and</HI> Councils a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the Holy Gho&s;t, <HI>or they did not? If they did know them&s;elves to be true</HI> General Councils, <HI>repre&s;enting the</HI> Church Catholick, &amp;c. <HI>then they undoubtedly were &s;o. And then why were they repre&s;ented by the Fifth</HI> Lateran Council <HI>as</HI> &s;chi&s;|matical &s;editious Councils,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Concilium Con|&s;tantien&s;e ubi definit Concili|um e&s;&s;e &s;upra Papam, reproba|tum e&s;t in Con|cilio Florentino &amp; Lateranen&s;i ultimo. <HI>Bellar. de Concil. l. 1. c 7. de Concil. partim Re|probatis.</HI></NOTE> and of no Authority; <HI>Why are they &s;tiled</HI> Concilia Reprobata, Reprobated Councils, <HI>by the greate&s;t Part of</HI> Roman Catholicks, <HI>in reference to &s;ome of the&s;e things which they profe&s;s to have decided under this</HI> Maje&s;tick Character? <HI>Why is it yet left free for any</HI> Romani&s;t <HI>to reject their Authority, and Decrees in many Matters? Moreover, if they were true</HI> Ge|neral Councils repre&s;enting the whole Church, <HI>and</HI> a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the Holy Gho&s;t, <HI>either &s;uch</HI> Councils <HI>must have erred in what they have decreed as matter of Faith, and therefore cannot be Infal|lible, and then the whole</HI> Church Repre&s;entative, <HI>and</HI> Councils a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the Holy Gho&s;t <HI>may erre in matters of Faith, or if they did not erre, it mu&s;t be matter of Faith, That</HI> a General Council is &s;uperior to the Pope. <HI>Secondly,</HI> That General Coun|cils may infallibly determine matters of Faith without him,
<PB N="ix" REF="5">yea, again&s;t him. Thirdly, <HI>That</HI> the pertiancious Re&s;i&s;ters of this Doctrine were Hereticks, <HI>and therefore that</HI> Eugenius <HI>the</HI> 4th. Julius <HI>the</HI> 2d. Leo <HI>the</HI> 10th. <HI>and the</HI> 5th. Lateran Council <HI>were</HI> Heretical.</P>
<P><HI>If they did not know the Truth of what they thus a&s;&s;ert, how &s;hall private Per&s;ons be able to di&s;cern what &s;uch</HI> A&s;&s;emblies, <HI>and &s;o many</HI> Univer&s;ities <HI>and</HI> Churches <HI>throughout the World con&s;enting with them, and owning them as &s;uch, could not di&s;cern? That is, how &s;hall they know when</HI> Councils <HI>are truly</HI> General, <HI>when they truly repre&s;ent the</HI> Church Catholick, <HI>and they are</HI> a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the Holy Gho&s;t? <HI>Was not this one of their</HI> Decrees, <HI>That for the future,</HI> Quilibet in R. Pontificem eligendus, Every one that was to be cho&s;en Pope &s;hould in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Gho&s;t with Heart and Mouth Profe&s;s to God Almighty, and to ble&s;&s;ed <HI>Peter,</HI> firmy to believe, and hold, as long as he lived, the holy Catholick Faith, according to the Traditions of the Apo&s;tles, the general Councils, and in particular, of the general Councils of <HI>Lateran, Lyons, Vienna, Con&s;tance</HI> and <HI>Ba&s;il,</HI> and to keep that Faith to a tittle unchanged,<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Con&s;il. Con&s;t. Se&s;&s;. <HI>39.</HI> Ba&s;il. Se&s;&s;. <HI>23.37.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Et u&s;|que ad animam &amp; &s;anguinem confirmare, defen&s;are &amp; praedicare,</HI> And to preach, confirm and defend it with their Life and Blood? <HI>Did not the following</HI> Popes, <HI>till after the Time of</HI> Eugenius <HI>the</HI> 4th. <HI>make this Profe&s;&s;ion? Yea, were not the</HI> Inqui&s;itors <HI>of</HI> Hereticks <HI>obliged by the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance <HI>to enquire of any who lay under Su&s;picion of</HI> Here&s;y,<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">&V;trum credaet, teneat, &amp; a&s;&s;erat, quod quodlibet Concili|um Generale, &amp; etiam Con&s;tan|tinen&s;e &V;niver&s;alem Eccle&s;iam reprae&s;entet. Item utrum credat, quod illud quod Sacrum Concili|um Con&s;tantienen&s;e &V;niver&s;alem Eccle&s;iam Reprae&s;entans, appro|bavit &amp; approbat in favorem fidei, &amp; &s;alutem animarum, quod hoc e&s;t abuniver&s;is Chri|&s;ti fidelibus approbandum, &amp; te|nendum: Et qu&ograve;d condemnavit &amp; condemnat e&s;&s;e fidei, &amp; bonis moribus contrarium, hoc ab ei&s;|dem e&s;&s;e tenendum pro condem|nato, credendum, &amp; a&s;&s;erendum. <HI>Se&s;&s;. 45. apud Binium Tom. 7. p. 1124.</HI></NOTE> Whether he believed, held, and a&s;&s;erted, That every ge|neral Council, and particularly that of <HI>Constance</HI> repre&s;ents the Univer&s;al Church, and whether he believed that what that Council, repre&s;enting the whole Church, approved in favour of Faith, and the welfare of Souls, was to be approved by all the Faithful, and what it condemned as contrary to Faith and good Manners, was as &s;uch to be condemned? <HI>And after this Pro|fe&s;&s;ion of the&s;e</HI> Popes, <HI>this Inqui&s;ition made by all concerned to find out, and pro&s;ecute Per&s;ons &s;u&s;pected of</HI> Here&s;y, <HI>could they be doubtful whether the&s;e</HI> Coun|cils <HI>were truly General, or no? Would they condemn Men of</HI> Here&s;y <HI>for not believing the&s;e Articles, if they them&s;elves did not believe them? What Hppes
<PB N="x" REF="6">can private Per&s;ons have, that they &s;hall &s;urely know when</HI> Councils <HI>repre&s;ent the</HI> Church, <HI>and are accepted by it, if the Agreement of &s;o many</HI> Nations, <HI>&s;o many</HI> Univer&s;ities, <HI>&s;o many</HI> Cardinals, Arch-Bi&s;hops, Bi&s;hops, Divines <HI>and</HI> Doctors, <HI>the Profe&s;&s;ion of &s;o many</HI> Popes, <HI>the Practice of &s;o many</HI> Inqui&s;itors, <HI>do not prove that the&s;e</HI> Councils <HI>were once accepted by the</HI> Church.</P>
<P><HI>Again, Was there any</HI> Scripture, <HI>or</HI> Tradition <HI>of the</HI> Church <HI>which plainly taught the contrary; if not, there can be none now, and &s;o no Man can hve ju&s;t Cau&s;e, from</HI> Scripture <HI>or</HI> Tradition, <HI>to doubt the Infallibility of the&s;e</HI> Councils, <HI>That</HI> they repre&s;ented the whole Church, and were a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the Holy Gho&s;t, <HI>That they were</HI> above the Pope, <HI>and</HI> Repre&s;entatives of the Church Catholick without Dependance on him. <HI>If either plain</HI> Scripture, <HI>or</HI> Tradition <HI>contradicted the&s;e their A&s;&s;ertions and Determinations, then mu&s;t the&s;e great</HI> A&s;&s;emblies, <HI>and all the</HI> Univer&s;ities, Nations, <HI>and</HI> Churches <HI>which owned them as true</HI> general Councils, <HI>be ac|counted ignorant of what plain</HI> Scripture <HI>or</HI> Tradition <HI>delivered touching a Matter of Faith of &s;o great Import to the &V;nion, the Peace and Reformation of the</HI> Church, <HI>and why then may not others be ignorant of other Matters plain in</HI> Scripture, <HI>or</HI> Tradition, <HI>with|out Peril? why may we not &s;uppo&s;e, or at the lea&s;t, &s;u&s;pect, That other</HI> Councils, <HI>le&s;s numerous, have been &s;o?</HI></P>
<P><HI>Again, The&s;e</HI> Councils <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance, <HI>and</HI> Ba&s;il <HI>have de|clared and decreed, That</HI><NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Concil. Ba&s;il. Se&s;&s;. <HI>2.</HI> apud Bin. To. <HI>8.</HI> p. <HI>22.</HI> Se&s;&s;. <HI>18.</HI> p. <HI>55.</HI></NOTE> general Councils have Authority immediately from Chri&s;t, which every one, of what&s;oever State or Dignity, though it be Papal, is obliged to obey in things pertaining to Faith, the Extirpation of the &s;aid Schi&s;m, and the general Reformation of the Church in its Head and Members. <HI>That</HI> the Pope him&s;elf is bound to &s;tand to the Declaration and Definition of the&s;e Councils. What&s;oever Chri&s;tian, <HI>&s;aith the</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>45.</HI></NOTE> Council <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance, refu&s;eth to profe&s;s, That he believes, a&s;&s;erts and holds this, he &s;hall be proceeded again&s;t, as one &s;u&s;pected of Here&s;y. <HI>This, &s;aith the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>is</HI><NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>33.</HI> p. <HI>95.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Veritas fidei Catholicae,</HI> A Truth be|longing to the Catholick Faith, and who&s;oever pertinaciou&s;ly re&s;i&s;ts it, <HI>cen&s;endus e&s;t Haereticus,</HI> Is to be deemed an Heretick. It is an Article of Faith which cannot be neglected, <HI>&s;ay they, Sine interitu &s;aluts,</HI> Without the Lo&s;s of Salvation. <HI>They al&s;o decreed, That</HI> it was not in the Power of the Pope to di&s;&s;olve, prorogue, or transfer a general Council to another place,
<PB N="xi" REF="6">without the Con&s;ent of the &s;aid Council. <HI>And this</HI> Decree <HI>is al&s;o &s;tiled</HI><NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Ibid. Se&s;&s;. <HI>33.</HI> p. <HI>59.</HI> &amp; Se&s;&s;. <HI>38.</HI> p. <HI>101.</HI></NOTE> An Article of Faith, which he who pertina|ciou&s;ly doth re&s;i&s;t is to be deemed an Heretick. <HI>They al&s;o urge in Confirmation of the&s;e Decrees,</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>That they were e&s;tabli&s;hed by</HI> Martin <HI>the</HI> Fifth, <HI>confirming the</HI> Decrees <HI>of the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Con&s;tance, <HI>and by</HI> Eugenius <HI>the</HI> Fourth, <HI>confirming that of</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>and particularly that of the Eighth Se&s;&s;ion, That</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">P. <HI>33.</HI></NOTE> during that Council, there could be no general Council a&s;&s;embled el&s;ewhere, <HI>and that</HI> if any one pre&s;umed to make or erect another A&s;&s;embly under the Name of a general Council a&s;&s;embled el&s;ewhere, <HI>and that</HI> if any one pre&s;umed to make or erect another A&s;&s;embly under the Name of a general Council, he would not erect a Council of the Church Catho|lick, but a Coventicle of Schi&s;maticks.</P>
<P>Secondly. <HI>That by Virtue of the&s;e</HI> Decrees<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>29.</HI> p. <HI>83.</HI> p. <HI>101.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Martin</HI> the Fifth was cho&s;en Pope, <HI>and John</HI> the Twenty third, <HI>and Bene|dict</HI> the Thirteenth were depo&s;ed, and that after the Death of <HI>Martin</HI> the Fifth, <HI>Eugenius</HI> the Fourth was cho&s;en Pope by virtue of the &s;ame Decrees. So that if they were not valid, the&s;e neither could be true Popes, nor the Cardinals, Arch-Bi&s;hops, or other Clerks promoted by them could have good Titles to the&s;e Promotions.</P>
<P>Thirdly. <HI>That</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg"><HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 30. <HI>p.</HI> 84. <HI>v. p.</HI> 138, 139, 178.</NOTE> if the Pope had the Authority over general Councils, which the&s;e Decrees denied to belong to him, the Pope might without Re&s;i&s;tance, at his Plea&s;ure, corrupt all Chri&s;tianity, and being accu&s;ed by a Council of Here&s;y, or any other Crime, might pre&s;ently di&s;&s;olve the Council to e|&s;cape being judged by them.</P>
<P>Fourthly. <HI>That</HI><NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Decret. <HI>5.</HI> Concl. p. <HI>117.</HI></NOTE> no skilful Per&s;on ever doubted of this Article, That the Pope was &s;ubject to the Judgment of Univer|&s;al Councils in things which concern the Faith. <HI>That</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg"><HI>P.</HI> 153, 155, 180.</NOTE> the Univer&s;al Church, and Chri&s;tian Religion acquie&s;ced in this Article of Faith, <HI>Firmiter credens non po&s;&s;e fieri di&s;&s;olutionem Syno|di &s;ine con&s;en&s;u ejus,</HI> Firmly believing, that a Di&s;&s;olution of the Council could not be made without its Con&s;ent.<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg"><HI>P.</HI> 149.</NOTE> That it was by all confe&s;&s;ed.</P>
<P>Fifthly. <HI>That</HI><NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">P. 136, 139.</NOTE> if the&s;e Decrees were not to be admitted, it mu&s;t follow, that all the&s;e Councils had actually erred, and that they who were Members of them, were &s;chi&s;maticks, <HI>and that the Church which judged that they could not be di&s;&s;olved with|out their own Con&s;ent, hath al&s;o erred.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Now, I &s;ay, were the&s;e truly Articles of Faith, or not? If they
<PB N="xii" REF="7" MS="y">were, why are they not received by the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Rome? <HI>Yea why are they rejected by the greate&s;t part of</HI><NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Concilii Ba|&s;ilien&s;is nihil e&s;t ratum &amp; proba|tum ni&s;i quaedam di&s;po&s;itiones. <HI>Bell. de Con|cil. l. 1. c. 7.</HI></NOTE> Romi&s;h Doctors? <HI>Why were they practically condemned by the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Florence <HI>a&s;&s;em|bling in oppo&s;ition to one of the&s;e Articles? And why is not that</HI> Council <HI>held by the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Rome <HI>Schi&s;matical, as it mu&s;t have been, if the fore-mentioned Decrees be true? Why were they dogmatically Condemned in the Fifth</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Lateran?</P>
<P><HI>If they were not Articles of Faith, why were they owned as &s;uch by &s;o many</HI> Councils, <HI>&s;o many</HI> Nations, <HI>&s;o many</HI> Univer&s;ities? <HI>Why doth the</HI> General Council <HI>of</HI> Ba&s;il <HI>&s;o frequently in&s;i&s;t upon this plea in defence of them,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 89.</NOTE> <HI>that they were determinations, &V;ni|ver&s;ae Eccle&s;iae,</HI> of the Univer&s;al Church, <HI>that they had been declared in many</HI> Councils,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 153.</NOTE> <HI>atque per &V;niver&s;alem Eccle&s;iam approhatae,</HI> and approved by the Univer&s;al Church? <HI>That, tota Eccle&s;ia,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 155.</NOTE> <HI>&amp; populus Christianus,</HI> the whole Church, and all Chri&s;tian People had acquie&s;ced in them. <HI>That they were</HI> Declarations of the Catholick Faith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 180.</NOTE> <HI>quas univer&s;a tenuit Ec|cle&s;ia,</HI> which the Univer&s;al Church held. <HI>May we not here turn allt he Arguments of the</HI> Romani&s;ts <HI>upon them, by which they do endeavour to &s;hew that 'tis in us unrea&s;onable, ab&s;urd, and in&s;olent to condemn the</HI> Decrees <HI>of their &s;uppo&s;ed</HI> General Councils, <HI>and of the&s;e two in particular, decreeing for the</HI> Sub&s;traction <HI>of the Cup? May we not complain of them in the words of the</HI> Council <HI>of</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>that</HI> refu&s;ing to follow,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 117.</NOTE> as an infallible Rule, the Doctrine of the Catholick Church in things re&s;pecting Faith, <HI>judicium pro|prium in adver&s;um obduratis animis &s;equi volunt,</HI> they chu&s;e on the contrary with obdurate minds to follow their <HI>Private Judg|ment? May we not ask them in the words of the &s;ame</HI> Council, Whether they dare condemn all the Cardinals, Patriarchs, Bi&s;hops, the Emperor, the Kings, the Princes and others, who by them&s;elves or others were pre&s;ent in this Council; <HI>&amp; denique Eccle&s;iam per orbem di&s;per&s;am hoc Concilium approbantem,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 149.</NOTE> and la&s;tly the Church di&s;per&s;ed throughout the World ap|proving this Council? <HI>May we not argue thus with them,</HI> If tho&s;e Declarations of Faith and Divine Right, which have &s;o oft and &s;olemnly been made by the Univer&s;al Church, and by General Councils declared con&s;i&s;torially to be lawful by the Popes them&s;elves,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 179.</NOTE> even at the very time that they made them: <HI>Si po&s;t haec omnia;</HI> If, <HI>I &s;ay,</HI> after all the&s;e things, the&s;e Decla|rations may be rejected and trampled upon, as being erroneous,
<PB N="xiii" REF="7" MS="y">mu&s;t not the whole Church be accu&s;ed of Error, and the Declarations of General Councils touching matters of Faith be henceforth disbelieved? <HI>Yea la&s;tly may we not conclude with</HI> R. H. <HI>in a like ca&s;e,</HI><NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Rat. account Di&s;c. <HI>1.</HI> ch. <HI>6.</HI> &sect;. <HI>59.</HI> p. <HI>58.</HI></NOTE> <HI>That</HI> if the Decrees of &s;o many Synods, (<HI>viz. at</HI> Pi&s;a, Con&s;tance, Sens, Ba&s;il, Bourges) &s;o often weighing the Adver&s;aries Rea&s;ons and Evidneces, was not &s;ufficient for &s;etling &s;uch a point, at lea&s;t as to the obedience of future &s;ilence and non-contradiction, and as to &s;uffering the Church to enjoy her Peace; what can hereafter be &s;ufficient, or can we ever hope that any Controver&s;ie &s;hall be finally de|termined, or ended by a future Council, if this (<HI>of the Supe|riority of a General Council above a Pope,</HI> &amp;c.) is not by the&s;e forepa&s;t? Can there be any Ground here to que&s;tion the inte|grity or lawful proceedings of &s;o many Councils all concurring in the &s;ame Judgment in this matter? or could there be any new Light in this Point attainable by private Doctors, or by following Councils of the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> of which tho&s;e Councils were not capable or had no notice of, <HI>what&s;oever</HI> R. H. <HI>el&s;ewhere &s;peaks of,</HI><NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg"><HI>Di&s;c.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 3. &sect;. 37, 38. <HI>p.</HI> 26.</NOTE> A moral certainty, that &s;o many and &s;uch per&s;ons as meet in their &s;uppo&s;ed General Councils, could not con&s;pire to fal&s;ifie the Truth, <HI>That</HI><NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg"><HI>Di&s;c.</HI> 3. &sect;. 44. <HI>p.</HI> 28.</NOTE> none can be &s;uppo&s;ed fit to judge of them, <HI>That</HI><NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">P. 143, 179.</NOTE> Men vainly pretend to be certain of what &s;uch Councils, and a major part of the Church, having the &s;ame means of certainty, judge fal&s;e, or that their private Judgments can have clear Scripture or Tra|dition, which they could not di&s;cern, <HI>I &s;ay, All the&s;e things in this in&s;tance do &s;o vi&s;ibly recoil upon them, that it is needle&s;s to in&s;i&s;t upon it.</HI></P>
<P><HI>La&s;tly, Two things I de&s;ire may be con&s;idered and attended to in peru&s;ing this Di&s;cour&s;e.</HI></P>
<P><HI>The</HI> Fir&s;t, <HI>is, That though the</HI> Ancients <HI>alledged here, directly oppo&s;e the Doctrines and Determinations of the&s;e</HI> Councils, <HI>and the Practice of the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Rome <HI>e&s;tabli&s;hed by them; yet do I not for that Rea&s;on only conclude her guilty of Sin and Error in denying the Cup to the Laity, for I am far from holding every thing taught or practi&s;ed by the</HI> Ancients, <HI>as certainly true and nece&s;&s;ary, and there|fore fear not any Retortions of this Nature, from our</HI> Adver&s;aries: <HI>Had I de&s;igned any thing of that Nature, I would more cpiou&s;ly have in&s;isted on tho&s;e Arguments from Scripture, whence that con|clu&s;ion can alone be made, and which I therefore have &s;o briefly touched
<PB N="xiv" REF="8">upon, becau&s;e I was &s;o happily prevented in that matter by the un|an&s;werable Treati&s;e on this Subject again&s;t the Bi&s;hop of</HI> Meaux, <HI>with which I was unwilling to interfere; but finding that the fore|mentioned</HI> Bi&s;hop <HI>had with great confidence appealed for this matter, to the</HI> con&s;tant practice <HI>and to the</HI> Principles <HI>of the</HI> Primitive Church,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 160, 161.</NOTE> <HI>and told us, That</HI> the con&s;tant Practices of the Primi|tive Church received with univer&s;al approbation from the Ori|gin of Chri&s;tianity, till the time of the Council of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> do invincibly demon&s;trate, that the Council did but follow the <HI>Tradition of All Ages</HI> when it defined, That the Communion under one kind was as good and &s;ufficient as under both, <HI>with many other things of a like nature, in which he is al&s;o followed by the late Writers of the &s;ame Communion: And finding al&s;o that the once exploded</HI> Blackloi&s;ts <HI>were again admitted to plead the infalli|bility of the</HI> Roman Church <HI>from</HI> practical Tradition, <HI>and that this was done upon the &s;trength of the&s;e two Propo&s;itions:</HI></P>
<P N="1">1.<NOTE PLACE="marg">J. S.</NOTE> <HI>That</HI> the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> hath always held clo&s;e to Tra|dition, and received &s;till her Doctrine by Tradition from the Father to the Son, from the fir&s;t to the &s;econd, and &s;o to the pre&s;ent Age.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>That</HI> &s;he could not mi&s;take the &s;en&s;e of Tradition in par|ticular points. <HI>In contradiction to the&s;e confident A&s;&s;ertions I have here &s;hewed, by confronting the Doctrines and Sayings of the</HI> Fathers, <HI>to the expre&s;s Determinations of their</HI> Councils.</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>That the pre&s;ent</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> Rome <HI>hath varied in this matter from</HI> Antiquity, <HI>both in Doctrine and Practice, and that</HI> Tra|dition <HI>plainly contradicts all their A&s;&s;ertions and Decrees relating to it: And therefore that all her late</HI> Defenders <HI>are much mi&s;taken, or, which is wor&s;e, would lead others into a known Error, when they undertake to per&s;wade them that the practice of their</HI> Church, <HI>in denying the Cup to the</HI> Laity <HI>and to</HI> Prie&s;ts non-conficient, <HI>is war|ranted by Tradition and Primitive Practice, and by the</HI> Principles <HI>on which they builded that pretended Practice.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>That in this</HI> particular Point <HI>&s;he hath either actually mi&s;taken the Sence of</HI> Tradition, <HI>or actually devidated from</HI> Tradition. <HI>And &s;eeing whether &s;he does not differ from or agree with the</HI> Pri|mitive <HI>Belief, and Practice in this</HI> Article, <HI>is a matter of</HI> Fact, <HI>and &s;o may be determined by the Te&s;timony of good</HI> Witne&s;&s;es <HI>of what was practi&s;ed and believed in their Times, and by plain Allegations of matter of</HI> Fact, <HI>without</HI> Infallibility: <HI>In plain rea&s;on, and from
<PB N="xv" REF="8">her own avowed Principles it follows, that her Authority in &s;aying &s;he does not differ from the</HI> Tradition <HI>of the</HI> Ancients, <HI>and much more in a&s;&s;erting, That &s;he hath always held to it, and therefore could not mi&s;take the Sence of it, can be of no force again&s;t plain evidence of</HI> Fact <HI>to the contrary. If then the difference betwixt the Belief and Practice of the</HI> Ancients, <HI>and of the</HI> pre&s;ent Church <HI>of</HI> Rome <HI>in this matter be evident, as I think I have made it, it mu&s;t be owned that the pre&s;ent received Tradition of that</HI> Church <HI>can be no certain Rule of Truth, and no &s;ure Argument that &s;uch was the Tradition of the</HI> Primitive Church, <HI>&s;ince in this Con|trover&s;ie &s;he hath actually varied from the Tradition of the</HI> An|cients.</P>
<P><HI>And thus far,</HI> 1. <HI>and no farther, would I be thought to drive the Argument drawn from the Citations of the</HI> Ancients. <HI>The Right or</HI> Authority <HI>claimed by that</HI> Church, <HI>will be be&s;t judged of by other</HI> Intrin&s;ick Arguments, <HI>which ought to have the greater force when it appears that</HI> Pre&s;cription <HI>is again&s;t our</HI> Adver&s;aries. <HI>Only I cannot but admire why the</HI> Trent Council <HI>&s;hould found their Power of making &s;uch a Change in our</HI> Lord<HI>'s In&s;titution, on tho&s;e words of the</HI> Apo&s;lte, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> iv. 1<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Id autem Apo&s;tolus non ob&s;cure vi&s;us e&s;t innui&s;&s;e cum ait, &s;ic nos exi&s;timet, <HI>&amp;c. Se&s;&s;. 21. c. 2.</HI></NOTE> But let a Man account of us, <GAP DESC="foreign">, &amp; di&s;pen&s;atores my&s;teriorum Dei, as Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, and Stewards of the My|&s;teries of God. <HI>Since in that very place it is imme|diately added, That</HI> of a Steward it is required that he be found Faithful, <HI>that is, &s;aith</HI><NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. In Locum.</NOTE> Chry|&s;o&s;tom, <HI>that</HI> he do not u&s;urp Authority over the things of his Lord, but admini&s;ter them as a Steward, <GAP DESC="foreign">, for it belongeth to a Steward to admini&s;ter, <HI>or di&s;tribute,</HI> well to the Family the things com|mitted to his hands. <HI>And St.</HI> Ba&s;il<NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Haec ip&s;is integra cu&s;todiat, Tom. 2. de vera ac pia fide p. 385. <HI>b.</HI></NOTE> <HI>&s;aith,</HI> It is the property of a faithful Mini&s;ter, what&s;oever things are committed to him by his Lord, to di|&s;tribute them to his fellow Servants, and to pre&s;erve them for him, without Adulteration or Deceit, <HI>or purely and</HI> entirely, <HI>&s;aith the</HI> Latin.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>The</HI> Second <HI>thing which I de&s;ire may be con&s;idered, is, That nothing in the following Citations, can be urged again&s;t the</HI> Church <HI>of</HI> England, <HI>as Erroneous in this Matter.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Art. 6.</NOTE> <HI>For &s;ince &s;he profe&s;&s;eth
<PB N="xvi" REF="9">to admit nothing</HI> as nece&s;&s;ary to be believed, <HI>but what is either ex|pre&s;&s;ed in, or fairly deducible from</HI> Scripture, <HI>and that</HI> it is not ne|ce&s;&s;ary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, or utterly alike:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Art. 34.</NOTE> <HI>How can in reflect upon her, that S.</HI> Cyprian, <HI>for Example, held it nece&s;&s;ary</HI> to mix the Wine with Water, <HI>or that others have held it nece&s;&s;ary to u&s;e</HI> Unleavened Bread, &amp;c. <HI>All that her</HI> Sons <HI>are in this Ca&s;e obliged to, is only to give fair and &s;atisfactory Rea&s;ons, why the&s;e things are not nece&s;&s;ary, which they are both able and willing to do; whereas if a di&s;agreement between the</HI> pre&s;ent Church <HI>of</HI> Rome, <HI>and the</HI> Primitive Chri&s;tians <HI>be once proved again&s;t them in any of their</HI> Articles, <HI>all their fine Pleas for the certainty of their</HI> Traditions,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>M.</HI> Que&s;t. of Que&s;t. p. 395, 396, 397.</NOTE> <HI>the</HI> Infallibility <HI>of their</HI> Councils, as proceeding upon Tradition, <HI>and</HI> meeting only to con&s;ult about the Tradition of the Church diffu&s;ed, <HI>and all the</HI> Prejudices <HI>they advance again&s;t the</HI> Prote&s;tants <HI>from the pre&s;ent</HI> Tradition <HI>of their</HI> Church, <HI>mu&s;t be confe&s;&s;edly vain and</HI> Sophi&s;tical. <HI>And the attending to this difference of</HI> Principles <HI>in each</HI> Church, <HI>will &s;hew how much the Te&s;timonies of the</HI> Ancients <HI>do affect the one, and how little they concern the other, and &s;o will prevent the Objections of an &V;nwary, and the Cavils of a captious Reader.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="introduction">
<PB N="1" REF="9">
<HEAD><HI>THE INTRODUCTION.</HI> Shewing what the Councils of <HI>Con&s;tance, Ba&s;il,</HI> and <HI>Trent</HI> have determined, touching Commu|nion in one kind.</HEAD>
<P>THOUGH in many other Doctrines, and Practices of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> &s;he contradicteth the plaine&s;t Evidence of <HI>Scripture</HI> and <HI>Tradition,</HI> as in the <HI>bowing down to Images,</HI> the <HI>Celebration</HI> of the <HI>Ma&s;s</HI> in <HI>Latin,</HI> where it is a Tongue <HI>unknown</HI> to the Generality of them that hear it; yet in none of them hath &s;he &s;o openly af|fronted, and defied both the In&s;titutions of the <HI>H. Scripture,</HI> and the continual Practice, and declaration of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> as in her practice of the <HI>Sub&s;traction</HI> of the <HI>Cup</HI> from <HI>Lay Communicants;</HI> and in the Propo&s;itions, A&s;&s;ertions, and De|crees, &s;he hath e&s;tabli&s;hed to excu&s;e that practice.</P>
<P>In that of <HI>Honorary Wor&s;hip</HI> of the <HI>Images</HI> of <HI>Saints,</HI> her &s;e|cond <HI>Nicene Council</HI> doth very frequently, though, &s;ay the <HI>Fa|thers</HI> met at <HI>Frankford</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Praefat. p. 10.</NOTE>, very <HI>impudently,</HI> pretend to <HI>Apo&s;tolical Tradition.</HI> The <HI>Trent Council</HI> u&s;her in their <HI>Decree</HI> concerning the <HI>Honour</HI> and <HI>Veneration</HI> to be imparted to them, with an in&s;inuation, that it is made <HI>juxta Catholicae, &amp; Apo&s;tolicae Eccle|&s;iae u&s;um, &agrave; primaevis Chri&s;tianae Religionis temporibus receptum</HI><NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. <HI>25.</HI></NOTE>: <HI>According to the u&s;e of the Catholick and Apo&s;tolick Church, receiv|ed from the fir&s;t Ages of Chri&s;tianity.</HI> But when they come to &s;et|tle <HI>as a Law</HI> this <HI>Defalcation</HI> of the <HI>Cup,</HI> they do it without any of the&s;e colours, or pretences, yea with confe&s;&s;ed deviation both from our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s In&s;titution and <HI>Tradition,</HI> and from the con&s;tant practice of the fir&s;t, and pure&s;t Ages of his <HI>Church,</HI> Declaring, and defining, as the <HI>Trent Council</HI> doth, That<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg"><HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 21. c. 1, 2.</NOTE> <HI>al|though
<PB N="2" REF="10">our Redeemer, and our Lord, in his La&s;t Supper did in&s;titute this venerable Sacrament, and deliver it to the Apo&s;tles in both &s;pe|cies, yet</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ibid.</HI> Can. 2.</NOTE> <HI>if any per&s;on &s;ay the Holy Catholick Church was not by ju&s;t cau&s;es and rea&s;ons moved to give it to the Laity, and Prie&s;ts not con&s;ecrating, in one &s;pecies only, let him be accur&s;ed.</HI> And as the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance</HI> doth, That<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Quod licet in primitiva Ec|cle&s;ia huju&s;|modi Sacra|mentum reci|peretur a fidelibus &s;ub utra&abque; &s;pecie, tamen haec con&s;uetudo, <HI>viz.</HI> communicandi Laicos, tantummodo &s;ub &s;pecie panis habenda e&s;t pro lege quam non licet reprobare. <HI>Concil. Con&s;tant. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 13.</NOTE> <HI>although in the Primitive Church the Sacrament was received by the Faithful under both &s;pecies, yet is the Cu&s;tom of receiving it by Lay-Men, and by Prie&s;ts not con&s;e|crating, to be received as a Law.</HI></P>
<P>That the&s;e <HI>Decrees</HI> are evidently repugnant to the in&s;titution of our <HI>Lord</HI> and <HI>Saviour,</HI> and to the practice of the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> for above a Thou&s;and Years, hath been prov|ed beyond all po&s;&s;ibility of contradiction, in a late excellent Treati&s;e, in An&s;wer to a Di&s;cour&s;e of Mr. <HI>Condom</HI> on this Subject. That the &s;ame <HI>Decrees,</HI> and almo&s;t every propo&s;ition, declaration, and a&s;&s;ertion, which have been advanced, and invented by the <HI>General Councils</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance, Ba&s;il,</HI> and of <HI>Trent,</HI> in favour of them, are manife&s;tly oppo&s;ite and repugnant to the received <HI>Traditions</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and to the Sence and the Expre&s;&s;ions of the <HI>Fathers</HI> of the <HI>Chri&s;tian Church,</HI> I undertake, by God's A&s;&s;i&s;tance, in the en&s;uing Pages to demon|&s;trate, by &s;hewing,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> What the&s;e <HI>Councils</HI> have determined in this matter. And,</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> What hath, in contradiction to them, been a&s;&s;erted, and declared by the <HI>Fathers</HI> which flouri&s;hed in the <HI>Church</HI> of God.</P>
<P>Now the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome</HI> hath by the <HI>Councils</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance, Ba|&s;il</HI> and <HI>Trent,</HI> declared and defined as followeth.</P>
<P N="1">1. Fir&s;t,<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Sancta Synodus decla|rat, &amp; docet nullo divino praecepto Laicos &amp; Clericos, non conficientes obligari ad Euchari&s;tiae Sacramentum &s;ub utra&abque; &s;pecie &s;umendum. <HI>Syn. Trid. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 21. <HI>c.</HI> 1.</NOTE> <HI>That the Laicks and Prie&s;ts, who do not con&s;ecrate, are not obliged by divine Precept to re|ceive the Sacrament in both kinds.</HI> That<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Et <HI>cap.</HI> 3.</NOTE> <HI>though Chri&s;t, in his La&s;t Supper, in&s;tituted this veverable Sa|crament under the &s;pecies of Bread and Wine, yeet do not that in&s;titution and delivery, bind all the Faithful, by the Law of Chri&s;t, to receive both &s;pecies; and that they who a&s;&s;ert the contrary, &s;peak ra&s;hly and pre&s;umptuou&s;ly.</HI></P>
<PB N="3" REF="10">
<P N="2">2. That<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Neque nullo pacto dubitari po&s;&s;e, &s;alva fi|de, quin illis alterius &s;pe|ciei communio ad &s;alutem &s;ufficiat. <HI>Ibid.</HI> Et <HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 13. <HI>Can.</HI> 3.</NOTE> <HI>it cannot be doubted, without prejudice to the Chri&s;ti|an Faith, but that Communion in one kind only is &s;ufficient to Sal|vation.</HI> Who&s;oever doth affirm the contrary to either of the&s;e Declarations, &s;aith the <HI>Trent Council, let him be Anathema.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. That<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Sancta mater Eccle&s;ia&mdash;gravibus &amp; ju&s;tis cau&s;is adducta, hanc con&s;uetu|dinem &s;ub altera &s;pecie communican|di approbavit, &amp; pro lege habendum decrevit, quam reprobare, aut &s;ine Ec|cle&s;iae authoritate pro libito mutare non licet. <HI>Concil. Trid. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 21. <HI>c.</HI> 2.</NOTE> <HI>the Church of Chri&s;t, for ju&s;t and weighty rea&s;ons, hath approved the Communion of Laicks and Prie&s;ts not con&s;e|crating, under one kind only, and hath defined it for a Law, That</HI><NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Concilium S. Generale Con&s;tan|tien&s;e in Spirite Sancto legitime con|gregatum, declarat, decernit &amp; definit, quod licet Chri&s;tus po&s;t coenam in&s;ti|tuerit, &amp; &s;uis Di&s;cipulis admini&s;trave|rit &s;ub untra&abque; &s;pecie panis &amp; vini hoc venerabile Sacramentum&mdash;&amp; &s;imiliter, quod licet in primitiva Eccle&s;ia hujus|modi Sacramentum reciperetur a fide|libus &s;ub utra&abque; &s;pecie, tamen haec con|&s;uetudo ad evitandum aliqua pericula &amp;c &s;candalae&s;t rationabiliter introducta quod a conficientibus &s;ub utra&abque; &s;pecie, &amp; a Laicis tantummodo &s;ub &s;pecie panis &s;u&s;cipiatur, unde cum huju&s;modi con&s;uetudo ab Eccle&s;ia, &amp; Sanctis Patribus rationabiliter introducta, &amp; <HI>diuti&s;&s;ime</HI> ob&s;ervata &s;it, habenda e&s;t pro lege quam non licet reprobare, aut &s;ine Eccle&s;iae authoritate pro libitu mutare. <HI>Concil. Con&s;tant. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 13.</NOTE> <HI>although Chri&s;t him&s;elf did mini&s;ter this venerable Sacrament to his Di&s;ciples in both kinds, the &s;pecies of Bread and Wine; and though it was &s;o receiv|ed by the Faithful in the Primitive Church, yet the contrary Cu&s;tom that the Prie&s;ts, who do con&s;ecrate, &s;hould receive in both kinds, and the Laity &s;hould receive only the &s;pecies of Bread, was rationally introduced, and is to be received as a Law, which none mu&s;t change or reject at his plea&s;ure, without the Authority of the Church.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. That <HI>to &s;ay that it is</HI><NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Quapro|pter dicere hanc con&s;uetu|dinem aut le|gem ob&s;ervare &s;it &s;acrilegum aut illicitum, cen&s;eri debet erroneum, &amp; pertinaciter a&s;&s;erentes oppo&s;itum praemi&s;&s;orum tanquam Haeretici arcendi &s;unt, &amp; graviter puniendi. <HI>Ibid.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Sacrilegious, or unlawful to ob&s;erve this Law or Cu&s;to, is to be deemed Erroneous, and they who perti|naciou&s;ly do &s;o a&s;&s;ert, are to be puni&s;hed, and driven from the Church as Hereticks, they acting damnably who endeavour to reprove this cu&s;tom as Sacrilegious.</HI> That<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Quod nullus Presbyter &s;ub poena excommunicationis, communicet populum &s;ub utra&abque; &s;pecie panis &amp; vini. Item ip&s;a Sancta Synodus decernit &amp; declarat &s;uper i&s;ta materia, ut ef|fectualiter puniant eos contra hoc decretum excedentes, qui communicando populum &s;ub utra&abque; &s;pecie panis &amp; vini exhortati fuerint, &amp; &s;ic faciendum e&s;&s;e docuerint, &amp; &s;i ad poeniten|tiam redire non curaverint, animo indurato, per cen&s;uras Eccle&s;ia&s;ticas per eos ut Haeretici &s;unt coercendi. <HI>Ibid.</HI></NOTE> <HI>if any Prie&s;t communicates the People under both kinds, he is to be excommunicated, and proce&s;s is to be di|rected
<PB N="4" REF="11">by the Authority of the General Council of</HI> Con&s;tance <HI>to all Pa|triarchs, Primates, Arch-bi&s;hops, Bi&s;hops, and their Vicars in Spiri|tuals, commanding them under the penalty of Excommunication, that they effectually puni&s;h tho&s;e, who, contrary to this Decree, exhort the People to Communicate in both kinds of Bread and Wine, and take upon them &s;o to mini&s;ter the Sacrament unto them, and to deal with them as Hereticks, if they continue ob&s;tinately without Repentance in &s;o doing.</HI> Yea the <HI>Trent Council</HI> hath pronounced an <HI>Anathema</HI> upon all tho&s;e<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Si quis dix|erit Sanctam Eccle&s;iam Ca|tholicam non ju&s;tis cau&s;is &amp; rationibus ad|ductam fui&s;&s;e ut Laicos, atque etiam Clericos non conficientes, &s;ub panis tantummodo &s;pe|cie communicaret, aut in eo erra&s;&s;e, Anathema &s;it. <HI>Concil. Trid. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 21. <HI>Can.</HI> 2.</NOTE> <HI>who &s;hall &s;ay &s;he was not moved by ju&s;t Cau&s;es and Rea&s;ons to make this Law, that non-conficient Prie&s;ts and Laicks &s;hould communicate in Bread alone, or in that &s;pecies only, or that &s;he erred in making of that Law.</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. That<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">In&s;uper de|clarat, Quam|vis Redemptor no&s;ter in &s;u|prema illa coe|na hoc Sacra|mentum in du|abus &s;peciebus in&s;tituerit, &amp; A po&s;tolis tra|diderit, tamen fatendum effe etiam &s;ub altera tantum &s;pecie totum atque integrum Chri&s;tum, verumque Sacramentum &s;umi, ac propterea, quod ad fructum attinet, nulla gratia nece&s;&s;aria ad &s;alutem eos de|fraudari, qui unam &s;peciem &s;olam accipiunt. <HI>Concil. Trid. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 21. <HI>Cap.</HI> 3. Si quis negaverit in venerabili Sacramento Euchari&s;tiae &s;ub unaquaque &s;pecie &amp; &s;ub &s;ingulis cuju&s;que &s;peciei partibus, &s;eparatione facta, totum Chri&s;tum contineri, Anathema &s;it. <HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 13. <HI>Can.</HI> 3.</NOTE> <HI>though Chri&s;t in&s;tituted this Sacrament in both kinds, and &s;o delivered it to his Apo&s;tles, yet mu&s;t it be confe&s;&s;ed, that whole, and entire Chri&s;t, and a true Sacrament is received under one kind only,</HI> and <HI>that</HI> therefore, <HI>as to the benefit of the Sacrament, they are not deprived of any Grace nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation, who receive one kind only;</HI> yea, that <HI>it is mo&s;t true, that as much is contained under either &s;pecies, as under both, for whole Chri&s;t is under the &s;pe|cies of Bread, and under every part of it; under the &s;pecies of Wine, and every particle of it.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. That<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Nullatenus ambigendum e&s;t, quod non &s;ub &s;pecie pa|nis caro tan|tum, nec &s;ub &s;pecie vini &s;an|guis tantum, &s;ed &s;ub quali|bet &s;pecie e&s;t integer totus Chri&s;tus. <HI>Concil. Ba&s;. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 30. <HI>Concil. Con&s;tant. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 13. Vina|turalis illius connexionis &amp; concomitantiae, qua partes Chri&s;ti Domini &mdash; inter &s;e copu|lantur. <HI>Concil. Trid. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 13. <HI>Cap.</HI> 3.</NOTE> <HI>by force of the natural Connexion and Concomi|tance, which is betwixt the parts of Chri&s;t's rai&s;ed Body, Chri&s;t's Body is under the &s;pecies of Wine, and his Blood under the &s;pecies of Bread; and &s;o whole Chri&s;t under each &s;pecies, and every particle of them, it being firmly to be believed, and in no wi&s;e doubted, that the whole Body and Blood of Chri&s;t is contained as well under the &s;pecies of Bread, as under that of Wine, and not the Fle&s;h only under the
<PB N="5" REF="11">&s;pecies of Bread, nor the Blood only under the &s;pecies of Wine;</HI> and<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Si quis ne|gaverit in Sanctiffimae Euchari&s;tiae Sacramento contineri vere, realiter &amp; &s;ub&s;tantialiter corpus, &amp; &s;anguinem, una cum anima &amp; divinitate Domini no&s;tri Je&s;u Chri&s;ti, ac proinde totum Chri&s;tum &mdash; Anathema &s;it. <HI>Ibid. Can.</HI> 1.</NOTE> this <HI>who&s;oever &s;hall deny,</HI> &s;aith the <HI>Trent Council, let him be Anathema.</HI></P>
<P N="7">7. That no man mu&s;t dare hereafter<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Cunctis Chri&s;ti fideli|bus interdicit, ne po&s;thac de iis aliter <HI>vel credere,</HI> vel do|cere, vel prae|dicare aude|ant, quam ex his decretis explicatum atque definitum. <HI>Conc. Trid. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 21. <HI>Cap.</HI> 1. <HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 13. <HI>praefat.</HI></NOTE> <HI>to preach, teach or believe otherwi&s;e than is by the&s;e Decrees explained and defined.</HI> The&s;e are the <HI>Doctrines, Decrees,</HI> and <HI>Definitions</HI> of the&s;e <HI>Coun|cils,</HI> and how extreamly oppo&s;ite they are unto the formerly received Doctrines of the Church of Chri&s;t, and to the plain A&s;&s;ertions of the <HI>Ancient Fathers,</HI> &s;hall be my bu&s;ine&s;s in the en|&s;uing Sections to demon&s;trate.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="6" REF="12">
<HEAD>CHAP. I. The Contents.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub"><HI>Shewing in oppo&s;ition to the decrees of the Councils of</HI> Con&s;tance, Ba&s;il <HI>and</HI> Trent, <HI>that the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, till the 12th. Century, tanght, that the Laity by divine precept were obliged to receive both &s;pecies, which is proved from the Te&s;timo|nies of</HI> Ju&s;tin Martyr, <HI>Cent.</HI> 2. &sect; 1. <HI>Of</HI> Cyprian, <HI>Gent.</HI> 3. &sect; 2. <HI>Of</HI> Ba&s;il, Ambro&s;e, <HI>and the Apo&s;tolical Con&s;titutions, Cent.</HI> 4. &sect; 3. <HI>Of</HI> Chry&s;o&s;tome <HI>and St.</HI> Au&s;tin, <HI>Cent.</HI> 5. &sect; 4. <HI>Of</HI> Cae|&s;arius Arelaten&s;is, <HI>and</HI> Procopius Gazaeus, <HI>Cent.</HI> 6. &sect; 5. <HI>Of</HI> I&s;idore Hi&s;palen&s;is, <HI>and the Council of</HI> Braga, <HI>Cent.</HI> 7. &sect; 6. <HI>Of venerable</HI> Bede, <HI>Cent.</HI> 8. &sect; 7. <HI>Of</HI> Hincmarus Remen&s;is <HI>and</HI> Pa&s;cha&s;ius, <HI>Cent.</HI> 9. &sect; 8. <HI>Of</HI> Lanfrank <HI>and</HI> An&s;elme, <HI>Cent.</HI> 11. &sect; 9. <HI>Of</HI> Pa&s;chal, Hugo de Sancto Victore, Arnoldus Carnoten&s;is, <HI>St.</HI> Bernard, <HI>and</HI> Rupertus Taitien&s;is, <HI>Cent.</HI> 12. &sect; 10. <HI>Of</HI> Albertus Magnus, <HI>Cent.</HI> 13. &sect; 11. <HI>Five Corollaries from the Doctrine of the Fathers in this Point,</HI> &sect; 12.</HEAD>
<P>FIRST then whereas the <HI>Councils</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 1.</NOTE> <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> and<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Sancta Synodus decla|rat &amp; docet nullo divino praecepto Laicos &amp; Clericos non conficientes obligari ad Euchari&s;tiae Sacramentum &s;ub utraque &s;pecie &s;umen|dum. <HI>Se&s;&s;.</HI> 21. <HI>Cap.</HI> 1. <HI>Con|cil. Con&s;t. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 13.</NOTE> <HI>Trent</HI> have declared, defined and determined, That <HI>the Faithful Laity and the Clergy that do not con&s;ecrate, are not obliged by divine precept to receive the Sacrament of the Euchari&s;t in both the &s;pecies of Bread and Wine.</HI> The <HI>Fathers</HI> do, in oppo&s;ition to this Doctrine, either expre&s;ly, or by plain con&s;equence a&s;&s;ert that the <HI>Laity,</HI> as well as <HI>Prie&s;ts,</HI> by divine precept, are obliged to receive the Sacrament of the <HI>Lord's Supper</HI> in both kinds, and that the pre|cept, <HI>drink ye all of this,</HI> was by our <HI>Lord</HI> directed, <HI>as well to Lay-men us to Prie&s;ts. Ju&s;tin Martyr,</HI> in his Second <HI>Apology,</HI> relates the practice of the <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> thus, <HI>After the Pre&s;ident hath given thanks, and all the People &s;aid</HI> Amen,<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> pag. 97.</NOTE> <HI>the Deacons give to every per&s;on pre&s;ent to partici|pate of the Bread, Wine and Water, which are ble&s;&s;ed, and this food me call the Euchari&s;t, which none but he that believeth our Doctrine, and is Baptized can re|ceive.</HI> And to &s;hew us that he did not look upon
<PB N="7" REF="12">this practice as an arbitrary thing, he adds, That<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> p. 98.</NOTE> <HI>the Ble&s;&s;ed Apo&s;tles in their Go&s;pels had delivered that Chri&s;t commanded them to do &s;o;</HI> for, <HI>be having taken Bread, and given thanks, is by them declared to have &s;aid, Do this in remembrance of me, this is my Body; and al&s;o when he had taken the Cup, and given thanks, to have &s;aid This is my Blood, and to have given it to them alone.</HI> Where note fir&s;t, that <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> &s;peaks here of a <HI>command</HI> of Chri&s;t, which cannot po&s;&s;ibly re|late unto the <HI>con&s;ecration,</HI> but to the <HI>participation</HI> of the Ele|ments, the command being, <HI>Do this, Take, eat, Drink ye all of this.</HI> Secondly, he had &s;aid before that, <HI>only</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> p. 98.</NOTE> <HI>Believers did communicate;</HI> this he now proves, becau&s;e Chri&s;t delivered the Elements <HI>to them alone,</HI> commanding them to partake of them. He therefore clearly &s;peaks of delivering the Bread and Wine to the Communicants: Moreover &s;peaking of the &s;ervice performed by <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> on the <HI>Lord</HI>'s Day, he &s;aith, <HI>Prayers being fini&s;hed, we offer Bread,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 98.</NOTE> <HI>Wine and Water, and the Pre&s;ident gives thanks and Prai&s;e, and the People &s;ay Amen; and there is made a Di&s;tribution of tho&s;e things which have been con&s;ecrated, and every one partakes of them;</HI> and then he thus concludes, that<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> p 99. B.</NOTE> <HI>Chri&s;t ri&s;ing upon this day, appeared, and taught tho&s;e things which we have now laid before your Eyes,</HI> He therefore mu&s;t have taught, according to <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr,</HI> the di&s;tribution of the Bread and Wine to every Communicant. Here then ob&s;erve to the confu&s;ion of the <HI>Trent Council,</HI> Fir&s;t, That it was the <HI>Tradition</HI> of the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> that Chri&s;t <HI>commanded,</HI> that the Euchari&s;t under both kinds, &s;hould be given to every one pre&s;ent at the Sacrament, and that the di&s;tribution of tho&s;e things which were con&s;ecrated, &s;o that <HI>every one &s;hould partake of them,</HI> is that which <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> taught. Secondly, That they declared that Chri&s;t gave this commandment in his <HI>Go&s;pels,</HI> whence it is evident, that the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> and all the Chri&s;tians of their times, and of the times of <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr,</HI> did interpret the In&s;titution of the Sacrament by Chri&s;t, as a <HI>command,</HI> that every faithful Per&s;on pre&s;ent &s;hould partake both of the con&s;ecrated Bread and Cup, and that both &s;hould be di&s;tribu|ted to them.</P>
<PB N="8" REF="13">
<P>St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> in his <HI>Epi&s;tle</HI> to <HI>Cacilian</HI> complains of &s;ome,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 2.</NOTE> who <HI>out of Ignorance, or Simplicity, in &s;anctifying of the Cup of the Lord, and</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">In calice Domini &s;ancti|ficando &amp; plebi mini&s;trando. <HI>Ep.</HI> 63. <HI>ed. Oxon. p.</HI> 148.</NOTE> in the Mini&s;tration of it to the People, <HI>did not that which Je&s;us Chri&s;t, our Lord and God, the Author and Teacher of that Sacrifice, did and taught, becau&s;e they u&s;ed only Water, and mixed not Wine with it in the Cup they con&s;ecrated, and di&s;tributed among the People.</HI> Where note that this they did not out of any prophane Opinion of the Wickedne&s;s of drinking Wine, as the <HI>Aquarii,</HI> and <HI>Encratitae,</HI> and the <HI>Ta|tiani</HI> did, but only out of <HI>Ignorance and Simplicity,</HI> and there|fore he informs us, That they did this only in their <HI>morning Sacrifice,</HI> that the <HI>Heathens</HI> might not conclude that they were <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> and &s;o hale them away to <HI>Martyrdom, becau&s;e they &s;mell'd of Wine:</HI> And that<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Cum ad coenandum ve|nimus mixtum calicem offeri|mus. <HI>p.</HI> 155, 156.</NOTE> <HI>in their evening Sacrifice</HI> they <HI>offered a Cup mixt,</HI> according to Cu&s;tom. Now again&s;t this humane and novel Cu&s;tom he argues,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> From the Cu&s;tom of<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Quanquam &s;ciam Epi&s;co|pos plurimos Eccle&s;iis Do|minicis in <HI>toto mundo</HI> divina dignatione praepo&s;itos vangelicae ritatis ac <HI>minicae traditionis</HI> tenere rationem, nec ab eo quod Chri&s;tus magifter &amp; praecepit &amp; ge&s;|&s;it, humana &amp; novella in&s;titutione decedere. <HI>Ibid. p.</HI> 148.</NOTE> <HI>mo&s;t Bi&s;hops in the Church of Chri&s;t; Who,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>keep to the evangelical Truth, and the Tradition of our Lord, and do not, by any new and humane In&s;ti|tution, recede from that which Chri&s;t our Ma&s;ter hath commanded and performed.</HI> Whence it is evident, that in the Judgment of St. <HI>Cyprian,</HI> Chri&s;t both <HI>commanded,</HI> That the Cup mixed with Water &s;hould be <HI>admini&s;tred to the People,</HI> and did &s;o admini|&s;ter it.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly.</HI> From the Nece&s;&s;ity of obeying Chri&s;t's In&s;tituti|on, and Command; for &s;aith he,<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Religio&s;um pariter &amp; nece&s;&s;arium duxi has ad vos literas facere, ut &s;iquis in i&s;to errore adhuc teneatur, veri|tatis luce per&s;pecta ad radi|cem atque originem <HI>traditio|nis dominicae</HI> revertatur&mdash;Quando aliquid Deo in&s;piran|te &amp; mandante praecipitur, nece&s;&s;e e&s;t domino &s;ervus fi|delis obtemperet, excu&s;atus a pud omnes quod nihil &s;ibi arroganter a&s;&s;umat qui offen|&s;am domini timere compelli|tur ni&s;i faciat quod <HI>jubetur. ib.</HI></NOTE> <HI>I thought it both Religious and Nece&s;&s;ary to write the&s;e Letters to you, That, if any be yet held under this Error, &s;eeing the Light of the Truth, they may return to the Root and Original of the Tradition of our Lord.&mdash;For when any thing is</HI> injoined <HI>by the In&s;piration and Command of God, it is nece&s;&s;ary that the Faithful Servant &s;hould obey his Lord, and he will be excu&s;ed of all Men, That he arrogantly a&s;&s;umeth nothing to him&s;elf, who is compelled to fear the Anger of the Lord, if he do not what he hath commanded.</HI> St. <HI>Cy|prian</HI> therefore did believe that Chri&s;t required, That the Cup, offered in Remembrance of him,
<PB N="9" REF="13">&s;hould be mixed with Wine and Water; and being thus of|fered, &s;hould be di&s;tributed to the People; and that he who did not &s;o Admini&s;ter, did <HI>arrogantly a&s;&s;ume unto him&s;elf,</HI> and had ju&s;t Cau&s;e <HI>to fear the Indignation of his Lord.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> This he proves al&s;o from the Exhortation and Com|mand of Wi&s;dom;<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><HI>Prov.</HI> ix. 5.</NOTE> <HI>Come, eat of my Bread, and drink of the Wine that I have mingled:</HI> Where by mixed Wine, <HI>the Cup of the Lord mixed with Wine and Water, is,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>prophetically &s;poken of;</HI> adding, That <HI>we could not drink the Blood of Chri&s;t, had not He first been pre&s;&s;ed, and trampled upon;</HI> and,<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Ni&s;i Chri|&s;tus calicem prior biberet in quo creden|tibus propina|ret. <HI>p.</HI> 150.</NOTE> <HI>had not be fir&s;t drunk the Cup in which he drunk to Believers.</HI> More|over, <HI>as Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>commanded the Water of eternal Life to be given to Believers in Bapti&s;m; &s;o al&s;o by the Example of his Ma&s;ter&s;hip, he taught the Cup was to be mingled with Wine and Water: For about the Day of his Pa&s;&s;ion taking the Cup, He ble&s;|&s;ed it, and gave to his Di&s;ciples; &s;aying, Drink ye all of this, for this is my Blood of the New Te&s;tament which is &s;hed for many for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins.&mdash;And the Apo&s;tle</HI> Paul <HI>&s;aith, the Lord Je|&s;us, the &s;ame Night in which he was betrayed took Bread, and gi|ving Thanks, he brake it, and &s;aid, This is my Body which &s;hall be delivered for you, do this in Remembrance of me; likewi&s;e, after Supper, he took the Cup, &s;aying, This Cup is the New Te&s;tament in my Blood; this do, as oft as you drink it, in Remembrance of me; for as oft as you eat this Bread and drink this Cup, you &s;hew th Lords Death till he come. Now,</HI> &s;aith he,<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Quod &s;i a Domino prae|cipitur N. B. &amp; ab Apo&s;tolo ejus hoc idem confirmatur &amp; traditur, ut quotiescunque biberimus in Commemoratio|nem Domini haec &s;aciamus quod fecit &amp; Dominus, inve|nimus non ob&s;ervari a nobis quod mandatum e&s;t, ni&s;i ea|dem quae dominus &s;ecit, nos quoque &s;aciamus. <HI>p.</HI> 152.</NOTE> <HI>if it be</HI> commanded <HI>by our Lord, and the &s;ame thing be confirmed, and delivered by his Apo&s;tle, That as oft as we drink in Commemoration of our Lord, we &s;hould do that which our Lord did; we find that is not ob&s;erved by us which is commanded, unle&s;s we do the &s;ame things which our Lord did, and mingling the Cup of the Lord after the &s;ame man|ner we recede not from the divine In&s;titution.</HI></P>
<P>La&s;tly. <HI>If any of our Predece&s;&s;ors,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>out of Ignorance, or Simplicity, did not hold, and ob&s;erve that</HI><NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">&mdash;Quod nos dominus facere exemplo &amp; Magi&s;terio &s;uo docuit, &amp;c. <HI>p.</HI> 156, 157.</NOTE> <HI>which the Lord taught us to do by his Example, and</HI> command; <HI>Gods Mercy may &s;hew Pardon to him, whereas no Pardon will be &s;hewed to us, being in&s;tructed and admoni&s;hed to offer, as our Lord did, his Cup mixed with Wine, if we do not &s;o. Wherefore we have directed
<PB N="10" REF="14">Letters to all our Colleagues, That the evangelical</HI> Command, <HI>and the Tradition of our Lord, &s;hould be every where ob&s;erved, and that there &s;hould be no receding from that which Chri&s;t both taught and did.</HI></P>
<P>Here then is all that <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> a&s;&s;ert again&s;t the Definitions of the <HI>Councils</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance, Ba&s;il</HI> and <HI>Trent, viz.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. That our <HI>Lord</HI> taught both by Example, and <HI>command</HI> the Mini&s;tration of the Cup, or that this was enjoined <HI>by In|&s;piration and</HI> Command <HI>of God.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. That <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> in mini&s;tring the Cup <HI>drank to Believers,</HI> and, That <HI>he commanded them to drink it,</HI> by &s;aying, <HI>Drink ye all of this;</HI> and that the &s;ame thing is confirmed by the <HI>Apo&s;tle, &s;ay|ing, This do, as oft as you drink it, in Remembrance of me.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. That this <HI>evangelical Command,</HI> and <HI>Tradition</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> is to be every where ob&s;erved, and that none &s;hould recede from what he did <HI>both teach and do,</HI> none &s;hould recede from the <HI>divine In&s;truction;</HI> that it is nece&s;&s;ary that <HI>the Faithful Ser|vant &s;hould obey his Lord,</HI> and that he may ju&s;tly fear his Anger if he do not what he hath commanded.</P>
<P>Now that St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> in this <HI>Epi&s;tle</HI> &s;peaks not only of the <HI>Con&s;ecrution,</HI> or <HI>Oblation</HI> of the <HI>Cup,</HI> but al&s;o of the <HI>Di&s;tribu|tion</HI> of it, and the <HI>Participation</HI> of it by the <HI>People,</HI> is evident beyond all Contradiction. For,</P>
<P N="1">1. He expre&s;ly &s;peaks of &s;anctifying the Lords Cup, and <HI>vtini&s;tring it to the People.</HI> N. B. and of the Blood of the Lord<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Epoto San|guine Domint <HI>p.</HI> 153.</NOTE> <HI>drank off by them;</HI> and of the Cup which in the <HI>P&s;almi&s;t?</HI> Phra&s;e, <HI>inebriates the Drinkers of it.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. He adds, that &s;ome perhaps might plead in favour of that Practice, he condemns, That they u&s;ed only Water, lea&s;t their Per&s;ecutors, <HI>perceiving that they &s;melled of Wine in the Morning,</HI> might hence conclude, they had received the Sacrament, and gather thence that they were <HI>Chri&s;tians;</HI> which could by no means be objected, if he argued only for the <HI>Con&s;ecration</HI> of Wine, and not for the <HI>Participation</HI> of it by <HI>Believers al&s;o,</HI> &s;eeing they could not &s;mell of that which they did not partake of.</P>
<P N="3">3.<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 155.</NOTE> He &s;aith, That <HI>if the fear of &s;melling of Wine &s;hould keep Men from doing what Chri&s;t did, and</HI> commanded <HI>to be done in commemoration of him&s;elf, the Brother hood would be withdrawn from the Pa&s;&s;ion of Chri&s;t in the times of Per&s;ecution, whil&s;t they thus learn|ed to be a&s;hamed of his Blood in the Oblations:</HI> Whereas, if it be|longed
<PB N="11" REF="14">not to them to drink of the Blood of the Oblation, jure communications, <HI>by right of participation,</HI> as St. <HI>Cyorian</HI> &s;ays it did, if they were not obliged to drink of it <HI>in remem|brance of him,</HI> this con&s;equence mu&s;t be infirm.</P>
<P N="4">4. Whereas they who did celebrate this Sacrifice with Bread and Water con&s;ecrated in the Morning Sacrifice, thought this a good excu&s;e, that in the Evening Sacrifice they u&s;ed Wine mixed with Water. St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 136.</NOTE> That <HI>this excu&s;e is not &s;ufficient;</HI> partly, becau&s;e <HI>the People could not be all invited to the Evening Sacrifice;</HI> partly, becau&s;e <HI>in every Sacrifice me make men|tion of Chri&s;t's Pa&s;&s;ion, and &s;o mu&s;t do no other thing in any Sa|crifice than what Chri&s;t did;</HI> which Rea&s;ons can carry no weight in them, but upon &s;uppo&s;ition of an obligation on the People to communicate of the con&s;ecrated Wine and Water.</P>
<P><HI>La&s;tly,</HI> He adds, That <HI>if the blu&s;h to drink the Blood of Chri&s;t,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibid.</NOTE> <HI>we cannot be prepared to pour out our Blood for Chri&s;t;</HI> which not the Prie&s;t alone, but all the People mu&s;t be prepared to do; it therefore is extreamly evident, that here St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> di&s;cour&s;eth not only of the Prie&s;t's obligation to <HI>con&s;ecrate</HI> Wine mixed with Water, but al&s;o of the Peoples obligation to <HI>partake</HI> of the <HI>Cup</HI> &s;o con&s;ecrated.</P>
<P>In the <HI>Apo&s;tolical Con&s;titutions</HI> the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> are in|troduced,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 3.</NOTE> giving this order,<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> 1. 2. c. 57.</NOTE> <HI>When the Sacri|fice is offered, let every order of Believers receive by them&s;elves of the Lord's Body, and of his precious Blood.</HI> The Title of which Con&s;titution is. <HI>What every one of the Clergy and Laity</HI> ought to do <HI>in the A&s;&s;embly.</HI> In the Sacramental Thank&s;giving they &s;peak thus, <HI>We give thee thanks O Father for Chri&s;t's precious Blood &s;hed for our &s;akes, and for his precious Body,</HI><NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> l. 7. c. 25.</NOTE> <HI>the</HI> Antitypes <HI>of which me now celebrate, be having commanded us to &s;hew forth his Death.</HI> This Prayer all the Faithful make, and all that are Baptized are the per&s;ons who are thus to &s;hew forth his Death. In the Prayer after the divine Oblation, they &s;ay thus,<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Lib. <HI>2.</HI> cap. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Let the Bi&s;hop Communicate, then the Prie&s;ts, Deacons,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Among&s;t the Women, the Deacon|ne&s;&s;es, Virgins and Windows, then the Children, then all the People in their Order; and the Prie&s;t, let him tender the Obla|tion, &s;aying, The Body of Chri&s;t, and let the Receiver &s;ay,</HI> Amen;
<PB N="12" REF="15"><HI>the Deason, let him hold the Cup, and giving it, &s;ay, The Blood of Chri&s;t, the Cup of Life, and he that drinketh it let him &s;ay,</HI> Amen. And in the clo&s;e of the&s;e Pre&s;criptions are the&s;e words,<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> &amp;c. c. 15.</NOTE> <HI>The&s;e things we the Apo&s;tles have com|manded you Bi&s;hops, Prie&s;ts, and Deacons to ob&s;erve, touching the My&s;tical Service.</HI></P>
<P>St. <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> is an expre&s;s a&s;&s;ertor of the &s;ame Doctrine; for he &s;pends a whole Chapter to prove that he who is regenerated by <HI>Bapti&s;m,</HI><NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> Tom. 1. l. 1. de Bapt. c. 3.</NOTE> ought <HI>afterwards to be nouri&s;hed by the participation of the divine</HI> My&s;teries in the plural, not by one of them only, and<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> P. 580.</NOTE> <HI>how this &s;hould be done,</HI> Chri&s;t, &s;aith he, <HI>hath taught</HI> us, <HI>&s;aying, unle&s;s you eat the Fle&s;h of the Son of Man, and</HI> drink his Blood, <HI>you have no Life in you. He that eateth my Fle&s;h, and</HI> drinks <HI>my Blood, hath eternal Life,</HI> &amp;c. And <HI>at the clo&s;e of the Go&s;pels it is written, that Je&s;us taking Bread, and giving thanks, brake, and gave it to his Di&s;ciples, and &s;aid, Take, eat, this is my Body broken for you, this do in remembrance of me; and taking the Cup, and giving thanks, he gave it to them, &s;aying, Drink ye all of this,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>The Apo&s;tle al&s;o doth atte&s;t the&s;e things, &s;aying, I received from the Lord that which I delivered unto you, that the Lord Je&s;us, in the Night in which he was betrayed, took Bread, and giving thanks, brake it, and &s;aid, This is my Body broken for you, do this in remembrance of me: Like|wi&s;e after Supper, he took the Cup, &s;aying, This Cup is the New Te&s;tament in my Blood, do this in remembrance of me; for as of: as you &s;hall not this Bread, and drink this Cup, you &s;hew forth the Lord's Death till he come.</HI><NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> p. 581.</NOTE> <HI>What there|fore do the&s;e words profit us? That eating and drink|ing we might be always mindful of him who died for us, and ro&s;e again.</HI> Which words are as full a confu|tation of the <HI>Roman</HI> Doctrine, as can be de&s;ired by any <HI>Prote&s;tant.</HI></P>
<P>For they expre&s;ly teach, that every Baptized per&s;on<NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> Moral. Reg. 21. Tom. 2. p. 431.</NOTE> is bound to partake of <HI>both the My&s;teries,</HI> of the Bread and of the Cup, that our Lord hath taught him how he &s;hould be nouri&s;hed by the&s;e my&s;teries, even by eating Sacramentally of his Fle&s;h, and drinking Sacramentally his Blood.</P>
<PB N="13" REF="15">
<P>That the words of the In&s;titution of this Supper mentioned in the <HI>Go&s;pels,</HI> and in particular tho&s;e words, <HI>Drink ye all of this,</HI> belong to <HI>all Believers,</HI> even as much as the forementioned words, <HI>He that eats my Fle&s;h and drinks my Blood, hath eternal Life, &amp;c.</HI> they being here introduced to prove, that all Be|lievers ought to be nouri&s;hed by the holy My&s;teries; that there|fore,</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>Do this;</HI> in both the&s;e Places is not a Command directed to the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> to <HI>Sacrifice</HI> Chri&s;ts Body and his Blood; but to Believers to eat and <HI>drink</HI> them. And,</P>
<P N="4">4. That we are to remember and <HI>&s;hew forth Chri&s;ts Death,</HI> not only by eating, but by <HI>drinking</HI> al&s;o.</P>
<P>St. <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> &s;peaking of the&s;e Sacraments, as he, and many of the <HI>Ancients</HI> call the con&s;ecrated Bread and Wine, informs us, that Chri&s;t &s;peaks of them in the <HI>Song of Songs,</HI> &s;aying,<NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">Edite inquit fratres mei &amp; inebrianimi. <HI>De Sa|cram l.</HI> 5. <HI>c.</HI> 3. quoties enim bibis, remi&s;&s;ionem accipis peccatorum &amp; inebriaris in Spiritu. <HI>ibid.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Eat my Brethren, and be in|ebriated; for as oft as thou</HI> drinke&s;t, <HI>thou receive&s;t Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins, and art inebriated with the Spi|rit.</HI> And the &s;ame <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> el&s;ewhere &s;aith, <HI>If as oft as this Blood is poured out, it is poured out for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins,</HI><NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">Debeo illum &s;emper accipere, ut &s;emper mihi pec|cata dimittantur. <HI>l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 6.</NOTE> <HI>I</HI> ought <HI>alwaies to</HI> re|ceive <HI>it, that my Sins may always be</HI> remitted. In which Words he not only a&s;&s;erts, That Chri&s;t's <HI>Blood</HI> poured out, <HI>ought</HI> to be received; which cannot be done, by receiving it only by Conco|mitance with the Body, but al&s;o that our Lord <HI>commands</HI> his Brethren not to eat only of the&s;e <HI>My&s;teries,</HI> but <HI>to be inebriated,</HI> and &s;aith, That we are thus <HI>inebriated by drinking.</HI></P>
<P>St. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom</HI> is copious on this Subject; for, &s;aith he,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 4.</NOTE> <HI>ma|ny things conduce to chri&s;tian Love,</HI><NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> in Matt. Hom. 32. p 223.</NOTE> <HI>one Table is offered to all; the &s;ame Drink is given to all, and not only &s;o, but it is given out of one Cup: For the</HI> Father <HI>being willing to induce us to love one another,</HI> ordered this, <HI>making us to drink out of one Cup, which is an In&s;tance of inten&s;e Love:</HI> So that the Sacrament of the <HI>Cup,</HI> according to St. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom,</HI> was of the In&s;titution of the <HI>Father;</HI> and he thus ordered Matters for the Advance|ment of his great Commandment of <HI>Chri&s;tian Love.</HI> In his Twenty &s;eventh <HI>Homily</HI> upon the Fir&s;t Epi&s;tle to the <HI>Corinthians,</HI>
<PB N="14" REF="16">he &s;aith, That <HI>as Chri&s;t &s;aid over the Bread, and over the</HI> Cup, <HI>do this in Remembrance of me;</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. p. 421.</NOTE> <HI>reveal|ing to us the Cau&s;e of giving us this My&s;tery: So doth St.</HI> Paul <HI>here &s;ay, As often as you eat this Bread and</HI> drink <HI>this Cup, you &s;hew the Lord's Death.</HI> Chri&s;t therefore did command the drinking of this Cup, and did it for a Cau&s;e which will remain to the Worlds End, and equally concern all <HI>Chri&s;tians, viz.</HI> The <HI>Remembrance</HI> and <HI>Annunciation of his Death.</HI> And in his Fifteenth <HI>Homily</HI> upon the Fir&s;t of <HI>Timothy</HI> he brings in Chri&s;t thus &s;peaking to the Laity, as well as Clergy, <HI>I have united, I have joined you to my &s;lf;</HI><NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. p. 316.</NOTE> <HI>I have &s;aid</HI> eat me, drink me: And whether <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> or the <HI>Trent Council</HI> &s;hould be obeyed in this Matter, it is not hard to judge, e&s;pecially if we con&s;ider, That in the Judgment of St. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom,</HI> Chri&s;t did not only in&s;titute, but command the&s;e things to be done. His Words are the&s;e: <HI>As chiefly we remember tho&s;e Words which we la&s;t hear from our departing Friends, and are wont to &s;ay, by way of Admonition to their Heirs, if they dare to tran&s;gre&s;s their Commands, con&s;ider this is the la&s;t Voice which your Father uttered, and till his la&s;t Breath he required the&s;e things.</HI> Even <HI>&s;o</HI> Paul <HI>being willing hence to ren|der his Di&s;cour&s;e formidable: Remember,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>that he gave this his la&s;t My&s;tery, and in that very Night in which he was to be &s;lain for us,</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">In Cor. 1. Hom. 27. pag. 421.</NOTE> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>he commanded the&s;e things.</HI></P>
<P>St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> doth &s;ufficiently inform us of the &s;ame thing by asking of this Que&s;tion; <HI>When our Lord &s;aith, Exceept ye ear my Fle&s;h and drink my Blood, you &s;hall have no Life in you; how is it that the People are &s;o much re&s;lrained from the Blood of the Sacrifices which were offered for Sins? If by tho&s;e Sacrifices this one Sacrifice was &s;ig|nified,</HI><NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Ab hujus Sacrificii &s;an|guine &s;umendo in alimentum, non &s;olum nemo prohibetur, &s;ed <HI>ad bibendum omnes</HI> exhor|tantur, qui volunt habere vitam. <HI>qu.</HI> 57. <HI>in Levit.</HI></NOTE> <HI>from taking of the Blood of which Sacri|fice, not only no Man is re&s;trained, but</HI> All Men are exhorted to drink it, <HI>who will have Life, for &s;urely &s;uch an</HI> Exhortation <HI>mu&s;t be equivalent to a Command.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="5" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>It is worth the Enquiry,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">In Levit. p. 327.</NOTE> <HI>Procopius Gazaeus, how it comes to pa&s;s, That when in the Law the eating of Blood is for|bidden. Now Chri&s;t commandeth us to eat his Blood.</HI></P>
<PB N="15" REF="16">
<P><MILESTONE N="6" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>I&s;idore Hi&s;palen&s;is,</HI> &s;aith, in Allu&s;ion to the Words of <HI>Wi&s;dom,</HI> That <HI>Chri&s;t, the Wi&s;dom of God, hath built him an Hou&s;e, the Church, in which he hath &s;lain the Sacrifices of his Body, in which he hath mingled the Wine of his Blood in the Cup of the divine Sa|crament; and prepared his Table, that is, the Altar of the Lord, when &s;ending forth his Servants the Apo&s;tles, and Teachers to the Fooli&s;h, that is, to all Nations that knew not the true God, he &s;aith unto them,</HI><NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Dixit, eis venite, come|dite panem meum &amp; bibite vinum quod mi&s;cui vobis, id e&s;t Sancti corporis e&s;cam &s;u|mite, &amp; poculum &s;anguinis &s;acri percipite. <HI>De Gent. vo|cat. cap.</HI> 26.</NOTE> <HI>Come, eat my Bread, and</HI> drink my Wine <HI>which I have mingled, that is, take ye the Meat of my &s;acred Body, and receive the Cup of my &s;acred Blood.</HI> His Command there|fore, according to <HI>I&s;idore,</HI> was by his <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> &s;ent to all Nations, and to the Fooli&s;h among them to <HI>drink the Cup of his &s;acred Blood.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Council</HI> held at <HI>Braga</HI> in the &s;ame <HI>Century,</HI> &s;peaking of tho&s;e who delivered to the People a piece of Bread dipp'd in the Wine for the whole Communion, confutes this Practice, by recurring, not only to the Cu&s;tom of the <HI>Church,</HI> but al&s;o to the Doctrine of the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> and the <HI>Command</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t;</HI> for, &s;ay they,<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Quidam in Sacrificiis Do|mini&mdash;Eucha|ri&s;tam vino madidam pro complemento communionis credunt popu|lis porrigen|dam &mdash; Quod quam &s;it Evangelicae &amp; Apo&s;tolicae Doctrinae contrarium non difficile ab ip&s;o fonte veritatis probabitur a quo ordinata ip&s;a Sacramentorum My&s;teria proce&s;&s;erunt. &mdash; Seor&s;im enim pa|nis, &s;eor&s;im &amp; calicis commemoratio memoratur. <HI>Concil. To.</HI> 6. <HI>p.</HI> 563.</NOTE> <HI>how Repugnant this Practice is to the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel, and Cu&s;tom of the Church, may ea&s;ily be proved from the Fountain of Truth, who gave the Cup by it &s;elf, &s;aying,</HI> Drink ye all <HI>of this, as he took the Bread by it &s;elf, &s;aying, Take, eat,</HI> &amp;c. Hence then we learn, That the Fountain of Truth <HI>com|manded,</HI> and the Doctrine of the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> requireth; That all the People &s;hould receive the Cup; and that they &s;hould re|ceive it ordinarily apart from the Bread.</P>
<P><HI>Regino</HI> quotes from <HI>venerable Bede</HI> the&s;e Words,<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Po&s;tquam infirmus &s;acra Unctione fue|rit delibutus, &s;tatim corpore &amp; &s;anguine Domini recreandus e&s;t, ut de cujus vita temporali de&s;peratur, vivificari in anima vita aeterna mereatur, ait enim Dominus, qui manducat, &amp;c. Pro|inde Sancti Canones praecipiunt ut nulli fideli in extremis po&s;ito Communio denegetur. <HI>De Eccle&s;. Di&s;c. l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 119. <HI>p.</HI> 77.</NOTE> <MILESTONE N="7" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>When the infirm Per&s;on hath been anointed, he pre&s;ently is to be refre&s;h|ed with the</HI> Body <HI>and</HI> Blood <HI>of our Lord, that he may de&s;erve to be quickned with Life Eternal in his Soul, when his corporal Life is
<PB N="16" REF="17">de&s;paired of; for our Lord &s;aith, He that eats my Fle&s;h, and</HI> drinks <HI>my</HI> Blood, <HI>hath eternal Life; and unle&s;s you eat&mdash; you &s;hall have no Life in you: And hence the &s;acred Canons command that the Communion &s;hould be denyed to none of the Faithful in the Clo&s;e of this Life.</HI> Where we learn, 1. What was then under&s;tood by the Word Communion, <HI>viz.</HI> the receiving of both Species, the Body and the Blood, and how the&s;e Species were to be re|ceived, <HI>viz.</HI> The Fle&s;h was to be eaten, and the Blood to be drunk. 2. Why they were to be both received, <HI>viz.</HI> Becau&s;e of our Lords Sayings, <HI>John</HI> vi. And <HI>3ly.</HI> We al&s;o learn, for Confutation of Mr. <HI>Condom</HI>'s fir&s;t pretended Practice of the <HI>Church,</HI> That the Sick were to receive the Body and the Blood, and that the <HI>Canons</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> required that they &s;hould not be withheld from them.</P>
<P><HI>Zacharias Chry&s;opolitanus,</HI> cites from the &s;ame <HI>Bede</HI> the&s;e Words,<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Hinc e&s;t quod ait, Bibite ex hoc omnes &amp; ore &amp; corde, ut &s;itis participes pa&s;&s;ionis meae. <HI>Monote&s;&s;. p.</HI> 306.</NOTE> <HI>Hence it is that he &s;aith, Drink ye all of this, both with the Heart and with the Mouth, that ye may be Partakers of my Pa&s;&s;ion.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="8" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>Pa&s;cha&s;ius Rathertus</HI> &s;aith, <HI>It is Chri&s;t alone who breaketh this Bread, and di&s;tributeth it to Believers by the Hands of his Mini|&s;ters,</HI><NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Similiter &amp; calicem por|rigit eis dicens, accipite &amp; hi|bite ex hoc <HI>omnes tam mini&s;tri quam reliqui credentes. cap.</HI> 15.</NOTE> <HI>&s;aying, Take ye, and</HI> drink <HI>ye all of this, as well Mini&s;ters as the re&s;t of the Faithful: This is the Blood of the new and everla&s;ting Te&s;tament. Ca&s;&s;ander</HI> informs us, That the <HI>Glo&s;s</HI> called <HI>expo|&s;itio quadruplicis Mi&s;&s;ae,</HI> expounds the Words thus,<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Ex hoc &s;cilicet Calice &s;anguinis omnes &s;cilicet &s;ine per&s;onarum acceptione. <HI>De Com. &s;ub utraque &s;pecie, p.</HI> 1043.</NOTE> <HI>Drink ye of this Cup of Blood,</HI> All <HI>without ex|ception of Per&s;ons. Hincmarus Remen&s;is,</HI> having cited the &s;ame Words, adds<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Tom. 2. p. 90.</NOTE> <HI>Haec dixit &amp; dicit, This he &s;aid then, and this he &s;aith now.</HI> All plainly contradicting the <HI>R. Glo&s;s</HI> (and Mr. <HI>Con|dom</HI>'s Expo&s;ition) That the&s;e Words, <HI>Drink ye all of this, were only &s;poken to, and concern'd only the Apo&s;tles.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Lanfranck,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 9.</NOTE> <HI>Arch-bi&s;hop</HI> of <HI>Canterbury,</HI> &s;peaks thus to <HI>Berengarius; If thou coulde&s;t with Chri&s;tian Caution under|&s;tand the&s;e things which ought to be under&s;tood literally, and
<PB N="17" REF="17">&s;piritually,</HI><NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Proculdubio crederes quod univer&s;alis Eccle&s;ia cre|dit, praedicares quod Apo&s;to|lica Doctrina in tota mandi latitudine praedicandum in|&s;tituit, carnem &s;cilicet &amp; &s;an|guinem Domini no&s;tri Je&s;u Chri&s;ti &amp; ore, &amp; corpore, &amp; ore cordis, hoc e&s;t, corpora|liter, &amp; &s;piritualiter mandu|cari &amp; bibi.&mdash; <HI>De Sacr. Euch. f.</HI> 131, 132.</NOTE> <HI>thou woulde&s;t without doubt believe that which the univer&s;al Church believes; thou would-e&s;t publi&s;h what the Doctrine of the Apo&s;tles hath appointed to be publi&s;hed through the World,</HI> viz. <HI>That the</HI> Body <HI>and</HI> Blood <HI>of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t is to be eaten and</HI> drunken, <HI>both by the Mouth and Body, and by the Mouth of the Heart; that is, both bodily and &s;piritually.</HI> And <HI>An&s;elm</HI> his Succe&s;&s;or in the &s;ame See, &s;aith, <HI>We ought to eat and drink this Sacrament two ways,</HI><NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Ore cordis &amp; ore Cor|poris. <HI>Com. in</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11.</NOTE> <HI>with the Mouth of the Heart, and of the Body.</HI> The doing both the&s;e things, the drinking of the Blood of <HI>Je&s;us</HI> with our Mouths, is that which ought to be done, that which the Doctrine of the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> hath appointed to be pub|li&s;hed.</P>
<P><HI>Pope Pa&s;chal</HI> writes to <HI>Pontius, Abbot</HI> of <HI>Clun,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect;. 10.</NOTE> thus;<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Scribens ad Caecilium B. Cyprianus ait, quando aliquid Deo in&s;piran|te, &amp; mandante praecipitur, ne|ce&s;&s;e e&s;t domi|no &s;ervus fide|lis obtempe|ret, excu&s;atus apud omnes quod nihil &s;ibi arroganter a&s;|&s;umat, ne aliud fiat a nobis quam quod pro nobis Dominus prior fecit, igi|tur in &s;umendo corpore &amp; &s;anguine Domini, juxta eundem Cyprianum, <HI>Dominicatraditio &s;ervetur,</HI> necab eo quod Chri&s;tus Magi&s;ter &amp; praecepit, &amp; ge&s;&s;it <HI>humana, &amp; novella in&s;titutione,</HI> di&s;cedatur; novimus enim per &s;e panem, per &s;e vinum ab ip&s;o Domino traditum, quem morem &s;ic &s;em|per in Sancta Eccle&s;ia con&s;ervandum docemus atque praecipimus, praeterquam in parvulis, &amp; omnino infirmis qui panem ab&s;orbere non po&s;&s;unt. <HI>Ep.</HI> 32. <HI>De non porrigenda Communione intincta. Concil. Tom.</HI> 10. <HI>p.</HI> 656.</NOTE> <HI>Cyprian</HI> writing to <HI>Caecilius</HI> &s;aith, <HI>When any thing is required by the In|&s;piration, and</HI> command <HI>of God, it is nece&s;&s;ary that the faith|ful Servant &s;hould obey his Lord.&mdash;Therefore in taking the Bo|dy and Blood of our Lord, according to the &s;ame</HI> Cyprian, <HI>let the Tradition of the Lord be ob&s;erved, nor let that be departed from by any humane and novel In&s;titution which Chri&s;t our Ma&s;ter</HI> commanded <HI>and did.</HI> He therefore owned the taking of the Cup apart from the Bread, to be a <HI>Command</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> which no <HI>new In&s;titution</HI> of Men could alter. <HI>Our Lord Je&s;us,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">Lib. 2 de Sacram. Part. 8. Fol. 395.</NOTE> <HI>Hugo de Sancto Victore, in&s;tituted the Sacrament of the Bo|dy and the Blood of Chri&s;t, and commanded that they &s;hould af|terwards do the &s;ame thing in remembrance of him&s;elf.</HI><NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">In Johan. <HI>Cap.</HI> 6.</NOTE> <HI>Ru|pertus Tuitien&s;is</HI> informs us, That <HI>our Lord pre&s;cribing the whole manner of eating his Fle&s;h, and drinking his Blood, &s;aith,</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Vid Theoph. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 word"> Matth. <HI>c.</HI> 26. <HI>p.</HI> 162.</NOTE> <HI>Do this in remembrance of me.</HI></P>
<PB N="18" REF="18">
<P><HI>Arnoldus Carnoten&s;is</HI> delivers the &s;ame Doctrine mo&s;t ex|pre&s;ly: For, faith he,<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg"><P>Scholae Evangelicae hoc primum magi&s;terium protu|lerunt.</P>
<P>Lex quippe e&s;um &s;angui|nis prohibet, Evangelium praecipit ut bibatur.</P></NOTE> <HI>the Doctrine of the Sacrament is new, and the evangelical Schools fir&s;t brought forth this Command. This Di&s;cipline was fir&s;t made known unto the World by Chri&s;t our Teacher, That Chri&s;tians &s;hould drink Blood, the &V;&s;e of which the old Law did forbid; for the old Law forbids the eating Blood, the Go&s;pel com|mands it &s;hould be drunk: In which Commands the Chri&s;tian Re|ligion ought chiefly to di&s;cern this, That the Blood of Bea&s;ts, in all things differing from the Blood of Chri&s;t, hath only the Effect of temporal Vivification, and cannot profit to eternal Life;</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Bibimus autem de &s;an|guine, Chri&s;to ip&s;o jubente. <HI>Inter opera Cypr. ad&s;cript. p.</HI> 41.</NOTE> <HI>but we</HI> drink <HI>of the Blood by his</HI> Com|mand, <HI>being made Partakers of eternal Life with him, and by him. Chri&s;t him&s;elf is the Butler, who hath reach'd forth this Cup, and taught that we &s;hould not only outwardly be da&s;hed with this Blood, but inwardly, by the powerful A&s;per&s;ion of it, &s;hould be fortified in our Souls. Petrus Cluniacen&s;is,</HI> in the &s;ame Age &s;peaks thus,<NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">Cum Chri&s;tus imperet N. B. dicens, Hoc facite, hoc plane, non aliud, hoc idem quod accipitis ad comeden|dum, quod &s;umitis <HI>ad biben|dum,</HI> corpus &s;cilicet meum &amp; fanguinem, hoc inquam facite in meam commemorationem, quid ultra certe quaeritis? &mdash; Quia quod fecit eos facere praecepit, quod eis di&s;tribuit hoc eos aliis di&s;tribuere vo|luit. <HI>Ed. Era&s;m. f.</HI> 209.</NOTE> <HI>Chri&s;t commands, do this, not another thing; this which you have received to eat, which you take to</HI> drink, viz. <HI>My Body and Blood; this, &s;ay I, do in memory of me.&mdash;That which he did, he commanded them to do; That which he di&s;tributed to them, he would have them di&s;tribute to others. Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;aith St. <HI>Bernard, the Day before his Pa&s;|&s;ion, pre&s;cribed to his Di&s;ciples the Form of this Sa|crament. He gave Efficacy to it,</HI> i. e.<NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg">Hujus Sacramenti for|mam prae&s;crip&s;it, efficaciam exhibuit, i. e. fieri praecepit. <HI>De Caena Dom. c. qui incipit,</HI> Panem Angel. <HI>f.</HI> 320. b.</NOTE> <HI>He commanded it to be done. The Pre&s;cription of the Form was under Bread and Wine; note the Order: Fir&s;t he wa&s;hes his Di&s;ciples Feet, then, going back to the Table, He ordains the Sacrifice of his Body and Blood; giving the Bread apart, and the Wine apart, &s;aying thus of the Bread, Take and eat, this is my Body; and of the Wine thus, Drink ye all of this.</HI> And again,<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">De Sacra|mento quidem Corporis &amp; fanguinis &s;ui nemo e&s;t qui ne&s;ciat hanc quoque tantam &amp; tam &s;ingularem alimoniam ea pri|mum die exhibitam, ea die commendatam, &amp; mandatam deinceps frequentari. <HI>Serm.</HI> 3. <HI>in ramis Palm. fol.</HI> 30. b.</NOTE> <HI>Concerning the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t, there is no Man who knoweth not, that upon that Day, That great and
<PB N="19" REF="18">&s;ingular Nouri&s;hment was fir&s;t exhibited, on that Day commended, and</HI> commanded <HI>henceforth to be frequented.</HI></P>
<P><NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">Hoc dici|mus, Quod po&s;tquam Chri|&s;tus exhibuit corpus &s;uum &s;ub &s;pecie pa|nis, tunc etiam po&s;tea exhibuit &s;anguinem &s;u|um &s;ub &s;pecie vini, &amp; utrum|que Sacramen|taliter e&s;&s;e ce|lebrandum praecepit in Ec|cle&s;ia per &s;ta|tuta Apo&s;toli|ca, &amp; ideo Ec|cle&s;ia in&s;tructa actione Chri|&s;ti, utrumque celebrat, divi|&s;im conficiendo corpus &s;ub &s;pecie panis, &amp; divi&s;im conficiendo &s;anguinem &s;ub &s;pecie vini, quod autem duo haec exhibuerit &amp; celebranda in&s;tituerit Chri&s;tus patet, <HI>Matth.</HI> 27. &mdash; Ex omnibus iftis accipitur quod Chri&s;t us &s;ub una &s;pecie panis corpus &s;uum tradidit, &s;ub altera &s;pecie vini tradidit &s;anguinem, &amp; <HI>fic &s;ervandum in&s;tituit,</HI> &amp; cum Chri&s;ti actio &s;it no&s;tra in&s;tru|ctio, pro certo haec duo nobis &s;ervanda e&s;&s;e praecepit, &amp; ideo &s;ub una &s;pecie corpus, &amp; &s;ub alia <HI>tradimus</HI> &s;anguinem, <HI>Sum. de Sacr. Euch. Di&s;t.</HI> 3. <HI>tr.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 5.</NOTE> <HI>Albertus Magnus</HI> teacheth,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect;. 11.</NOTE> That <HI>after Chri&s;t had exhi|bited his Body under the Species of Bread, he afterwards exhibited his Blood under the Species of Wine, and by the Apo&s;tolical Statutes</HI> commanded both <HI>to be &s;acramentally celebrated in the Church;</HI> and having proved from the <HI>Evangeli&s;ts St. Matthew, Mark,</HI> and <HI>Luke,</HI> That Chri&s;t celebrated both apart.&mdash;<HI>From all the&s;e things,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>'tis known or under&s;tood, that Chri&s;t, un|der one Species of Bread, delivered his Body, and under the other Species of Wine, his Blood, and &s;o appointed it to be ob&s;erved; and &s;ince Chri&s;t's Action is our In&s;truction,</HI> Pro certo haec duo nobis &s;ervanda e&s;&s;e praecepit, <HI>He</HI> commanded <HI>the&s;e</HI> Two <HI>things mo&s;t certainly to be ob&s;erved, and therefore under</HI> One Species we deliver <HI>the Body, and under the other the</HI> Blood. Where we &s;ee the Practice of the <HI>Church</HI> was then to deliver both Species, and that the Command of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> was then conceived to be their Motive &s;o to do, according to that &s;aying of <HI>Durantus,</HI><NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">In primitiva Eccle&s;ia omnes qui celebrationi Mi&s;&s;arum intererant &s;ingulis diebus com|municare &s;olebant, eo quod Apo&s;toli omnes de calice bibebant, Domino dicente, Bibite ex hoc omnes, <HI>Rat. l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 53.</NOTE> <HI>In the primitive Church all that heard Ma&s;s, u&s;ed to commu|nicate, becau&s;e the Apo&s;tles all drank of the Cup, the Lord &s;aying,</HI> Drink ye all <HI>of this.</HI></P>
<P>Here then,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect;. 12.</NOTE> be&s;ides what hath already been ob&s;erved from the&s;e Pa&s;&s;ages, we farther learn;</P>
<P N="1">1. That every Order of Believers ought to receive of the Lords Body, and of his precious Blood <HI>apart;</HI> That they ought <HI>to</HI> drink this Cup <HI>with the Mouth of the Body.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. That the <HI>Tradition</HI> of our <HI>Lord</HI> is to be ob&s;erved, and not departed from, by rea&s;on of any <HI>humane and novel In&s;titu|tion.</HI></P>
<PB N="20" REF="19">
<P N="3">3. That the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> commanded the&s;e things to be ob|&s;erved, that the Doctrine of the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> and the Cu&s;tom of the <HI>Church</HI> require the Cup &s;hould be received apart,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Interim autem dum ab eo in hoc mundo peregrinamur, <HI>Corpore &amp; &s;anguine ejus</HI> in via pa&s;cimur, &s;icut Apo&s;tolis &s;uis hoc My&s;terium in coena ulti|ma ante mortem &s;uam tradi|dit, &amp; nobis &s;equentibus fre|quentandum <HI>per eos mandavit. Guitm. de. Sacram. lib.</HI> 3. <HI>fol.</HI> 91. b.</NOTE> that this the <HI>univer|&s;al Church believes,</HI> and the Doctrine of the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> hath appointed this to be publi&s;hed throughout the world, that the Blood of our <HI>Lord Je&s;us</HI> is to be drunk by the mouth of the Bo|dy, that the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> commands it &s;hould be drunk, that the <HI>Apo&s;tolical Statutes</HI> commanded both to be celebrated in the Church, that God him&s;elf or|dered that we &s;hould all drink out of one Cup, and that this is required by the in&s;piration and command of God; that Chri&s;t &s;aid, <HI>Eat me, Drink me,</HI> that he <HI>exhorted all Men to drink</HI> of his Blood; that he &s;ent forth his <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> and Teachers, to invite them to drink of the Wine that he had mingled, and to receive the Cup of his &s;acred Blood; that he <HI>commanded</HI> the&s;e things, that he &s;o appointed it to be ob&s;erved, and that we drink of the blood of Chri&s;t <HI>by his command.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. That the command, <HI>Drink ye all of this,</HI> was by <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> directed <HI>as well unto the People as the Mini&s;ters, to all without exception,</HI> that what Chri&s;t did he commanded his followers to do, <HI>what he di&s;tributed to them, he would have them di&s;tribute to others,</HI> and that in the <HI>Primitive Church all communicated,</HI> be|cau&s;e Chri&s;t &s;aid to his Apo&s;tles, <HI>Drink ye all of this.</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. That by receiving of both kinds, they &s;hewed forth Chri&s;t's Death, and this is as much as any <HI>Prote&s;tant</HI> hath &s;aid, or needs to &s;ay.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="21" REF="19">
<HEAD>CHAP. II.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub"><HI>The Contents.</HI> Whereas the&s;e Councils take upon them to Decree this Sacrament &s;hall be celebrated otherwi&s;e, than by their own confe&s;&s;ion it was in&s;tituted by Chri&s;t, The Fathers in the general a&s;&s;ert, That this My&s;tery ought not to be celebrated otherwi&s;e than it was delivered by Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles, <HI>&sect;. 1.</HI> When &s;ome delivered the Bread dipp'd in the con&s;ecrated Cup as a compleat Communion, they con|demned this practice as varying from the In&s;titution and from the practice of the Church, <HI>&sect;. 2.</HI> They condemned the offering on the Altar, other things be&s;ides Bread, Wine and Water for the &s;ame Rea&s;ons, <HI>&sect;. 3.</HI> They condemned the u&s;ing Wine not mixed with Water on the &s;ame account, <HI>&sect;. 4.</HI> They condemned the celebration of this My&s;tery in con&s;ecrated Bread and Water only from the &s;ame grounds, <HI>&sect;. 5.</HI> Inferences again&s;t Communion in one kind from the premi&s;es, <HI>&sect;. 6.</HI></HEAD>
<P>SEcondly,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 13. Se&s;&s;. 21. c. 3.</NOTE> whereas the Councils of <HI>Con&s;tance</HI> and of <HI>Trent</HI> confe&s;s, That Chri&s;t in&s;tituted this venerable Sacrament <HI>under both &s;pecies,</HI> and &s;o delivered it to his Apo&s;tles, and that the <HI>Primitive Church</HI> did practi&s;e &s;uitably unto this In&s;tituti|on, and yet deny that there lies any Obligation on <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> from this In&s;titution, or this practice to admini&s;ter it, or to receive it in both kinds,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 21. cap. 2.</NOTE> a&s;&s;erting they have power as <HI>di&s;pen|&s;atores My&s;teriorum Dei, Di&s;pen&s;ers of the My&s;teries of God,</HI> to make this change in the Admini&s;tration of this Sacrament, whereas, I &s;ay, the&s;e are the bold A&s;&s;ertions of the foremen|tioned <HI>Councils;</HI> in oppo&s;ition to them the Sayings of the <HI>Fa|thers</HI> are very clear and pregnant, in which they plainly &s;hew they thought them&s;elves, and all that bare the Name of <HI>Chri|&s;tians,</HI> obliged to ob&s;erve the In&s;titution of the Sacrament, which by the Confe&s;&s;ions of the <HI>Councils</HI> of <HI>Trent</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> was in both kinds, and in the di&s;tribution of it, to do as <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> the Author of it did, <HI>viz.</HI> to give both &s;pecies apart to the Communicants, which came to be partakers of this Holy Sa|crament. And,</P>
<PB N="22" REF="20">
<P N="1"><MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="&sect;"> 1. The Author which pa&s;&s;eth under the Name of <HI>Am|bro&s;e,</HI> in his Comment on the&s;e words, <HI>He that eateth this Bread, or drinks this Cup unworthily,</HI> &amp;c. &s;aith thus,<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Indignum dicit e&s;&s;e domino qui aliter my&s;terium celebrat quam ab eo tradi|tum e&s;t, non enim pote&s;t devotus e&s;&s;e qui aliter prae|&s;umit quam datum e&s;t ab Authore. <HI>In locum.</HI></NOTE> <HI>He pronounces him unworthy of the Lord, who otherwi&s;e doth celebrate this My&s;tery than it was delivered by him; for he cannot be devout who pre|&s;umes to do it otherwi&s;e, then it was given by the Au|thor.</HI> And this good Rule in after-Ages was ap|proved of, and even tran&s;cribed by the <HI>Ritua|li&s;ts,</HI> and by the <HI>Commentators</HI> on the &s;ame place,<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Indigne dicit, i.e, or|dine non ob&s;ervato, viz. qui aliter My&s;terium illud cele|brat vel &s;umit quam tradi|tum e&s;t a &s;anctis patribus. <HI>Haym. in locum, p.</HI> 130.</NOTE> <HI>He eats unworthily,</HI> &s;aith Haymo, <HI>that is, not ob&s;erving order, who either celebrates,</HI> or takes <HI>that My&s;tery otherwi&s;e than it was delivered by the Holy Fathers.</HI> St. <HI>An&s;elm</HI> in his Comment on the &s;ame Chapter &s;aith, That <Q REND="margQuotes">"St. <HI>Paul</HI> reproved the <HI>Co|rinthians</HI> becau&s;e they did not well ob&s;erve what he had delivered, touching this matter, he having delivered to them what the Lord delivered to him, and therefore that which they ought to retain reverently and inviolably;</Q> adding, That<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Qui aliter my&s;terium ce|lebrat quam a Chri&s;to tradi|tum e&s;t. <HI>Ibid.</HI></NOTE> <HI>he eats and drinks unworthily, who either cele|brates or</HI> receives <HI>that My&s;tery otherwi&s;e than it was delivered by our Lord.</HI> The <HI>Glo&s;s</HI> cites the &s;ame words from <HI>Ambro&s;e, Aquinas</HI> from the <HI>Glo&s;s. He is unworthy,</HI> &s;aith Hugo, <HI>who celebrates the My&s;tery otherwi&s;e than by Chri&s;t it was delivered.</HI> And he, &s;aith <HI>Lyra,</HI> is unworthy,<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Qui non ob&s;ervat ritum a Chri&s;to in&s;titutum. <HI>Ibid.</HI></NOTE> <HI>who ob&s;erves not the Cu&s;tom in&s;tituted by Chri&s;t. Gregory</HI> the Third condemns the placing Two or Three Cups upon the Altar at once, as being not agreeable to the practice of our Lord. For, &s;aith he<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">In mi&s;&s;arum &s;olenniis ob|&s;ervandum e&s;t quod dominus no&s;ter Je&s;us Chri&s;tus Sanctis &s;uis di&s;tribuit di&s;cipulis, acce|pit enim calicem &amp; dedit eis, dicens, Hic e&s;t calix Novi Te|&s;tamenti in meo &s;anguine, hoc facite quotie&s;cunque &s;umitis. <HI>Ep. ad Bonifacium.</HI></NOTE> <HI>In the Solemnities of the Ma&s;s that is to be ob&s;erved which our Lord Je&s;us gave to his Di&s;ciples, for he took the Cup, and gave it to them &s;aying, This is the Cup of the New Te&s;tament in my Blood, this do as often as you take it.</HI> And<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">De Inftit. Cler. <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 31.</NOTE> <HI>Rabanus Maurus</HI> &s;aith, <HI>It is not lawfull to offer any other thing in the Sacraments, than that which our Lord him&s;elf appoint|ed, and by his Example taught us to do.</HI></P>
<P N="2"><MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>2dly.</HI> Some in the <HI>Church</HI> did frequently attempt the altera|tion of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s In&s;titution by giving to the People the Bread
<PB N="23" REF="20">dipp'd in the &s;acred Blood for a Compleat Communion, but a|gain&s;t the&s;e Innovators in the Fourth Century, <HI>Pope Julius</HI> op|po&s;ed him&s;elf, laying down this for his Rule, That it was by no means lawful for any to <HI>recede</HI> from our <HI>Lord</HI>'s In&s;titution, Practice and Example. His Words are the&s;e,<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Audivimus enim quo&s;|dam Schi&s;matica ambitione detentos, contra divinos or|dines &amp; Apo&s;tolicas in&s;tituti|ones, &mdash; intinctam Euchari|&s;tiam populis pro complemen|to Communionis porrigere. &mdash; Quod quam fit Evangelicae &amp; Apo&s;tolicae doctrinae con|trarium, &amp; con&s;uetudini Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticae adver&s;um, non dif|ficile ab ip&s;o fonte veritatis probatur, a quo ordinata ip&s;a Sacramentorum my&s;teria pro|ce&s;&s;erunt.&mdash;Ubi Apo&s;tolis cor|pus &s;uum commendavit &amp; &s;an|guinem, &s;eor&s;um enim panis, &amp; &s;eor&s;um calicis commenda|tio memoratur. <HI>Concil. Tom.</HI> 2. <HI>p.</HI> 525, 526.</NOTE> <HI>We have heard that &s;ome per&s;ons, being guilty of Schi&s;matical Ambition, do, again&s;t the divine Orders, and Apo&s;tolical In&s;titution, deliver to the People the Euchari&s;t dipp'd in the Blood for an intire Commu|nion. How contrary the&s;e things are to the Evan|gelical and Apo&s;tolical Doctrine, and oppo&s;ite to the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Cu&s;tom, it is not hard to prove from the Fountain of Truth, from whom the In&s;titution of the&s;e Sacramental My&s;teries proceeded, for they have no Te&s;timony from the Go&s;pel for this, where Chri&s;t com|mended his Body and Blood to his Di&s;ciples, for there is recorded the commendation of his Body and Blood apart.</HI> The Council of<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Eadem habet Concil. Bra|caren&s;e. <HI>Tom.</HI> 6. <HI>p.</HI> 562, 563.</NOTE> <HI>Braga</HI> in the Seventh Centary in the very &s;ame words con|demns this Practice, blaming them, who, for the whole Communion delivered to the People a piece of Bread dipp'd in the Con&s;ecrated Wine, <HI>Which Cu&s;tom how contrary,</HI> &s;ay they, <HI>it is to the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel, and the Practice of the Church, we may learn from the Fountain of Truth, who gave the Cup by it &s;elf, &s;aying, Drink ye all of this; as he took the Bread by it &s;elf, &s;aying, Take, eat,</HI> &amp;c.<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Ut populus plene po&s;&s;it communicare. <HI>cap.</HI> 19.</NOTE> <HI>Micrologus</HI> &s;aith, <HI>It is not Authentick that &s;ome dip the Body of Christ, and di&s;tribute it &s;o dipp'd for a full Communion, for the</HI> Roman <HI>Order contradicts it, for in the day of Preparation it commands, that the Wine not con&s;ecrated, &s;hould be con&s;ecrated by the Lord's Prayer, and the mixture of the Lord's Body with the Blood, that</HI> the People may fully Commu|nicate, <HI>which would be a &s;uperfluous Command, if the Lord's Body dipp'd in the Cup the day before, and pre&s;erved, would &s;uffice to Communicate the People with: And therefore Pope</HI> Julius<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Julius quoque Papa &s;eor|&s;im panem &amp; &s;eor&s;im calicem, juxta dominicam In&s;tituti|onem &s;umenda docet. <HI>Idem ibid.</HI></NOTE> <HI>writing to the Bi&s;hops of</HI> Aegypt, <HI>doth wholly forbid this Intinction, and teacheth, that the Bread and the Cup &s;hould be both taken apart,</HI> accord|ing to our Lord's In&s;titution. <HI>Humbertus</HI> in his Di&s;putation again&s;t the <HI>Greeks,</HI> &s;aith thus, <HI>That
<PB N="24" REF="21">you are wont to take the Holy Bread of life eternal in a Spoon dipped in the Cup, what can you offer for it?</HI><NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Neque enim ip&s;e Do|minus panem in Caiice vini intrivit, &amp; &s;ic Apo&s;tolis de|dit, &s;ed &s;icut Sancta Romana Eccle&s;ia u&s;que nunc ob&s;ervat, panem integrum benedixit, &amp; fractum fingulis particu|latim di&s;tribuit, dicens, Acci|pite &amp; comedite, hoc e&s;t corpus meum; quibus, po&s;t|quam coenatus e&s;t, calicem porrexit, dicens, Bibite ex eo omnes. Quam <HI>Reverendam Angelis</HI> &amp; hominibus in&s;titu|tionem prima &s;cilicet Ecclefia u&s;que ad haec moderna tem|pora, &s;icut ab Apo&s;tolis re|cepit, fideliter retinuit. &mdash; <HI>Apud Baron. Tom.</HI> 11. <HI>p.</HI> 971.</NOTE> <HI>for our Lord did not thus dip Bread in the Cup of Wine, and &s;o give it to his Apo&s;tles, &s;aying, Take and eat this in a Spoon, This is my Body; but as the</HI> Roman Church even to this day ob&s;erves, <HI>he ble&s;&s;ed the whole Bread, and distributed it, being broken, to every one apart, &s;aying, Take and eat, This is my Body, to whom he al&s;o after Supper reach|ed forth the Cup, &s;aying,</HI> Drink ye all of this, <HI>which</HI> In&s;titution <HI>to be</HI> revered by Men and Angels, <HI>Holy</HI> Zion, <HI>the first Church, even to this Day, as it received from the Apostles, &s;o doth it faithfully retain it.</HI> And then having cited a long pa&s;&s;age from the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> he adds, <HI>Hence is it clearer than the light, that the holy Church of</HI> Jeru&s;alem <HI>did of old ob&s;erve the &s;ame Rite of the divine Sacrifice which the holy</HI> Roman <HI>Church cea&s;eth not hitherto to ob&s;erve; for we lay upon the Holy Altars thin Cakes of Flour prepared, whole and &s;ound, and Communicate with the Peo|ple of them, being after con&s;ecration broken, and then we are made to drink of the Cup of Wine, and liquid Blood, for we find Bread &s;opp'd was delivered by Christ to none but the Traytor</HI> Judas, <HI>to &s;ig|nifie that he was to betray him.</HI> Again, he having &s;aid, That <HI>Christ</HI> delivered the Bread and Wine apart, and that the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Christ</HI> religiou&s;ly ob&s;erved his In&s;titu|tion, adds, That<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Nec pote&s;t fieri ut quilibet convenientius aut verius commendare praevalu|i&s;&s;et Sacro&s;anctum My&s;teri|um fidei, quam ip&s;e qui tra|didit &s;eip&s;um pro nobis ob|lationem. &mdash; <HI>Ibid. p.</HI> 974.</NOTE> <HI>it could not be that any one &s;hould prevail to commend this Holy My&s;tery of Faith more conveniently, or truly, than he who delivered him&s;elf an Oblation, and a Sacrifice of a Sweet Odor to God for us, the immaculate Lamb of God, who taketh away the Sins of the World, to whom the mo&s;t perfect knowledge of any Man being compared, is the highest Ignorance.</HI> In the Year of our Lord 1118. <HI>Pope Pa&s;chal</HI> the Second, writes an Epi&s;tle to <HI>Pontius, Abbot</HI> of <HI>Clun,</HI> after this wi&s;e:<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Ep. 32. de non porrigen|da. Communi|one intincta. <HI>Concil. Tom.</HI> 10. <HI>p.</HI> 656.</NOTE> <HI>Ble&s;&s;ed</HI> Cyprian <HI>writing to</HI> Caecilian <HI>&s;aith, That when any thing is required by God's</HI> In&s;piration and Command, <HI>it is nece&s;&s;ary that the faithful Servant &s;hould obey his Lord, and he will be excu&s;ed of all Men, that he a&s;&s;umeth nothing arrogantly to him&s;elf, nor may any other thing be done by us, than what our Lord
<PB N="25" REF="21">first did for us. Therefore in taking the Body and the Blood of Christ, according to the &s;ame St.</HI> Cyprian, <HI>Let the tradition of our Lord be kept, nor let us recede by</HI> any humane and novel In&s;ti|tution <HI>from that which our Lord both commanded and did; for we know that the Bread was delivered by our Lord apart, and the Wine apart, which Cu&s;tom we</HI> teach, <HI>and</HI> require to be ob&s;erved per|petually <HI>in the</HI> Church, <HI>excepting only in the Ca&s;e of Infants and Infirm Per&s;ons, who cannot receive the Bread. Hildebert, Bi&s;hop</HI> of <HI>Mans,</HI> doth vehemently reprove the Cu&s;tom of giving the Bread &s;opped, u&s;ed in this or &s;ome other <HI>Mona&s;tery;</HI> for, writing to the <HI>Abbot</HI> of &s;ome Mona&s;tery, he &s;aith, <HI>It is judicial ob&s;tinacy to preferr Cu&s;tom before Truth:</HI> And having proved this from the words of St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> and St. <HI>Au&s;tin,</HI> he proceeds thus; <HI>This, Brother, I have therefore &s;poken, that being rouzed up, thou maist awake, and &s;ee that</HI><NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Traditioni Sacramento|rum Altaris quae in ve&s;tro celebris e&s;t Mona&s;terio nec Evangelia con&s;onant nec de|creta concordant: In eo enim con&s;uetudinis e&s;t Euchari&s;ti|am nulli ni&s;i intinctam dari, quod nec ex Dominica In&s;ti|tutione, nec ex Sanctionibus Authenticis reperiatur a&s;|&s;umptum. &mdash; <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 64.</NOTE> <HI>neither the Go&s;pels nor Decrees agree with that distribution of the Sacra|ment of the Altar, which is practi&s;ed in your Mona|&s;tery; for there the Cu&s;tom is to give the Sacrament to none, but in Bread steeped in the Wine, which is neither found to be taken from our Lord's In&s;titution, nor from Authentick Sanctions: If you con&s;ult St.</HI> Matthew, Mark <HI>and</HI> Luke, <HI>you will find the Bread to have been delivered apart, and the Wine apart, for we read not that Chri&s;t gave Bread &s;opped to any but that Di&s;ciple, whom he thereby &s;hewed to be the betrayer of his Ma&s;ter.</HI><NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Euchari&s;tia intincta non debet dari populo <HI>pro &s;upple|mento Communionis. Sent. l.</HI> 4. <HI>Di&s;t.</HI> 11. <HI>Lit.</HI> f.</NOTE> <HI>The Euchari&s;t,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Lombard, ought not to be given to any Body &s;opped for a Sup|plement of the Communion, for we read of no &s;opped Bread given to any one, but</HI> Judas. La&s;tly, a Council held at <HI>London, A. D.</HI> 1175.<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Inhibemus ne quis qua&s;i pro comple|mento Com|munionis in|tinctam alicui tradat Eucha|ri&s;tiam, nam intinctum panem aliis Chri&s;tum praebui&s;&s;e non legimus, excepto illo tantum Di&s;cipulo quem intincta buccella Magi&s;tri proditorem o&s;tenderit. <HI>Apud Binium, Tom.</HI> 7. <HI>Part</HI> 2. <HI>p.</HI> 642.</NOTE> <HI>forbids any per&s;on to deliver the Euchari&s;tical Bread dipped in Wine for a compleat Com|munion,</HI> for, <HI>&s;ay they, we read not that our Lord gave the Bread &s;opped to any, but to that Di&s;ciple whom he thereby declared to be the Di&s;ciple that was to betray him.</HI></P>
<P>Now hence, &s;aith<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">De utra&abque; &s;pecie, <HI>p.</HI> 1027.</NOTE> <HI>Ca&s;&s;ander,</HI> it appears, That <HI>they who received the Cu&s;tom of dipping the Bread into the con&s;ecrated Cup,
<PB N="26" REF="22">did believe that both kinds were by all means to be u&s;ed for an entire and full Communion:</HI> For, wherefore did they dip the Bread in the My&s;tical Cup of our <HI>Lord's</HI> Blood, if one &s;pecies by it &s;elf would have &s;ufficed for a full and lawful Communion? And &s;eeing they who admini&s;tred the Bread dipp'd in the con|&s;ecrated Cup, did this becau&s;e they conceived it nece&s;&s;ary that both kinds &s;hould be received at lea&s;t together; and they who reprehended this Cu&s;tom, did therefore reprehend it, becau&s;e they held that both kinds were to be received apart, accord|ing to our <HI>Lord</HI>'s In&s;titution, and the con&s;tant Cu&s;tom of the <HI>Church:</HI> It is evident, hat all did then agree, that both kinds were to be received, and that it was not lawful to receive un|der the &s;pecies of Bread alone.</P>
<P N="3"><HI>3ly.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 3.</NOTE> Others attempted to vary from the In&s;titution of our Lord, and from the practice of the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> and the &s;ucceed|ing Ages of the <HI>Church,</HI> by offering on the Altar or commu|nion-Table not only Bread and Wine, but al&s;o <HI>Milk</HI> and <HI>Ho|ney, &amp;c.</HI> which thing the <HI>Ancient Fathers</HI> and <HI>Councils</HI> do with one voice condemn, as being contrary to the In&s;titution of our <HI>Lord.</HI> The Title of the Third <HI>Canon</HI> of the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> runs thus <HI>That nothing is to be offered in the Sacrifice, be&s;ides that which our Lord appointed;</HI> and in the body of the <HI>Canon,</HI> the offering Milk or Honey is condemned, as being <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>be&s;ides the Con&s;titution of our Lord touching the Sacri|fice,</HI> and the <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> or <HI>Pre&s;byter</HI> who doth this is to be depo&s;ed, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>as doing be&s;ides the Con&s;titution of the Lord. Our Lord,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Zonaras</HI> upon this <HI>Canon, deli|vering to his Apo&s;tles the celebration of this unbloody Sacrifice to be performed in Bread and Wine,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">. <HI>For this cau&s;e the Apo&s;tles forbad any other thing to be brought to the Sacrifice.</HI> The <HI>Church</HI> of<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">Can. 37.</NOTE> <HI>Africa</HI> made a <HI>Canon</HI> to the &s;ame effect, <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>it is not lawful to of|fer any thing in the Sacraments, be&s;ides Bread and Wine, mixed with Water,</HI> and the rea&s;on there a&s;&s;igned is, That nothing el&s;e is to be offered, <HI>qu&egrave;m quod ip&s;e Dominus tradidit, than that which our Lord him&s;elf delivered.</HI> This <HI>Canon</HI> is cited and confirmed in the Fifth <HI>General Council</HI> held in<NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">Can. 32.</NOTE> <HI>Trullo,</HI> for the &s;ame Rea&s;on, That, <HI>in this Sacrament things ought to be per|formed,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>according as our Lord him|&s;elf
<PB N="27" REF="22">delivered. Pope Julius</HI> in the Fourth, and the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Braga</HI> in the Seventh <HI>Century,</HI> &s;ay not as the <HI>Canons</HI> of the <HI>Ea&s;tern Church,</HI> that &s;ome offered <HI>Milk be&s;ides Bread and Wine,</HI> but that they offered, <HI>lac pro vino, Milk for Wine;</HI> this practice they condemn in the&s;e words;<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Cum enim Magi&s;ter ve|ritatis verum &s;alutis no&s;trae Sacrificium &s;uis commendaret di&s;cipulis, nulli lac, &s;ed panem tantum &amp; Calicem &s;ub hoc Sacramento cogno&s;cimus de|di&s;&s;e, legitur enim in Evan|gelica veritate, accepit Je&s;us panem &amp; Calicem, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> ce&s;&s;et ergo lac &s;acrificando offerri, quia manife&s;tum &amp; evidens exemplum veritatis Evange|licae illuxit, quod praeter pa|nem &amp; vinum, aliud offerri non liceat, <HI>Concil. To.</HI> 2. <HI>p.</HI> 525, 526. <HI>Concil. Brac. To.</HI> 6. <HI>p.</HI> 564.</NOTE> <HI>When the Ma&s;ter of Truth would commend to his Di&s;ciples the true Sacrifice of our Salvation, he gave to none Milk, but only Bread and Wine in the Sacra|ment; let therefore Milk cea&s;e to be offered, becau&s;e the manife&s;t and evident example of Evangelical Truth hath &s;hined forth, that, be&s;ides Bread and Wine, no|thing el&s;e may be offered.</HI> And again, <HI>Henceforth it &s;hall be lawful to none to offer any thing el&s;e in the divine Sacrifices, but according to the Sentence of the Ancient Councils, Bread and Wine only mixed with Water.</HI><NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">Lib. de rebus Eccle&s;. <HI>cap.</HI> 18.</NOTE> <HI>Strabo</HI> informs us, That <HI>though the u&s;e of the Sacraments was delivered by Chri&s;t, and from the Apo&s;tles and Apo&s;tolical Men, was dif|fu&s;ed throughout the whole Catholick Church, yet we. under&s;tand from the Apo&s;tolical Canons, that, in the fir&s;t Ages, &s;ome were wont to offer other Oblations, who therefore by the third of their Canons are to be depo&s;ed, as doing</HI> contra Con&s;titutionem Domini, <HI>against the Con&s;titution of our Lord.</HI> And the&s;e <HI>Decrees</HI> we find in<NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg">Decret. part 2. c. 18.</NOTE> <HI>Ivo,</HI> and in<NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">Decret. part 3. de con&s;ecr. di&s;t. 2. c. 4, 5.</NOTE> <HI>Gra|tian,</HI> and do thence learn, that they continued to be <HI>Authentick</HI> in their Days.</P>
<P>Now here let it be noted, that all the&s;e <HI>Fathers,</HI> and <HI>Coun|cils</HI> who condemn <HI>intinction,</HI> and the oblation of other things upon the <HI>Altar</HI> be&s;ides Bread, Wine and Water, give this as a &s;ufficient rea&s;on for &s;o doing, That <HI>the&s;e things were not agree|able unto that in&s;titution which was to be</HI> revered by Men and An|gels, from which it was <HI>by no means lawfull to depart,</HI> and <HI>to which Chri&s;tians were obliged to adhere;</HI> and &s;urely they who &s;o Religiou&s;ly condemned, and &s;trenuou&s;ly oppo&s;ed them&s;elves a|gain&s;t the Cu&s;tom of <HI>iminction,</HI> and of <HI>offering Milk and Honey,</HI> becau&s;e of the Repugnancy which the&s;e things bore unto the manner of, and the Rule ob&s;erved in our <HI>Lord</HI>'s In&s;titution of this Sacrament, would have been filled with holy indignation, had they known of any who wholly did with-hold from, or deny the Cup unto the People. Sure they who taught that to
<PB N="28" REF="23">do the&s;e things again&s;t the <HI>Divine Orders</HI> and <HI>Apo&s;tolical Con&s;ti|tution,</HI> was to be guilty of <HI>a manife&s;t Error,</HI> and of <HI>Schi&s;matical Ambition,</HI> could not have pa&s;&s;ed a milder Cen&s;ure on the &s;ub|&s;traction of the Cup from all the <HI>Laity.</HI> They who declared, that to do the&s;e things was to act <HI>contrary to the Evangelical Doctrine,</HI> and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Cu&s;tom</HI> or the <HI>Practice</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> would have declared with a greater zeal again&s;t the defalcation of that Cup, of which our <HI>Lord</HI> &s;aid in the In&s;titution, <HI>Drink ye all of this,</HI> of which <HI>all the Apo&s;tles drank,</HI> and which was, in complyance with this In&s;titution and this Example, con|fe&s;&s;edly received by all <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> in the fir&s;t Ages of the <HI>Church.</HI> They who would not allow <HI>intinction</HI> to be &s;ufficient for a <HI>com|pleat and full Communion of the People,</HI> or for a <HI>Supplement of the Communion,</HI> would much le&s;s have allowed that the Communion was intire and full, when nothing but the Bread was given to them. They who declared that <HI>nothing could be offered to ju|&s;tifie</HI> this variation from our Lord's In&s;titution, could much le&s;s think that any thing would ju&s;tifie this greater variation from it. They who affirm <HI>it could not be that any one &s;hould commend this My&s;tery of Faith more conveniently, or truly, than that Je&s;us, to whom the mo&s;t perfect knowledge of any Man being compared, is the highe&s;t ignorance;</HI> and that <HI>the Tradition of our Lord is to be kept, and not receded from on the account of any humane, or novel In&s;titution,</HI> could not imagine the Councils either of <HI>Trent</HI> or <HI>Con&s;tance</HI> could have any power given by the Author of that In&s;titution, to make a Law for the omitting one part of it, with a<NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">Concil. Con&s;t. Se&s;&s;. 13.</NOTE> <HI>non ob&s;tante</HI> to our Lord's In&s;titution, and to the practice of the <HI>Church.</HI> They, la&s;tly, who a&s;&s;ert, <HI>It is judicial ob&s;tinacy to preferr Cu&s;tom before Truth,</HI> mu&s;t have abhorred that plea for half Communion u&s;ed by the Council of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> that it was a <HI>Cu&s;tom rea&s;onably introduced by the Church,</HI> and by the <HI>Holy Fa|thers, and had been long ob&s;erved, and therefore was to be retained as a Law.</HI></P>
<P>Again, They who condemn the offering <HI>Milk</HI> and <HI>Honey</HI> on the Altar, as being <HI>be&s;ides the In&s;titution of our Lord,</HI> and for this rea&s;on do forbid and puni&s;h it, would more a&s;&s;uredly have condemned and puni&s;hed that defalcation of the Cup, which is confe&s;&s;edly contrary to the In&s;titution. They who took care that in this matter things &s;hould be done, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>as the lord delivered them,</HI> would never have allowed that
<PB N="29" REF="23">this Sacrament &s;hould be admini&s;tred otherwi&s;e than he had In&s;tituted it to be received. And la&s;tly, they who argued, <HI>That nothing el&s;e was to be offered, becau&s;e nothing el&s;e was mention|ed in the Go&s;pel,</HI> would never have endured that what was mentioned in the Go&s;pel, as offered and di&s;tributed to all, &s;hould not only be omitted, but forbidden, under the &s;evere&s;t Penalties.</P>
<P N="4"><MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>4ly.</HI> Some varied from the practice of the <HI>Church</HI> from the beginning, u&s;ed with re&s;pect to the Cup, and that Two Ways.</P>
<P N="1">1. By u&s;ing in this Sacrament Wine not mixed with Water; this neglect the <HI>Ancient Fathers</HI> and <HI>Councils</HI> do with one voice condemn, as varying from the In&s;titution of our <HI>Lord,</HI> and from the practice of the <HI>Church,</HI> and &s;olemnly decree that in conformity to both, the Wine they offered and di&s;tributed, &s;hould be continually mixed with Water. The Con&s;titutions of St. <HI>clemens</HI> &s;ay, That<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">L. 8. c. 12. P. 351.</NOTE> <HI>our Lord mixed the Cup with Wine and Water, and &s;anctifying it, he gave it to them, &s;aying, Drink ye all of it, and that therefore</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>according to his Order or In&s;titution, they offered to him this Bread and this Cup.</HI> And this they did, &s;aith <HI>Cotelerius,</HI> again&s;t Two Here&s;ies, that of the <HI>Monophy&s;ites</HI> and the <HI>Armenians,</HI> who u&s;ed only Wine in the <HI>My&s;teries.</HI> The<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Can. 37.</NOTE> <HI>African</HI> Council &s;aith, <HI>that nothing is to be offered in the Sacraments but Bread,</HI> &amp; merum aqua mixtum, <HI>and Wine mixed with Water, as our Lord delivered. Pope Julius</HI> &s;aith, That<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Calix dominicus juxta Canonum praecepta vino &amp; aqua permixtus debet offer|ri&mdash; non enim pote&s;t Calix domini e&s;&s;e aqua &s;ola, aut vi|num &s;olum, ni&s;i utrumque mi&s;ceatur. <HI>Apud Ivon. Decret. part.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> xi.</NOTE> <HI>the Cup of our Lord, according to the commands of the Canons, ought to be offered with Wine mixed with Water,</HI> and that <HI>the Cup of the Lord cannot be Wine or Water alone, but that both mu&s;t be mixed.</HI> The Councils of<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Concil. Wormaten&s;e apud eundem, <HI>Cap.</HI> 12. <HI>&amp; Con|cil. To.</HI> 2. <HI>p.</HI> 526.</NOTE> <HI>Worms</HI> and<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Calix dominicus juxta quod quidam Doctor edi&s;&s;erit, vino &amp; aqua permixtus debet offerri. <HI>Concil. Brac.</HI> 4. <HI>Concil. To.</HI> 6. <HI>p.</HI> 563.</NOTE> <HI>Braga,</HI> condemn the neglect of mixing Water, in the very words of <HI>Pope Julius.</HI> The General Council held in <HI>Trullo</HI> &s;aith the &s;ame thing, condemning the <HI>Armenians</HI> who ce|lebrated the Euchari&s;t with Wine not mixed with Water, as acting again&s;t the Tradition of the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> and Decreeing, That the <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> or the <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> who did thus celebrate the My&s;teries &s;hould be depo&s;ed,<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Can. 32.</NOTE> <HI>as imperfectly &s;hewing forth the My&s;tery, and innovating in things delivered.
<PB N="30" REF="24">I&s;idore</HI> &s;aith, That Wine alone cannot be offered in the Sacrifice of the Cup, and that<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Quando autem mi&s;ce|tur utrumque, tunc &s;piritu|ale Sacrificium perficitur. <HI>Lib.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 18.</NOTE> <HI>the &s;piritual Sacrifice is then perfected when they are both mixed.</HI> This mixture &s;ome of them held nece&s;&s;a|ry, becau&s;e our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s &s;ide being pierced with a Launce, not only Blood, but Water al&s;o i&s;&s;ued thence, <HI>for which cau&s;e,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">In Can. 32. Concil. Trull.</NOTE> <HI>Zonarus,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>it was nece&s;&s;arily de|termined by the Church, that in the holy My&s;teries Wine &s;hould be mixed with Water.</HI> That Wine and Water ought thus to be mixed, &s;aith<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">&mdash; Quia utrum&abque; ex la|tere ejus in &s;ua pa&s;&s;ione pro|fluxi&s;&s;e legitur. <HI>Apud Ivon. decret. Part.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 15.</NOTE> <HI>Pope Alexander, We have received from the Fathers, and even rea&s;on teacheth, becau&s;e both flowed from our Saviour's Side in his Pa&s;&s;ion.</HI><NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">^1 Cap. de celebr. Mi&s;&s;. <HI>p.</HI> 88. <HI>c.</HI> 10. ^2 <HI>L.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 10. ^3 <HI>C.</HI> 10.</NOTE> <NOTE N="1" PLACE="marg">Cap. de celebr. Mi&s;&s;. <HI>p.</HI> 88. <HI>c.</HI> 10.</NOTE> <HI>Alcuin,</HI><NOTE N="2" PLACE="marg"><HI>L.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 19.</NOTE> <HI>Rabanus Maurus,</HI> and<NOTE N="3" PLACE="marg"><HI>C.</HI> 10.</NOTE> <HI>Micrologus,</HI> a&s;&s;ign the &s;ame rea&s;on; others following St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> give this my&s;tical Rea&s;on of this mixture, That <HI>in</HI><NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Videmus populum in aqua intelligi, in vino vero o&s;tendi &s;anguinem Chri&s;ti, er|go &mdash; &s;i vinum tantum quis offerat, &s;anguis Chri&s;ti incipit e&s;&s;e &s;ine nobis, &s;i vero aqua &s;it &s;ola, plebs incipit e&s;&s;e &s;ine Chri&s;to. <HI>Julius Concil. Tom.</HI> 2. <HI>p.</HI> 526.</NOTE> <HI>Scripture Water &s;ignifies the People, the Wine &s;hews the Blood of Chri&s;t, and therefore, if Wine alone be offered, the Blood of Chri&s;t will be without the People, if only Water, the People will be without Chri&s;t:</HI> So <HI>Pope Julius,</HI> the Councils of<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Concil. Brac. Concil. tom. 6. p. 563.</NOTE> <HI>Braga</HI> and <HI>Worms;</HI> but, others &s;ay, this mu&s;t be done <HI>in complyance with our Lord's In&s;titution,</HI> and the <HI>Practice</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> that we may do the &s;ame thing which our Lord did<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Amalar. de Eccle&s;. Of|fic. l. 3. c. 24.</NOTE> <HI>&amp; a Magi&s;terio divino non recedamus, and may not recede from his Command.</HI></P>
<P N="2"><MILESTONE N="5" UNIT="&sect;"> 2. Others u&s;ed Water without Wine in Celebration of tho&s;e My&s;teries, and that not out of aver&s;ation to Wine (which was the cau&s;e why the <HI>Aquarii,</HI> the <HI>Encratites</HI> and the <HI>Manichaeans</HI> did refu&s;e to drink it in the Sacrament,) for in the Evening-Sacrifice they freely drank it, but to avoid being di&s;covered to be <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> by &s;melling of it in the Morning. Now again&s;t the&s;e per&s;ons St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> argues from the in&s;titution of the Sa|crament by <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and from his practice in the Oblation and the <HI>di&s;tribution</HI> of it.<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Admonitos autem nos &s;cias, ut in calice offerenda dominica traditio &s;ervetur, neque aliud fiat a nobis, quam quod pro nobis dominus prior fecerit. <HI>Cyp. Ep.</HI> 63. <HI>p.</HI> 48.</NOTE> <HI>For know,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>that we
<PB N="31" REF="24">are admoni&s;hed to ob&s;erve the Tradition of the Lord, in offering the Cup, and that nothing el&s;e may be done by us, than that which our Lord did fir&s;t for us.</HI> Now <HI>Cyprian</HI> before had &s;aid, That <HI>in offering the Cup, and</HI> mini&s;tering it to the People, <HI>our Lord had u&s;ed Water mixed with Wine.</HI> Again he adds, <HI>if Je&s;us Chri&s;t be the High-Prie&s;t of God the Father, and fir&s;t offered him&s;elf a Sa|crifice to the Father, and commanded this to be done in commemoration of him&s;elf;</HI><NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Utique ille Sacerdos vice Chri&s;ti vere fungitur, qui id quod Chri&s;tus fecit imitatur. &mdash; <HI>p.</HI> 155.</NOTE> <HI>&s;urely that Prie&s;t truly officiates in Chri&s;t's &s;tead, who imitates that which Chri&s;t did, and offers a full and true Sacrifice to God the Father, if &s;o he doth begin to offer as he &s;aw Chri&s;t did offer.</HI> &mdash; And again,<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Exponere enim ju&s;tifi|cationes &amp; Te&s;tamentum Do|mini, &amp; non hoc idem facere quod fecerit Dominus, quid aliud e&s;t quam &s;ermones ejus abjicere, &amp; di&s;ciplinam Do|minicam contemnere. <HI>p.</HI> 157.</NOTE> <HI>To de|clare the Statutes, and take the Te&s;taments of the Lord into our Mouths, and not to do the &s;ame thing which our Lord did, what other thing is it than to reject his Words, and to contemn the Lord's Di&s;ci|pline?</HI> And whereas &s;ome pleaded a Cu&s;tom for offering only Water, he &s;aith,<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">&mdash; Si in Sacrificio quod Chri&s;tus obtulerit, non ni&s;i Chri&s;tus &s;equendus e&s;t, uti|que id nos obaudire, &amp; &s;acere oportet quod Chri&s;tus fecit, &amp; quod faciendum e&s;&s;e man|davit! &mdash; Neque enim ho|minis con&s;uetudinem &s;equi oportet, &s;ed Dei veritatem. <HI>p.</HI> 154, 155.</NOTE> <HI>We mu&s;t en|quire whom the Authors of this Cu&s;tom followed, for if in the Sacrifice which Chri&s;t offered, Chri&s;t alone is to be followed, &s;urely that we ought to obey, and do which Chri&s;t did and commanded to be done; for we mu&s;t not follow the</HI> Cu&s;tom of Man, <HI>but the Truth of God.</HI> La&s;tly, <HI>Becau&s;e we make mention of his Pa&s;&s;ion in all our Sacrifices, we ought to do nothing but what he did, for the Scripture &s;aith, As often as you cat this Bread, and drink this Cup, you &s;hew the Lord's Death till he come;</HI><NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">&mdash; Quotie&s;cunque ergo calicem in commemorationem pa&s;&s;ionis ejus offerimus, id quod con&s;tat Dominum feci&s;|&s;e faciamus. <HI>p.</HI> 156.</NOTE> <HI>wherefore as oft as we offer up the Cup in commemoration of our Lord, and of his Pa&s;&s;ion, we ought to do that which it is ma|nife&s;t he did.</HI> Now here let it be noted.</P>
<P>That from the Third to the Twelfth <HI>Century,</HI> this Di&s;|cour&s;e of <HI>Cyprian</HI> is cited, and approved by all the <HI>Doctors</HI> of the <HI>We&s;tern Church,</HI> by <HI>Pope Julius,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Ubi &s;upra.</NOTE> by the Councils of <HI>Braga</HI> and <HI>Worms,</HI> by <HI>I&s;idore,</HI> by <HI>Alcuin, Rabanus Maurus, Walafri|dus Strabo,</HI> by <HI>Micrologus, Amalarius,</HI> by <HI>Ivo</HI> and <HI>Gratian;</HI> and particularly that <HI>Amalarius</HI> having cited the&s;e Words, <Q REND="margQuotes">"We find that it is not ob&s;erved by us which is commanded, unle&s;s we do the &s;ame things which Chri&s;t did, and mixing the Cup after the &s;ame manner recede not from the divine
<PB N="32" REF="25">In&s;titution.)</Q> He adds, That<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Quamvis hoc ille de co|mixtione vini &amp; aquae con|clu&s;i&s;&s;et, tamen de tota In&s;ti|tutione Dominica intelligere po&s;&s;umus adimplendum, in quo &s;uum mandatum e&s;t, &amp; Apo|&s;tolorum ob&s;ervatio. <HI>De Eccle&s;ia&s;t. Offic. l.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 24.</NOTE> <HI>though</HI> Cyprian <HI>concluded this only of the mixture of Wine and Water, yet may we under&s;tand it as a thing to be fulfilled in the whole In&s;titution of the Lord, in which is his command, and the Apo&s;tles ob&s;ervation of it.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="6" UNIT="&sect;"> Now &s;urely they who thought them&s;elves obliged to mix Water with their Wine, becau&s;e it was <HI>according to our Savi|our's In&s;titution,</HI> and <HI>doing of this Action as our Lord delivered it,</HI> and was <HI>according to the Canons and Practice of the Church,</HI> mu&s;t al&s;o think them&s;elves obliged for the very &s;ame rea&s;ons to Mi|ni&s;ter the Cup unto the People pre&s;ent at their Sacraments, and &s;ay unto them as our Saviour did, <HI>Drink ye all of this.</HI></P>
<P>They who believed they were by no means <HI>to recede from our Lord's In&s;titution in this matter,</HI> could never think it fit to recede from it in the delivery of the Cup.</P>
<P>They who decreed <HI>the Depo&s;ition</HI> of tho&s;e <HI>Bi&s;hops</HI> or <HI>Prie&s;ts,</HI> who did neglect this mixture, as <HI>imperfectly &s;hewing forth this My&s;tery,</HI> would more a&s;&s;uredly have for that rea&s;on, depo&s;ed tho&s;e who robbed the People of the Cup; for &s;ince, according to St. <HI>Paul,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">1 Cor. xi. 26.</NOTE> we <HI>&s;hew forth the Lord's Death, by eating of this Bread, and drinking of this Cup:</HI> It clearly follows, that if he who gives Wine without Water does but imperfectly &s;hew forth the My&s;tery to them who do receive it, he that neither gives con&s;ecrated Wine nor Water, mu&s;t do it more imper|fectly.</P>
<P>They who declared again&s;t the offering of Water only as a thing unlawful, <HI>becau&s;e all Chri&s;tians were obliged to ob&s;erve the Tradition of the Lord, offering the Cup, and mini&s;tring it to the People;</HI> and to <HI>imitate what Chri&s;t did,</HI> unle&s;s they would be thought <HI>contemners of Chri&s;t's di&s;cipline,</HI> mu&s;t al&s;o think them|&s;elves obliged to ob&s;erve the &s;ame <HI>Tradition</HI> and <HI>Example,</HI> in mini&s;tring the Cup, and Cen&s;ure in like manner tho&s;e who do it not.</P>
<P>They who teach, that <HI>not the Cu&s;tom of Man, but the Truth of God</HI> was to be followed, could never have approved of the plea from Cu&s;tom, u&s;ed by the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> for defalcati|on of the Cup.</P>
<PB N="33" REF="25">
<P>And la&s;tly, they who looked upon the In&s;titution as <HI>a Com|mand,</HI> and all the&s;e &s;ayings of St. <HI>Cyprian,</HI> as Rules to be ful|filled, and followed in the whole in&s;titution of our <HI>Lord,</HI> mu&s;t al&s;o think it a <HI>Command</HI> to mini&s;ter the Cup unto the People; and that tho&s;e Rules of <HI>Cyprian</HI> did bind them &s;o to do. I therefore &s;hall conclude this Chapter with that &s;aying of <HI>Alge|rus</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Quis audet excipere, quod ip&s;e non exce|pit, aut quis audit prohi|bere quod ip&s;e in Sacramento &s;uo non prohi|buit; &s;ed ip&s;e faciens, nos hoc ip&s;um fa|cere praecepit, cum dicit, Hoc facite, convenienter &s;ubaudiatur, quod Ego; quis aeque competenter &s;ubaudire audeat, &s;ed non de hoc unde ego, item &s;i mutandum e&s;t fermentato azymum, mutetur etiam quo|libet alio liquore vinum, &s;i enim vinum recipitur, cur azymum refutetur, cum &s;icut ex azymo, &s;ic ex vino Chri&s;tus vetus pa&s;cha finierit, &amp; novum inchoaverit, &amp; utrumque no|bis in <HI>Sacramento &s;uo</HI> aeque celebrandum tradiderit? <HI>Algerus de Sacram. Euch. lib.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 10. <HI>fol.</HI> 84. <HI>b.</HI> 85. <HI>a.</HI></NOTE>, In the ca&s;e of unleavened Bread. <HI>Who dares except what Chri&s;t excepted not, or forbid what he in his Sacraments did not for|bid, but doing it him&s;elf,</HI> commanded us to do the &s;ame thing, <HI>when he &s;aith, do this, we are conveniently to under&s;tand this which I do, but who dares al&s;o to under&s;tand this, but do it not of that which I do it? Moreover, if &V;nleavened Bread be to be changed for Lea|vened, let the Wine al&s;o be changed for any other liquor; for as our Lord Chri&s;t fini&s;hed the Old Pa&s;&s;over, and began the New with &V;nleavened Bread &s;o did he al&s;o do it with Wine, and</HI> delivered both to us to be equally celebrated in this Sacrament.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. III. The Contents.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">In oppo&s;ition to the Decree of the <HI>Trent</HI> Council, a&s;&s;erting that they who receive in one kind only are not deprived of any Grace nece&s;&s;a|ry to Salvation: The Fathers declare, <HI>1.</HI> That it is nece&s;&s;ary to partake of the Cup, in order to our &V;nion to Chri&s;t, <HI>&sect;. 1.</HI> For the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins, <HI>&sect;. 2.</HI> For the obtainment of Eternal Life, <HI>&sect;. 3.</HI> An inference from this la&s;t Particular, to &s;hew the fal&s;hood of one Anathema pronounced by the <HI>Trent</HI> Council, <HI>&sect;. 4.</HI></HEAD>
<P>IT is &s;ure &s;ome prejudice again&s;t this <HI>Novel</HI> Doctrine, and Practice of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> &s;ome ground to &s;cruple and &s;u&s;pect the lawfulne&s;s of the &s;ub&s;traction of the <HI>Cup,</HI> that it bears &s;uch a manife&s;t repugnance to our <HI>Lord</HI>'s in&s;titution, and
<PB N="34" REF="26">to that Repetition of it which St. <HI>Paul</HI> delivered as a thing care|fully to be ob&s;erved; a Tradition to be retained by the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Corinth;</HI> and by attendance to which all their mi&s;carriages, in reference to the Celebration of that My&s;tery, were to be cor|rected: That all the <HI>Fathers</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> above a Thou&s;and Years conceived them&s;elves obliged, by virtue of this In&s;titu|tion, to Mini&s;ter both &s;pecies to the People. That they on all occa&s;ions ro&s;e up with &s;uch an holy Zeal again&s;t tho&s;e per|&s;ons who in le&s;&s;er matters pre&s;umed to vary from this In&s;ti|tution, condemned all humane In&s;titutions which receded from it, and puni&s;h'd all Offenders in this kind. But &s;uch hath been the Providence of God in reference to this Affair, &s;uch the di&s;cour&s;es of the <HI>Antients,</HI> with re&s;pect unto this &s;ubject, that there is &s;carcely any other Po&s;ition advanced by the&s;e <HI>Councils</HI> in favour of this Doctrine and Practice of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> which they do not directly overthrow, or in plain words condemn, almo&s;t as fully as any <HI>Prote&s;tant</HI> can do. For,</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 21. cap. 3. Se&s;&s;. 13. Can. 3.</NOTE> Whereas it is defined by the <HI>Trent Council,</HI> that <HI>they are not deprived of any Grace nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation, who re|ceive one kind only;</HI> and that <HI>it cannot be doubted, without preju|dice to the Chri&s;tian Faith, but that Communion in one kind only is &s;ufficient to Salvation.</HI> The <HI>Fathers</HI> do, in oppo&s;ition to the&s;e. A&s;&s;ertions, plainly and frequently declare, That it is nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation for <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> in the general, to drink Chri&s;ti's Blood in the Sacrament. This will be evident,</P>
<P N="1">1. From the&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions, in which the <HI>Fathers</HI> do declare it nece&s;&s;ary, not only to partake of the Bread, but al&s;o of the Cup, in order to that <HI>&V;nion</HI> with <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> which &s;ure is nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation; and this they generally gather from tho&s;e words of Chri&s;t,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Joh. vi. 56.</NOTE> <HI>He that eateth my Fle&s;h, and</HI> drinketh <HI>my Blood dwell|eth in me, and I in him. The Doctrine of ble&s;&s;ed</HI> Paul, &s;aith <HI>Cy|ril</HI> of <HI>Jeru&s;alem, is &s;ufficient to aford us full &s;atisfaction touching the Holy My&s;teries, of which being made partakers, we become of the &s;ame body and blood with Chri&s;t; for &s;o he &s;aith, that our Lord Je&s;us, taking Bread, and giving Thanks, he brake, and gave it to his Di&s;ciples, &s;aying, Take, eat, this is my Body; and taking the Cup, and giving Thanks, he &s;aid, Take, and drink, for this is my Blood; for in the type of Bread, the Body, and in the type of Wine, the Blood is given to thee:</HI><NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Catech. My&s;t. 4. p. 237.</NOTE> <HI>That partaking of the Body and Blood
<PB N="35" REF="26">of Christ, thou mai&s;t be of one Body and Blood with him, for &s;o we are made</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>bearers of Chri&s;t; his Body and Blood being received into our members.</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Haecaccepta &amp; hau&s;ta, id efficiunt, ut &amp; nos in Chri|&s;to, &amp; Chri&s;tus in nobis &s;it. <HI>De Trin. l.</HI> 8. <HI>p.</HI> 166.</NOTE> <HI>Tho&s;e things being taken and drank,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Hilary, produce this effect, that Christ is in us, and we in Chri&s;t; and how na|tural this &V;nity is, he him&s;elf t&emacr;acheth, &s;aying, He that eats my Fle&s;h and</HI> drinks <HI>my Blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. Cyril</HI> of <HI>Alexandria</HI> on the&s;e words &s;aith, That<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg"><HI>In</HI> Joh 6.56.</NOTE> <HI>our Lord here &s;hews the great profitablene&s;s of this work; for, as if one join Wax to Wax, he will &s;ee one part within the other; &s;o, he that receives the Fle&s;h of our Saviour Chri&s;t, and</HI> drinks <HI>his Blood, is, as he &s;aith, found one with him. So mixed with and in him, that he is found in Christ, and Christ again in him. Oecu|menius</HI> upon the&s;e words, <HI>The Cup of Ble&s;&s;ing, is it not the Com|munion of the Blood of Christ?</HI> &s;aith thus, <HI>You know what I &s;ay,</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Ed. Gr. <HI>p.</HI> 444.</NOTE> <HI>for his Blood knits us to Chri&s;t as Members to the Head, by the participation of it. This Meat and Drink,</HI> &s;aith Rabanus Maurus, <HI>&s;ignifies the eternal &s;ociety of the Head and Members: He that</HI> drinketh, <HI>&s;aith he, my Blood, and eateth my Fle&s;h, dwelleth in me,</HI> &amp;c.<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Nece&s;&s;e habemus &s;u|mere corpus &amp; &s;anguinem ejus, ut in ip&s;o maneamus &amp; ejus corporis membra &s;imus. <HI>De in&s;t. cler. l.</HI> 1. <HI>cap.</HI> 31.</NOTE> <HI>wherefore 'tis nece&s;&s;ary that we &s;hould take the Body and Blood of Christ, that we may dwell in him, and be his Members. Who&s;oever worthily eateth the Body and the Blood of Christ, &s;hews that he is in God, and God in him.</HI> And <HI>we,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Lib. 2. f. 55. <HI>b.</HI></NOTE> Guitmund, <HI>who take the Communion of this Holy Bread and Cup, are made one Body with Christ. Theophylact</HI> upon the Tenth to the <HI>Corinthians,</HI> adds, <HI>That which he &s;aith is this, That which is in the Cup is that which flowed from his &s;ide, and</HI><NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Ad v. 16.</NOTE> <HI>by partici|pation of it we communicate with, that is, we are united to Christ: That Men might not only learn by words,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Ed. Era&s;m. <HI>p.</HI> 217.</NOTE> Petrus Cluniacen&s;is, <HI>that they can|not live unle&s;s they be joined and united to Christ after the manner of carnal Food and Life, they receive the Body of Chri&s;t, and drink the Blood of Christ. We,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Et nos Je&s;a Chri&s;to &amp; Je&s;us Chri&s;tus nobis unitate foederatur inenarrabili, <HI>&amp;c. De coena Domini, f.</HI> 320. b.</NOTE> St. <HI>Bernard, by the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, are joined in an ineffable &V;nity to Chri&s;t, and Chri&s;t to us, as he &s;aid, He that eat|eth my Fle&s;h and drinks my Blood, abidethin me, and I in him.</HI></P>
<PB N="36" REF="27">
<P N="2"><MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="&sect;"> 2. This will be further evident from tho&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions in which they &s;ay, That the receiving of the Cup is nece&s;&s;ary for the <HI>Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins,</HI> for <HI>without</HI> this <HI>Remi&s;&s;ion there is no Salva|tion. When thou receive&s;t,</HI> &s;aith St. <HI>Ambro&s;e, What &s;aith the Apo|&s;tle to thee? As often as we eat this Bread and drink this Cup, we &s;hew forth the Lord's Death; if we &s;hew forth his Death, we &s;hew forth the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins; and</HI><NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Si quotie&s;cunque effun|ditur &s;anguis in remi&s;&s;ionem peccatorum funditur, debeo illum &s;emper accipere, ut &s;emper mihi peccata dimit|tantur, qui &s;emper pecco, &s;emper debeo habere medi|cinam. <HI>De Sacr. l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 6. <HI>l.</HI> 5. <HI>cap.</HI> 3.</NOTE> <HI>if as often as this Blood is poured forth, it is done for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins,</HI> I ought <HI>always to receive it, that my Sins may always be forgiven, for as oft as thou drinkest thou receive&s;t Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins.</HI> Now this Pa&s;&s;age being cited, and approved by many o|thers in the following Ages, and extant in the<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Di&s;t. 2. c. 14. Can. de con&s;ecrat.</NOTE> <HI>Canon Law,</HI> it will be needle&s;s to cite more <HI>Authors</HI> to this purpo&s;e, only let it be noted, that to receive the Blood &s;hed for the Remi&s;&s;ion of our Sins, is to <HI>drink</HI> of it, &s;aith. St. <HI>Ambro&s;e,</HI> and well he might, no other way of receiving the Blood, &s;hed for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins, being then known, than that of drinking the Sacra|mental Cup.</P>
<P N="3"><MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="&sect;"> 3. They do expre&s;ly teach, That the Sacramental eating and drinking is ordinarily nece&s;&s;ary to eternal Life.<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Orat. 42.</NOTE> <HI>With|out any doubting or &s;hamefaced fear, eat Chri&s;t's Body, and</HI> drink <HI>his Blood,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Nazianzen, if thou de&s;ire&s;t Life. Gregory Ny&s;&s;en</HI> condemns <HI>Eunomius</HI> for a&s;&s;erting, That <HI>the My&s;tical Symbols did not confirm our Piety; But we,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>who have learned from the Holy Scriptures, That unle&s;s a Man be born again of Water,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>and that he who eats my Fle&s;h, and drinks my Blood &s;hall live for ever:</HI><NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Tom. 2. contr. Eunom. p. 704.</NOTE> <HI>We believe that our Salvation is corroborated by the My&s;tical Rites and Symbols.</HI><NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">In Levit. qu. 47.</NOTE> <HI>This Blood all Men are exhorted to</HI> drink <HI>who would have Life,</HI> &s;aith St. <HI>Au&s;tin. Charles</HI> the <HI>Great</HI> con|futing the vain Imaginations of the Second <HI>Nicene Council,</HI> and comparing the &s;acred Blood with <HI>Images,</HI> &s;peaks thus,<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">L. de Imag. 2. c. 27.</NOTE> <HI>Seeing without the participation of this Blood no Man can be &s;aved, whereas all Orthodox Per&s;ons may be &s;aved without the ob&s;ervation of Images, It is manife&s;t, that they are by no Man of a &s;ound Mind, to be compared or equalled to &s;o great a My&s;tery.
<PB N="37" REF="27">Alcuin,</HI> the Ma&s;ter of <HI>Charles</HI> the <HI>Great</HI> &s;aith, <HI>We mu&s;t know that it is not lawful to offer the Cup of the Lord's Blood unmixed with Water; for Wine was in the My&s;tery of our Redemption, when Chri&s;t &s;aid, I will not drink henceforth of the fruit of the Vine; and the Water with Blood, flowing from his &s;ide, &s;hewed the Wine pre&s;&s;ed out of the true Vine of his Fle&s;h with Water;</HI><NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Haec enim &s;unt Sacra|menta Eccle&s;iae &s;ine quibus ad vitam non intratur. <HI>De Celeb. Mi&s;&s;. p.</HI> 88.</NOTE> for the&s;e are the Sacraments of the Church, without which we cannot enter into Life.<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">De Officiis Eccle&s;. l. 3. c. 26.</NOTE> <HI>A|malarius</HI> &s;aith the &s;ame. And <HI>our Lord,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">De In&s;tit. Cler. l. 1. c. 31.</NOTE> <HI>Rabanus Maurus, having pronounced concerning his Body and Blood, that his Fle&s;h is Meat indeed, and his Blood Drink indeed; and that he that eateth my fle&s;h, and drinketh my Blood, hath Eternal Life; he therefore hath not that Life who eateth not that Bread, and drinketh not that Blood; for although Men, who are not in his Body by Faith, may have that Life in this World which is Temporal, they can never have that Eternal Life which is promi&s;ed to the Saints.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Fol. 216. b.</NOTE> <HI>Petrus Cluniacen&s;is, gives his Fle&s;h and Blood to be eaten and drunken, that as it is di&s;cerned that without carnal Meat and drink, none can pa&s;s through this temporal Life; &s;o it may be believed that without this &s;piritual Meat and Drink, none can ob|tain eternal Life; for how could he better commend him&s;elf to the World to be the Life of Men, than by Example of tho&s;e things in which Man's Life con&s;i&s;ts? and therefore the Wi&s;dom of God de|creed to give his Fle&s;h to Men to eat, and his Blood to drink in the &s;pecies of tho&s;e things; when he &s;aith, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>we learn by hearing, that he is Eternal Life; but when he &s;aith, except you eat my Fle&s;h,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>we learn by eating, that he is the Eternal Life of Men. That Men therefore might not only learn by Words, but more familiarly by Deeds, that they can|not Live, except they be united to him, they take the Body, they drink the Blood, in the likene&s;s of Food, not given by, or taken from any other but Chri&s;t; to &s;hew this, he &s;ignified that he would give to all Men his Fle&s;h to eat, and his Blood to drink.</HI></P>
<P>And, truly, if any Doctrine can de&s;erve to be &s;u&s;pected, as new, &s;trange, and incongruous to the Analogy of Faith, it mu&s;t be this, That <HI>the Cup of Life, the Cup of Ble&s;&s;ing which we ble&s;s, the Cup of Salvation,</HI> which we take according to our Lord's own In&s;titution, and which we drink of Worthily, is not needful to conferr Life, Salvation, or &s;piritual Ble&s;&s;ing on
<PB N="38" REF="28">the worthy Receiver of it. That in all the <HI>Liturgies</HI> of the <HI>Ancient Church,</HI> they &s;hould pray con&s;tantly, that they who worthily Received this Cup, might be <HI>filled thereby with all &s;pi|ritual Benediction, and heavenly Grace;</HI> that in their Di&s;cour&s;es on this Subject, they &s;hould exhort the People, after they had received the Bread, to drink this Cup for their <HI>Sanctification,</HI> for the <HI>remi&s;&s;ion of Sins,</HI> for the <HI>obtaining Life;</HI> and tell them it was nece&s;&s;ary to be drunk of, for all the ends here mentioned, and yet believe it was not needful to conferr Grace, and &s;piri|tualy Ble&s;&s;ings on them.</P>
<P>And <HI>4ly,</HI> This they do generally prove from the Fifth Cen|tury, by that known pa&s;&s;age of our Lord, <HI>Except you eat the Fle&s;h and drink the Blood of the Son of Man, you have no Life in you.</HI><NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">Tom. 1. p. 580. Tom. 2. p. 431.</NOTE> St. <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> is expre&s;s unto this purpo&s;e, &s;aying, That <HI>the Baptized per&s;on ought to be nouri&s;hed with the food of Eternal Life; and that the communication of the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t is nece&s;&s;ary to Eternal Life:</HI> And proving both from the&s;e words, <HI>Verily I &s;ay unto you, except you eat,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>He that eateth my Fle&s;h and drinketh my Blood hath Eternal Life.</HI> St. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom</HI> upon this Text, &s;peaks thus, <HI>Becau&s;e they had &s;aid before, it was im|po&s;&s;ible to eat his Fle&s;h, and drink his Blood.</HI><NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Tom. 2. p. 748.</NOTE> <HI>He here &s;hews, not only that it is not impo&s;&s;ible, but that it is very nece&s;&s;ary; and therefore introduceth the&s;e words, He that eateth my fle&s;h,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>He continually &s;peaks of the</HI> My&s;teries, <HI>&s;hewing the nece&s;&s;ity of the thing, and that it always ought to be done. Again&s;t the</HI> Pelagians, &s;aith <HI>P. Gela&s;ius,</HI><NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">Dominus Je&s;us (con|tra Pelagianos) coelefti voce pronunciat, Qui non mandu|caverit, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Ubi utique ne|minem videmus exemptum, nec au&s;us e&s;t aliquis dicere parvulum &s;ine hoc Sacramen|to &s;alutari ad aeternam vitam po&s;&s;e produci&mdash; <HI>Ep. vniv. E|pi&s;c. per Nicaenum. Concil. Tom.</HI> 4. <HI>p.</HI> 1177, 1178.</NOTE> <HI>our Lord pronounceth that he who eateth not the Fle&s;h of the Son of Man, and drinks his Blood, hath no Life in him; where we &s;ee none exempt, nor dares any &s;ay, that an Infant can obtain Eternal Life without this Sacrament &mdash; It is not only &s;aid, Except a Man be born again of Wa|ter,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>but unel&s;s, He eat &mdash; and drink,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>and that this is &s;poken of Eternal Life none can doubt; be|cau&s;e many who receive not this Sacrament, have this pre&s;ent Life.</HI> St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> A&s;&s;erts above Twenty times, the ab&s;olute nece&s;&s;ity that Infants &s;hould partake of Chri&s;t's Bo|dy, and drink his Blood, by rea&s;on of the&s;e words<NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">Omnino &amp; parvulorum &s;alvator e&s;t Chri&s;tus, omnino ni&s;i ab illo redimantur peribunt, quum &s;ine carne ejus &amp; &s;anguine vitam habere non po&s;&s;unt, hoc &s;en&s;it, hoc credidit, hoc didicit, hoc docuit Joannes. <HI>Tom.</HI> 7. <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>contra Jul. Pelag. ed. Frob. p.</HI> 949.</NOTE> <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI>
<PB N="39" REF="28">&s;aith he, <HI>is altogether the Saviour of Infants, and unle&s;s they be redeemed by him, they will utterly peri&s;h, &s;eeing without his Fle&s;h and Blood they cannot have Life. This St.</HI> John <HI>thought and believed, learned and taught.</HI> And again,<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">An dicente Chri&s;to, Si non manducaveritis, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> di|cturus fueram parvulum ha|biturum vitam qui &s;ine i&s;to Sacramento finii&s;&s;et hanc vi|tam. <HI>Ibid. l.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 1. <HI>p</HI> 991. d. 992. a.</NOTE> <HI>when Chri&s;t &s;aith, &V;nle&s;s you eat his Fle&s;h and drink his Blood you have no life in you, can I &s;ay the Child can have Life, who ends his Life without that Sacra|ment?</HI> And a third time, <HI>He having &s;aid, &V;nle&s;s you eat,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>and he that eats my Fle&s;h, and drinketh my Blood hath eternal Life:</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Quo igitur vitam regni coelorum promittitis parvu|lis non renatis ex aqua &amp; &s;piritu Sancto, non cibatis carne neque potatis &s;anguine Chri&s;ti? <HI>Where the Marginal Note is,</HI> Euchari&s;tia parvu|lis &s;ub utraque &s;pecie. <HI>Tom.</HI> 7. <HI>contr. Pelag. Hypogno&s;t. c.</HI> 5. <HI>p.</HI> 1405. b. c.</NOTE> <HI>How is it that you</HI> (Pelagians) <HI>promi&s;e the Kingdom of Heaven to Children not born of Water and the Spirit, not fed with the Fle&s;h of Chri&s;t, nor having drunk of his Blood which was &s;hed for the Remi&s;&s;ion of their Sins? Be|hold, he that is not Baptized, and he that is deprived of the</HI> Vital Cup <HI>and Bread, is divided from the Kingdom of Heaven.</HI> And of what Sacrament he conceives our <HI>Saviour</HI> to have &s;poken in the&s;e words, he more expre&s;ly tells us, &s;aying,<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Dominum audiamus non quidem hoc de Sacramen|to &s;ancti lavacri dicentem, &s;ed de Sacra mento &s;acrae men|&s;ae &s;uae, quo nemo ni&s;i rite baptizatus accedit, Ni&s;i man|ducaveritis, <HI>&amp;c. Tom.</HI> 7. <HI>l. de peccat. Meritis &amp; Remi&s;&s;. c.</HI> 19. <HI>p.</HI> 666.</NOTE> <HI>Let us hear our Lord &s;peaking, not of the Sacrament of Bapti&s;m,</HI> N. B. <HI>but of the Sacrament of his Holy Ta|ble, to which none comes who is not rightly Baptized, Except you eat &mdash; and drink,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>What do we far|ther &s;eek for? Dares any Body &s;ay, this Sentence be|longeth not to Children, or that they can have Life in them&s;elves, without the Participation of the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t? But he that &s;aith this, doth not attend, that if that Sentence comprehends not all, &s;o that they cannot have Life without the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t, tho&s;e of Riper Years are not obliged to regard it:</HI> And to refer you to the<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Vide Dallaeum de Cult. Latin. l. 5. cap. 3.</NOTE> Margin for the re&s;t, his Conclu&s;ion is this,<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Siergo, ut tot, &amp; tan|ta divina te&s;timonia conci|nant, nec &s;alus, nec vita ae|terna fine bapti&s;mo &amp; corpore &amp; &s;anguine Domini cuiquam &s;peranda e&s;t, fru&s;tra fine his promittitur parvulis. <HI>Lib.</HI> 1. <HI>de peccat. Meritis &amp; Remi&s;&s;. c.</HI> 24. <HI>p.</HI> 670.</NOTE> <HI>If then &s;o many divine Te&s;timonies accord in &s;aying, That neither Salvation nor Life eternal is by any to be hoped for, without Bapti&s;m, and the Body and the Blood of our Lord, they art in vain promi&s;ed to Children without them.</HI> Now here it is to be admi|red, that Men of Sence and of Integrity, &s;hould &s;ay, St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> &s;peaks all this <HI>of &s;uch a participa|tion of the Fle&s;h and Blood of Chri&s;t, as may be had in Bapti&s;m,</HI> when he not only &s;peaks in divers of
<PB N="40" REF="29">the&s;e places fir&s;t of the Sacrament of Bapti&s;m, and after of the Supper of the Lord, but &s;ometimes of this Sacrament by way of di&s;tinction from that of Bapti&s;m, &s;ometimes of the Sacra|ment of the <HI>Lord's Table,</HI> and of that eating and drinking of Chri&s;t's Body and Blood, <HI>quod per corpus geritur, which is done by the Body.</HI> And when this Text from the Fifth to the Twelfth <HI>Century,</HI> was by the <HI>Fathers</HI> &s;till interpreted of the <HI>Lord's Sup|per,</HI> and Children were admitted to that Sacrament, and to the drinking of the Cup on that account. <HI>I&s;idore Peleu&s;iota</HI> in the &s;ame Age extolling the <HI>Sacerdotal</HI> Order, &s;aith, That <HI>by their means we are regenerated,</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. l. 2. Ep. 52.</NOTE> <HI>and made partakers of the divine</HI> My&s;teries, <HI>without which no Man can attain the Heavenly rewards, as is appa|rent from the Heavenly Oracles, now &s;aying, That unle&s;s a Man be born again,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>and anon, &V;nle&s;s we eat,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>we have no life in us:</HI> Which Argument he &s;eems to have borrowed from St. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom,</HI> who &s;aith,<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Hom. 3. de Sacerd. tom. 6. p. 16. l. 38.</NOTE> <HI>If none can enter into the Kingdom of Heaven who is not born again of Water,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>If he that doth not eat the Fle&s;h of the Lord, and drink his Blood, is deprived of Eternal Life, and all the&s;e things are not otherwi&s;e communica|ted, but by the Hands of the Prie&s;t, who can, without the&s;e Men avoid the Fire of Hell, or enjoy the Crowns laid up in Heaven? Amphilochius</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. In Vit. Ba&s;il. c. 17. p. 221.</NOTE> <HI>It is impo&s;&s;ible that any one &s;hould be &s;a|ved, unle&s;s he be regenerated by Bapti&s;m, and made partaker of the Life-giving Antitypes of the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t.</HI><NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">De Eccle&s;i|a&s;t. Officiis, l. 1. de Sacrificio, c. 18.</NOTE> <HI>I&s;idore Hi&s;palen&s;is</HI> cites, and approves that pa&s;&s;age of<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Timendum e&s;t ne dum qui ab&s;tentus &s;eperatur a Chri&s;ti corpore procul remaneat a &s;alute, comminante ip&s;o vel di|cente, Ni&s;i ederitis carnem filii hominis &amp; biberitis &s;anguinem ejus, non habebitis vitam in vobis. <HI>Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p.</HI> 147. <HI>Et Raban. Maur. de in&s;titut. Cler. l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 31.</NOTE> St. <HI>Cyprian,</HI> in his Treati&s;e on the <HI>Lord</HI>'s <HI>Prayer, It is to be feared, lea&s;t any one, being long &s;eparated from the Body of Chri&s;t, &s;hould be far from Salvation; Chri&s;t having &s;aid, &V;nle&s;s you eat,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Hincmarus Remen&s;is</HI> &s;aith, That Chri&s;t &s;poke tho&s;e words <HI>of his Body and Blood inviting his Servants to his Table,</HI> that<NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg">Locutus e&s;t nobis de corpore &amp; &s;anguine &s;uo, commendans talem e&s;cam, &amp; talem potum, Ni&s;i man|ducaveritis, &amp;c. haec &s;unt Sacramenta Eccle&s;iae &s;ine quibus ad vitam quae vera vita e&s;t non intratur. <HI>Tom.</HI> 2. <HI>p.</HI> 92.</NOTE> <HI>this, and Bapti&s;m are the Sacraments of the</HI> Church, <HI>without which we cannot enter into true Life.</HI><NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Habet vitam aeternam; hanc ergo non habet qui i&s;tum pa|nem non manducat, nec i&s;tum &s;anguinem bibit, nam temporalem vitam &s;ine illo habere ho|mines po&s;&s;unt, aeternam vero omnino non po&s;&s;unt. <HI>Augu&s;t. Tract.</HI> 26. <HI>in Joh. p.</HI> 229. Sinc i&s;to cibo &amp; potu. <HI>Raban. M. de in&s;tit. Cler. l.</HI> 1.31.</NOTE> <HI>Rabanus</HI> &s;peaks thus, <HI>The Truth
<PB N="41" REF="29">&s;aith, My Fle&s;h is Meat indeed, and my Blood is Drink indeed. &mdash; Men may have temporal Life without this Meat and Drink,</HI> eternal they can never have. Which Words he borrowed from St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI>'s Comment on the Sixth of <HI>John. Regino</HI> cites this pa&s;&s;age from the <HI>Capitulars</HI> of <HI>Charles</HI> the <HI>Great,</HI> That<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">De Eccl. di&s;cipl. l. 1. can. 195.</NOTE> <HI>great di&s;cretion is to be u&s;ed as to the Receiving of the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t, for care is to be taken, least being deferred too long, it tend to the Destruction of the Soul, our Lord having &s;aid, &V;nle&s;s you eat,</HI> &amp;c.<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Qua&s;i quo|dam jurejuran|do prote&s;tatur dicens, Amen. Amen, &amp;c. <HI>A|pud Baron. Tom.</HI> 11. <HI>p.</HI> 1007.</NOTE> <HI>Humbert</HI> in his Di&s;putation again&s;t the <HI>Greeks,</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>Christ re&s;tified with an Oath, that without this refection, that Life which is Chri&s;t cannot be had, &s;aying, Verily I &s;ay unto you, except,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>The Fle&s;h is taken by it &s;elf,</HI> &s;aith Lanfranck, <HI>and the Blood by it &s;elf, not without a certain My&s;tery, though in ano|ther Sence whole Chri&s;t is &s;aid to be eaten, viz.</HI> By &s;piritual de|&s;ire of eternal Life, and Meditation of his Pa&s;&s;ion;<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Utraque come&s;tio ne|ce&s;&s;aria, utraque fructuo&s;a, altera indiget alterius, ut bo|ni aliquid operetur &mdash; hinc in Evangelio legitur ni&s;i man|ducaveritis, &amp;c. <HI>De Sacr. Euch. p.</HI> 126, 127.</NOTE> <HI>both the&s;e Come&s;tions</HI> are nece&s;&s;ary&mdash;<HI>for hence it is read in the Go&s;pel, that unle&s;s we eat, &amp;c.</HI><NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Comment. in 6. Joh.</NOTE> <HI>Rupertus Tuitien&s;is</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>lea&s;t any Man &s;hould think he hath recovered by Faith alone, the Life of his Body and Soul, without the vi&s;ible meat and drink of the Body and Blood of Christ, and con&s;equently needs not the Sacrament, Christ repeats the &s;ame thing again touching the eating his Fle&s;h and drinking his Blood; by this undoubt|edly te&s;tifying that he doth not truly believe, who&s;oever de&s;pi&s;eth to eat and to drink; for although thou be a Faithful Man, and profe&s;s thy &s;elf to be a Catholick, if thou refu&s;e&s;t to eat of this vi&s;ible Meat and Drink, even by this, that thou pre&s;ume&s;t that this Meat and Drink is not nece&s;&s;ary to thee, thou cuttest thy &s;elf off from the So|ciety of the Members of Christ, which is the Church.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="&sect;"> Now if that &s;ence which the con&s;tant interpretation of the <HI>Fathers</HI> hath put upon the&s;e words, from the Fifth to the Twelfth <HI>Century</HI> be owned by <HI>Romani&s;ts,</HI> the con&s;equence is un|avoidable, that it is nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation to receive the Sacra|ment under both kinds, for they who do receive the Body on|ly, may be &s;aid well to eat the Fle&s;h of Chri&s;t, becau&s;e they take &s;omething by way of Meat, but they cannot be &s;aid to <HI>drink his Blood,</HI> as here our <HI>Lord</HI> requireth them to do, &s;ince they take nothing by way of drink. The privation of Life is here connected with the neglect of Drinking, as much as with the
<PB N="42" REF="30">neglect of Eating; &s;ince therefore eating the drinking are di|&s;tinct Actions, he cannot properly be &s;aid to drink, who only eats, and therefore mu&s;t neglect what, by the <HI>Fathers</HI> de&s;|cants on the&s;e Words, is nece&s;&s;ary to life eternal. Moreover, &s;ince on this &s;ole account they con&s;tantly did mini&s;ter the Cup to little Children, as <HI>Roman Catholicks</HI> confe&s;s, they mini&s;tred both the Bread and Cup to Children capable of receiving both, as the <HI>Church Hi&s;tory</HI> atte&s;ts; it follows that they held it ne|ce&s;&s;ary to Salvation in conformity to the&s;e Sayings of our <HI>Lord</HI> recorded by St. <HI>John,</HI> that both &s;hould be received by all <HI>Chri|&s;tians</HI> capable of taking both Species. And therefore in con|demning this Doctrine,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 21. can. 4.</NOTE> and that with an <HI>Anathema,</HI> the <HI>Fathers</HI> of the <HI>Trent Council</HI> mu&s;t have virtually <HI>Anathematized</HI> the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> for Nine whole <HI>Centuries,</HI> and by re|nouncing of this Interpretation &s;o generally received, the <HI>Do|ctors</HI> of the <HI>Roman Church</HI> mu&s;t at lea&s;t &s;eem to us to violate that Oath,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Jaramentum profe&s;&s;ionis fi|dei a Pio 4. editum.</NOTE> which they have taken, never to interpret or own any &s;ence of Scripture, <HI>Ni&s;i juxta unanimem con&s;en&s;um Patrum, but according to the unanimous con&s;ent of the Fathers.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. IV. The Contents.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub"><HI>In oppo&s;ition to that Determination of the</HI> Trent <HI>Council, That a true or an intire Sacrament is taken under either Species. The Fathers and the School-Men do expre&s;ly &s;ay the contrary,</HI> viz. Epiphanius, &sect;. 1. <HI>The Council held in</HI> Trullo, P. Julius, P. Gela&s;ius, <HI>the Council</HI> of Braga, &sect;. 2. Pa&s;cha&s;ius Corbeien&s;is, Algerus <HI>and St.</HI> Bernard, &sect;. 3. Alexander Halen&s;is, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Albertus Magnus, Durantus, Petrus de Palude, Gulielmus de monte Laudano, Lyra, Carthu&s;ianns, Andreas Fri&s;ius, &sect;. 4. <HI>The Inferences from the&s;e Sayings,</HI> &sect; 5.</HEAD>
<P>WHereas the <HI>Trent Council</HI> a&s;&s;erts,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 21. cap. 3. l. 4. de Sacr. Ench. c. 22. s. utraque.</NOTE> That <HI>a true Sacrament is taken under either Species,</HI> that is, as <HI>Bellarmine</HI> Inter|prets it, <HI>An intire Sacrament;</HI> nothing is more repugnant to the plain Judgment of Antiquity than the&s;e A&s;&s;ertions. And
<PB N="43" REF="30">though the &s;ilence of all Antiquity in this matter is a full de|mon&s;tration that they held no &s;uch Doctrine, &s;eeing no rea|&s;on can be given why they, had they embraced this Doctrine, which is frequently inculcated by all the <HI>Roman Doctors,</HI> who write upon this Subject, &s;hould never &s;ay with the like plain|ne&s;s, as they &s;o often do, That <HI>an entire Sacrament is given un|der one Species only,</HI> or any thing to that effect; or give them|&s;elves the trouble to An&s;wer that Enquiry which &s;o di&s;turbs the <HI>Roman Doctors,</HI> and which they &s;ee them&s;elves &s;o much concerned to An&s;wer; <HI>viz. Why then did our dear Lord him&s;elf di|&s;tribute and in&s;titute this Sacrament to be received under both kinds?</HI> I &s;ay, though this be a &s;ufficient prejudice again&s;t that A&s;&s;er|tion of the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Trent;</HI> and though it will more fully be confuted by an impartial Reflection on what we have Di&s;|cour&s;ed, of the con&s;tant Declaration of the <HI>Church,</HI> that to give the con&s;ecrated Bread dipp'd in the Cup was not to give a compleat Sacrament, with many things of the like nature; yet &s;hall I wave all the&s;e Advantages at pre&s;ent, and &s;hew from the plain Sayings, both of the <HI>Ancients,</HI> the Writers of the <HI>middle,</HI> and chiefly of the <HI>latter Ages,</HI> or the Doctrine of the <HI>Schools,</HI> that they conceived the Reception of both Species by per&s;ons capable, was requi&s;ite to the integrity of this Sacra|ment.</P>
<P><MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>Epiphanius</HI> &s;peaking of the <HI>Encratites,</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>in this My|&s;tery they u&s;e only Water, and wholly do ab&s;tain from Wine;</HI> the cen&s;ure which he pa&s;&s;eth on them for &s;o doing, is this, That <HI>having the Form, they deny the Power of Godline&s;s;</HI><NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">, &amp;c. Haer. 47. &sect;. 3. Pag. 401.</NOTE> <HI>for who&s;oever,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>doth omit one part of a work, by the omi&s;&s;ion of that one part, doth really omit the whole.</HI> The Inference he mak|eth from that Rule is this, That <HI>the My&s;teries they celebrate by Water only, are really no My&s;te|ries, but only fal&s;e My&s;teries in imitation of the true, in which they are convinced by the Right words of our Saviour, &s;aying, I will not henceforth drink of the Fruit of the Vine.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="&sect;"> The <HI>General Council</HI> held in <HI>Truillo</HI> being informed that the <HI>Armenians</HI> did celebrate the My&s;teries in pure Wine not mixed
<PB N="44" REF="31">with Water, declares that the did<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Can. 32.</NOTE> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>imperfectly &s;hew forth the My&s;tery.</HI> Now let it be ob&s;er|ved from St. <HI>Paul,</HI> that it is not by offering only, but by par|taking of this Bread, and drinking of this Cup, that we do <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&s;hew forth the Lord's Death,</HI> and then it clearly fol|lows, that if he who di&s;tributes <HI>Wine without Water,</HI> imperfectly &s;hews forth the My&s;tery, he that gives neither Wine nor Wa|ter mu&s;t do it more imperfectly. When &s;ome in the <HI>Dioce&s;s</HI> of <HI>Squillaci</HI> out of &s;ome unknown Super&s;tition, would have taken the Bread without the Cup,<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Apud Ivon. decret. part 2. c. 89.</NOTE> <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> decrees, that they &s;hould either take the entire Sacrament, or be entirely driven from it; he therefore evidently determined, that taking of one Species only was not taking an <HI>entire Sacrament.</HI> In the Fourth Century,<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">See cap. 2.</NOTE> <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>Pope Julius,</HI> in the Seventh <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Braga,</HI> in the Eleventh <HI>Micrologus,</HI> in the Twelfth <HI>Peter Lombard,</HI> do with one voice deny that the Bread dipp'd in the con&s;ecrated Wine can be admini&s;tred, <HI>pro complemento Communionis, for an entire or compleat Communion,</HI> and therefore much le&s;s could they think that the Communion was entire when mini&s;tred only in dry Bread.</P>
<P>The great Sticklers for <HI>Tran&s;ub&s;tantiation</HI> averr the &s;ame thing.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Sect;. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Pa&s;cha&s;ius Corbeien&s;is</HI> &s;aith, That<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">De Corp. &amp; Sang. Dom. c. 11.</NOTE> <HI>therefore we are fed with, and made to drink of the&s;e two only in the way, that our whole Man, which con&s;i&s;ts of two Sub&s;tances,</HI> integr&egrave; reparetur, <HI>may be entirely repaired,</HI> both therefore were, in his judgment, needful to an entire reparation of the whole Man. <HI>Algerus</HI> in An&s;wer to this Que&s;tion, <HI>Why the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t is con&s;ecrated rather in Bread, Wine and Water, than in any other kinds of Bodies?</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>becau&s;e we &s;o live by Bread and drink, that we can want nei|ther of them,</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Utrum&abque; in <HI>Sacramento</HI> &s;uo e&s;&s;e voluit. De Sacr. Euch. l. 2. c. 5.</NOTE> <HI>our Lord would have both be in his Sacrament, lea&s;t if either of them &s;hould be wanting, as by this imperfect &s;ign of Life, he &s;hould &s;eem to be repre&s;ented not as full, but as imperfect Life.</HI> And a little after he &s;aith, <HI>This is done</HI> proptr commodiorem aptitudinem Sacrametalis perfectionis, <HI>for the more commodious repre&s;entation of the Sacramental perfection. The Species of Bread and Wine is propounded,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">De coena Domini f. 321. b.</NOTE> St. <HI>Bernard, that it might be taught, that there is a full and perfect refection in taking the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t; a full refection of Meat and Drink, the principal Sub&s;tances of Meat and Drink being Bread and Wine.</HI></P>
<PB N="45" REF="31">
<P><MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="&sect;"> But above all the <HI>School-Men</HI> do declare again&s;t this Doctrine of the <HI>Trent Council.</HI><NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">In iv. &s;ent. q. 40. membr. 3. Art 2. &amp; q. 53. membr. 1.</NOTE> <HI>Alexander</HI> of <HI>Hales</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>whole Chri&s;t is not under either Species Sacramentally, but the Fle&s;h only under the Species of Bread, the Blood under the Species of Wine on|ly; for to the perfection of the Sacrament is required a repre&s;entation according to the In&s;titution, but in one kind the matter of the Sacra|ment is not entirely and perfectly; I &s;ay there is not a perfect Sacra|ment, as to the Sacramental Perfection of it.</HI><NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Sum. part. 3. q. 76. Art. 2. Adv. Gent. l. 4. c. 61. &amp; in 1. Cor. c. 11.</NOTE> <HI>Aquinas</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>though Chri&s;t is contained under both Species, yet is it conve|nient to the u&s;e of this Sacrament, that the Body of Chri&s;t &s;hould be delivered apart for Food to the Faithful, and his Blood for Drink; both,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>is of the perfection of this Sacrament, for the perfection of refection, for the repre&s;entation of Chri&s;ts Pa&s;&s;ion, and for the effecting of the Salvation both of Soul and Body.</HI> 1. For its perfection; <HI>for it being a Spiritual Re|fection, it ought to have &s;piritual Meat and &s;piritual Drinke, for corporal Refection is not perfected without both the&s;e:</HI> And as he el&s;ewhere &s;aith, <HI>becau&s;e &s;piritual effects are done under the likene&s;s of vi&s;ible, it was fit that this &s;piritual nouri&s;hment &s;hould be delivered to us under the Species of tho&s;e things which Men do ordinarily u&s;e for corporal nouri&s;hment; and therefore this Sacrament is delivered to us under the Species of Bread and Wine.</HI> 2. For the &s;ignifica|tion of it; <HI>for it is a memorial of the Lord's Pa&s;&s;ion, whereby his Blood was &s;eparated from his Body; and therefore in this Sa|crament the Blood is offered by it &s;elf.</HI> And el&s;ewhere, <HI>Becau&s;e the Completion of our Salvation was made by the Pa&s;&s;ion and Death of Chri&s;t, by which is Blood was &s;eparated from his Fle&s;h;</HI> &s;epa|ratim nobis traditur Sacramentum corporis ejus &s;ub &s;pecie panis, &amp; &s;anguis &s;ub &s;pecie vini; <HI>the Sacrament of his Body is delivered</HI> N. B. <HI>to us apart under the Species of Bread, and the Blood un|der the Species of Wine, that &s;o in this Sacrament might be the me|mory and repre&s;entation of our Lord's Pa&s;&s;ion.</HI> 3. For the health|ful Effect of it; <HI>for the Body is offered to &s;hew that it is of force to &s;ave the Body, and the Blood is offered to &s;hew that it is of force to &s;ave the Soul; for the Soul is in the Blood.</HI><NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">In 4. Sent. di&s;t. 8. q. 2. &amp; di&s;t. 11. q. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Bonaventure</HI> &s;aith, That, <HI>as to the &s;ignification, both Species are of the integrity of this Sacrament, becau&s;e the matter of the Sacrament is expre&s;&s;ed in neither of them by it &s;elf, but in both together, which appears thus; Here Chri&s;t is &s;ignified as Meat, perfectly refre&s;hing them that eat
<PB N="46" REF="32">him Sacramentally and Spiritually; but a perfect Refection is not in Bread alone or Wine alone, but in both; he therefore is &s;ignified as perfectly refre&s;hing not in one Species only but in both.</HI> And again, <HI>This Sacrament, though it contains two Signs, and two Words, yet becau&s;e a perfect Sign ordained for one thing,</HI> &s;c. <HI>the &V;nion of the Body My&s;tical, re&s;ults from them, therefore the Sacrament is one; and the rea&s;on of this Integrity and Ordination comes from Nature, for neither is Bread nor Wine apart fully Refectory, but both, and one full Refection in nature comes from both, and &s;o they are di&s;po&s;ed to &s;ignifie one Refection; but this is compleated by the Divine In|&s;titution, which by one In&s;titution hath appointed the&s;e two Signs to &s;ig|nifie one perfect Refection, and &s;o it is one Sacrament on the account of nature and of Divine In&s;titution.</HI></P>
<P><NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">In 4. Sent. di&s;t. 8. Art. 13.</NOTE> <HI>Albertus Magnus</HI> lays down this general Rule, <HI>The Sacra|ment of the Church cau&s;eth nothing in Grace which it doth not &s;ig|nifie in Similitude,</HI> and that <HI>the Sacraments of the New Law are the cau&s;e of nothing of which they bear not a &s;en&s;ible Image;</HI> and thence infers, That <HI>the &V;nion of the My&s;tical Body is not perfect|ly cau&s;ed, and &s;ignified but by a double Sign; and therefore by vir|tue of the Sacrament we ought to have both.</HI> And in his Comment upon the Sixth of <HI>John,</HI> he &s;aith, That <HI>as in the Fle&s;h is received what is vivifying, and re&s;torative of the &s;piritual and divine Life lo&s;t in us, &s;o by the Blood is received the A&s;per&s;ion, and clean&s;ing of our inward parts.</HI> And making the enquiry, <HI>why, to that man|ducation Spiritual Drink was nece&s;&s;ary to be added,</HI> he an&s;wers, it is &s;o, <HI>becau&s;e Meat cannot be without Drink.</HI> In his Comment on<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">c. 22. f. 321.</NOTE> St. <HI>Luke; Some,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>more curious than devout, en|quire to what end was the Sacrament of the Blood in&s;tituted after the Sacrament of the Body, &s;ince the Body of Chri&s;t is not without the Blood, nor the Blood without the Body? But to this we &s;ay, that though the&s;e are as to their nature undivided, yet have they dif|ferent Effects; for one by Chri&s;t is ordained to incorporate, the Blood for the wa&s;hing away of Sins: whence it is &s;aid, That without &s;hedding of Blood there is no Remi&s;&s;ion: And that which they &s;ay that the Body is not without the Blood is true; but yet by virtue of the Sacrament, the Sacramental Body is not in the Blood, nor the Sa|cramental Blood in the Body: That therefore we might have a Sup|per Sacramentally perfect, it was nece&s;&s;ary that it &s;hould be in&s;titu|ted, that the Body and Blood &s;hould be Sacramentally had; this therefore is the cau&s;e and manner of the In&s;titution; &s;o our King
<PB N="47" REF="32">and Prie&s;t &s;aves us out of the Flour and out of the Wine-Pre&s;s.</HI><NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Rat. l. 4. c. 54. f. 126.</NOTE> <HI>Durantus</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>the Church in&s;tituted the Sacrament to be taken after the con&s;ecration of both Species, to &s;hew, that he who receives the Hoa&s;t only, receives not the whole Sacrament Sacra|mentally: For although the Blood be in the con&s;ecrated Hoa&s;t, yet is it not Sacramentally there, becau&s;e the Bread &s;ignifies the Body not the Blood, the Wine &s;ignifies the Blood, not the Body; wherefore becau&s;e the Sacrament under one kind is not compleat according to the Sign, the Sacrament ought to be compleat before the Prie&s;t u&s;e it.</HI> And again,<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Ibid. c. 4<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">. f. 106.</NOTE> <HI>Although, under the Form of Bread, the Blood may be taken with the Body, and under the Form of Wine, the Body may be taken with the Blood; yet, according to</HI> Innocent <HI>the Third, neither the Blood under the Form of Bread, nor the Body under te Form of Wine is drunk and eaten, becau&s;e as neither Blood is eaten nor the Body drunk, &s;o neither under the Form of Bread is drunk, or eaten under the Form of Wine.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ca&s;&s;under</HI> informs us of<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">De com. &s;ub utra&abque; &s;pecie, p. 1034.</NOTE> <HI>Petrus de Palude,</HI> that he a&s;&s;erted, That <HI>the matter of the Sacrament ought to be double,</HI> viz. <HI>the mat|ter of Bread and Drink; becau&s;e the effect of the Sacrament ought to be perfectly repre&s;ented by the matter, in a way agreeable to na|tural things, becau&s;e the Sacraments effect what they do figure, but the effect of the Sacrament is full Refection of the Soul, and therefore the matter repre&s;enting this, ought to do it by perfect Re|fection of the Body, which only is by Meat and Drink.</HI><NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Lyturg. p. 77.</NOTE> <HI>Guiliel|mus de monte Landano,</HI> as he there cites him, adds, That <HI>he who receives the Body, receives the whole Truth, but not the whole Sa|crament; and therefore in many places they Communicate with Bread and Wine, that is, with a</HI> whole Sacrament. The<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">De commu. &s;ub utraque &s;pecie, <HI>ibid.</HI></NOTE> Dean of <HI>Lovain,</HI> as he cites him, &s;aith, That <HI>with re&s;pect to the Sacrament, and the perfection of it, it is more convenient that the Communion &s;hould be made under both kinds, for this is more con&s;onant to the In&s;titu|tion and integrity of it, to corporal Refection, to the Example of Chri&s;t, and the Primitive Church.</HI> And again, <HI>He freely confe&s;&s;eth that the Laity communicating under one kind only, receive not a full Sacrament, which con&s;i&s;ts of two Parts. This Sacrament,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">In 1 ad Cor. c. xi.</NOTE> <HI>Lyra, is gi|ven under the double Species of Bread and Wine, that thereby spiritual Refection may perfectly be &s;hewed forth, and becau&s;e it is a memorial of Chri&s;t's Pa&s;&s;ion, in which the Blood was &s;eparated from the Body.</HI> And again, Utrumque e&s;t de perfectione huju Sacramenti, <HI>both is expre&s;|&s;ed
<PB N="48" REF="33">perfectly the Pa&s;&s;ion of Chri&s;t &s;emblably, of which this Sacrament is the memorial.</HI> 2dly. <HI>Becau&s;e both &s;ignifie nouri&s;hment perfectly. Though the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">In 1 ad Cor. c. xi.</NOTE> <HI>Carthu&s;ian, are called Sacraments in the plural, yet &s;peaking formally of their perfect and integral &V;nity, they are but one Sacrament; for they are or|dained to one end and compleat act,</HI> viz. <HI>to the &s;piritual Refection of the Soul, in which &s;piritual Meat and spiritual Drink is required.</HI></P>
<P><HI>The eating,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">L. 4. de emend. Chri|&s;tianae Reipub. cap. 19.</NOTE> <HI>Andreas Fri&s;ius, is named &s;eparately and the drinking &s;eparately by his Wi&s;dom, to which all humane Wi&s;dom concern|ing the in&s;eparability of living Blood from living Fle&s;h ought to give place; for here we are are not to di&s;pute from humane rea&s;on, but to have re&s;pect to the will of Chri&s;t, which in&s;tituted,</HI> convivium non mancum, <HI>not a maimed Banquet, but added drink to the meat.</HI> If any of the&s;e <HI>Doctors</HI> do el&s;ewhere contradict their own A&s;&s;ertions, for that I am not much concerned, it being natural, and almo&s;t unavoidable, for Men who maintain things contradictory to common rea&s;on, to &s;ay one thing when they di&s;cour&s;e according to the innate Notions of common rea&s;on, and another thing when they &s;erve the <HI>Hypothe&s;is</HI> to which they are en&s;laved; it &s;ufficeth me to make the&s;e plain Inferences from what they have di&s;cour&s;ed.</P>
<P N="1"><MILESTONE N="5" UNIT="&sect;"> 1. If both Species ae to be delivered to repre&s;ent <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> not as <HI>imperfect</HI> but as <HI>perfect Life,</HI> to teach us that there is a <HI>perfect</HI> and <HI>full Refection in this Sacrament,</HI> to &s;hew that <HI>Chri&s;t re|deemed the whole Man,</HI> and that <HI>there may be in this Sacrament a repre&s;entation according to the In&s;titution,</HI> then we who do thus repre&s;ent, thus teach, thus act, according to the In&s;titution mu&s;t be blamele&s;s, if the In&s;titution hath appointed both the&s;e Species <HI>to &s;ignifie one perfect Refection,</HI> they act not &s;uita|bly to their appointment who u&s;e but one. If <HI>the Bread &s;igni|fies the Body, not the Blood; the Wine the Blood, and not the Body;</HI> and if the Sacrament under one kind be <HI>not compleat according to the Sign,</HI> then, &s;eeing every Sacrament is <HI>Sacrae rei &s;ignum, a &s;ign of &s;omething &s;acred,</HI> this Sacrament can never be compleat, when it is admini&s;tered only in one of the appointed &s;igns, becau&s;e a &s;acred thing appointed to be &s;ignified mu&s;t then be wanting: <HI>If whole Chri&s;t be no under either Species Sacramentall, if the Sa|cramental Body be not in the Blood, nor the Sacramental Blood in the Body;</HI> If <HI>he who receives the Body only, receive not the whole Sa|crament
<PB N="49" REF="33">Sacramentally,</HI> then they who admini&s;ter the Body on|ly, do not admini&s;ter the whole Sacrament Sacramentally, nor, as is requi&s;ite to the Sacramental Perfection of the Ordi|nance. If both Species were given <HI>for an entire reparation of the whole Man, to be Food to the Faithful, and to avail to the Safety and Salvation both of Soul and Body;</HI> then mu&s;t they deprive the Laity of their Food, and their entire reparation, and hinder the Safety and Salvation of their Souls and Bodies, who de|prive them of one Species: If the Species of Wine is to be re|ceived <HI>for the remembrance of that Redemption which was made by the Effu&s;ion of blood, for the memory and repre&s;entation of Chri&s;t's Pa&s;&s;ion, that by it we may receive the A&s;per&s;ion and clean&s;ing of our inward Parts;</HI> then mu&s;t they hinder the &s;hewing forth of our <HI>Lord</HI>'s Death, and the purification of the Laity, who rob them of the Cup: If by virtue of the Sacrament <HI>we ought to have both Species, to have &s;piritual Meat and &s;piritual Drink,</HI> if the matter of the Sacrament <HI>ought to be double,</HI> and it is nece&s;|&s;ary to a <HI>Supper Sacramentally perfect, that the Body and Blood &s;hould both Sacramentally be had;</HI> then they who do not permit the People to have both, do not what they ought. And La&s;t|ly, If this be <HI>more con&s;onant to the in&s;titution, to the integrity of the Sacrament, to the Example of Chri&s;t, and of the Primitive Church;</HI> &s;ure they mu&s;t act more con&s;onantly to the In&s;titution, and the Example of their <HI>Lord,</HI> the Practice of the <HI>Primitive Church,</HI> and the Integrity of the Sacrament, who give both Species, than they who do deprive the <HI>Laity</HI> of one, though, at the &s;ame time, they do act le&s;s con&s;onantly to the <HI>Decrees</HI> and <HI>Con&s;titutions</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="50" REF="34">
<HEAD>CHAP. V.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub"><HI>The Contents.</HI> In oppo&s;ition to the Council of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> condemning them as Here|ticks who pertinaciou&s;ly a&s;&s;ert, That it is Sacrilegious to ob&s;erve the Law of Communion in one kind; this Practice is declared to be Sacrilegious by <HI>P. Leo, &sect;. 1.</HI> by <HI>P. Gela&s;ius, &sect;. 2.</HI> The Eva&s;ions of the <HI>Roman</HI> Catholicks fully refuted. <HI>Ibid.</HI> This is farther proved from the Sayings of the Fathers, compared with the De&s;criptions which the School-Men give of Sacrilege, <HI>&sect;. 3.</HI> And from the School-Men, <HI>&sect;. 4.</HI></HEAD>
<P>WHereas the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 13.</NOTE> approved by the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> declares <HI>it Erroneous to a&s;&s;ert, That it is Sacri|legious to ob&s;erve the Law or Cu&s;tom of Communicating the Prie&s;ts that do not con&s;ecrate, and the Laity, in one kind only,</HI> and com|mands that they <HI>who pertinaciou&s;ly &s;o a&s;&s;ert, &s;hall be driven away from the Communion of Chri&s;tians, as Hereticks, and be grievou&s;ly puni&s;hed by the Dioce&s;ans of the place, or their Officials, or the In|qui&s;itors of Heretical pravity;</HI> this mutilation of the Sacrament, hath by the <HI>Doctors</HI> of the <HI>Ancient Church</HI> been adjudged <HI>Sa|crilege,</HI> and they who only did receive the Bread, but did not partake of the Cup, have been pronounced <HI>Sacrilegious,</HI> and as &s;uch, are commanded to be expelled from the <HI>Society</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;tians.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="&sect;"> Thus <HI>Leo,</HI> &s;peaking of the <HI>Manichees,</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Comque ad tegendam infidelitatem &s;uam no&s;tris audent inter|e&s;&s;e My&s;teriis, ita in Sacra|mentorum Communione fe temperant, ut interdum, quo tutius lateant, ore indigno Chri&s;ti Corpus accipiunt, &s;anguinem autem redemptionis no&s;trae haurite omnino declinant, quod ideo ve&s;tram volumus &s;cire &s;anctita|tem, ut vobis huju&s;modi homines &amp; his mani&s;e&s;tentur indiciis, &amp; quorum deprehen&s;a fuerit &s;acrilega &s;imulatio, notati, &amp; proditi, a &s;anctorum &s;ocietate &s;acerdotali authoritate pel|antur. <HI>Serm.</HI> 4. <HI>in quadrag. c.</HI> 5. <HI>Ed. Que&s;nel. p.</HI> 271.</NOTE> <HI>They avoid the Sacrament of humane Salvation, and believe not that our Lord Chri&s;t was truly born, truly &s;uffered, was buried, and rai&s;ed again in true Fle&s;h of our Nature; and when, to conceal their Infidelity, they dare to be pre&s;ent at our My&s;teries, they &s;o behave them&s;elves in the Communion of the Sacrament, that &s;ometimes, lea&s;t they &s;hould not po&s;&s;ibly lie hid, they take Chri&s;t's Body with their unwor|thy Mouths, but they wholly decline drinking the Blood of our Re|demption,
<PB N="51" REF="34">which therefore we make known to your Holine&s;s, that &s;uch Men may be known to you by the&s;e Tokens, and that, by the Sa|cerdotal Authority, they may be expelled from the Communion of Saints, who&s;e</HI> Sacrilegious Simulation <HI>is thus found out; for ble&s;&s;ed</HI> Paul <HI>hath well admoni&s;hed the Church of God of &s;uch Men, &s;aying, We be&s;eech you Brethren, that you mark them who cau&s;e Divi&s;ions and Offences contrary to the Doctrine which you have receiv|ed, and avoid them.</HI></P>
<P>Where evident it is that the Practice of the <HI>Manichees</HI> in Receiving of the Body of the Lord in the <HI>Chri&s;tian My&s;teries,</HI> that &s;o they might di&s;&s;emble their Infidelity, is called <HI>Simula|tion,</HI> and their declining to <HI>drink the Blood of our Redemption,</HI> is that which made this <HI>Simulation</HI> to be <HI>Sacrilegious. 2dly.</HI> Here it is al&s;o evident, that in <HI>St. Leo</HI>'s days, to eat the Body of our Lord, or to receive it, and to drink his Blood, were look'd up|on as two di&s;tinct things, one of which might be done with|out the other, the Body being taken when the <HI>Blood of our Re|demption was not,</HI> which wholly overthrows the Doctrine of <HI>Concomitance,</HI> on which this <HI>Sacrilege</HI> is founded. <HI>3ly.</HI> Ob&s;erve that <HI>Leo</HI> would have &s;uch per&s;ons expelled from the Commu|nion of Saints for this <HI>Sacrilegious Simulation.</HI> That <HI>4ly.</HI> He makes the declining of the Cup at any time, a mark &s;ufficient to di&s;cern the&s;e <HI>Sacrilegious</HI> Per&s;ons, and a cau&s;e &s;ufficient for their Exclu&s;ion from the Communion of <HI>Saints;</HI> whereas had others at any time been permitted in the <HI>Church</HI>-A&s;&s;emblies to Communicate in Bread alone, for any other Rea&s;on, this mark had been no certain indication of a <HI>Manichee</HI> to <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> or Peo|ple, &s;ince being caught, they might pretend that they had for|merly received the <HI>Cup,</HI> but now ab&s;tained for &s;ome &s;pecial cau&s;e approved by the <HI>Church.</HI> The <HI>Faithful</HI> therefore mu&s;t have then generally Communicated at all times, or el&s;e the <HI>Mani|chee</HI> could not be certainly di&s;covered by one <HI>Dry Communion.</HI></P>
<P>Moreover Pope <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> did by a Law condemn this half Communion, as a great <HI>Sacrilege.</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Non e&s;&s;e &s;umendum Corpus Domini &s;ine Calice. <HI>Gela&s;ius Majorico &amp; Johanni Epi&s;copis, apud Ivon. decret. part.</HI> 2. <HI>cap.</HI> 8, 9. Comperimus quod quidam in eadem Regione &s;umpta tantum Corporis Sa|cri portione, a Calice Sacri cruoris ab&s;tineant, qui proculdubio (quoniam <HI>ne&s;cio qu&acirc; &s;uper|&s;titione</HI> docentur ob&s;tringi) aut integra <HI>Sacramenta</HI> accipiant, aut ab integris arceantur, <HI>quia divi&s;io unius &amp; eju&s;dem My&s;teril &s;ine grandi Sacrilegio non pote&s;t provenire.</HI></NOTE> <HI>We have found,</HI> &s;aith
<PB N="52" REF="35">he, <HI>that &s;ome in the &s;ame Country having taken only a portion of the Holy Body, ab&s;tain from the Cup of the Holy Blood, who (be|cau&s;e I know not by what Super&s;tition they are &s;aid to be bound) ought, without doubt, to receive the entire My&s;teries, or to be dri|ven from both; for the divi&s;ion of one and the &s;elf &s;ame My&s;tery, cannot happen without</HI> great Sacrilege. Where note, 1. That this Law re&s;pecteth not <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> only; for as<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Ad A. D. 496. Sect. 20.</NOTE> <HI>Baronius</HI> ob|&s;erves, <HI>This is no mention in the Law of the Prie&s;t Sacrificing,</HI> or of any other of that Order; whence, &s;aith he, it is evi|dent that what is generally &s;poken here, ought not to be re|&s;trained to them. Moreover, <HI>Ca&s;&s;ander</HI> doth a&s;&s;ure us, That in his <HI>Old Manu&s;cript,</HI> this was the Title of this <HI>Decree,</HI> That<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Quod nulli liceat ab&s;|que &s;anguinis participati|one &s;olius carnis Communi|onem percipere. <HI>P.</HI> 19. <HI>p.</HI> 1106.</NOTE> <HI>it was not lawful for any one N. B. to Receive the Communion of the Fle&s;h, without partaking of the Blood.</HI> In <HI>Ivo</HI> the Title of it runs thus, <HI>That the Body of our Lords is not to be taken without the Cup.</HI><NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Excommunicari illos praecipit <HI>quicunque</HI> &s;umpto corpore dominico a calicis participatione &s;e ab&s;tinerent. Nam (ut ip&s;e in eodem de|creto a&s;&s;erit) huju&s;modi Sa|cramentorum divi&s;io &s;ine grandi Sacrilegio provenire non poterit. <HI>Microl. Cap.</HI> 19.</NOTE> <HI>Micrologus</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>P. Gela&s;ius commanded that they &s;hould be Excommu|nicated,</HI> quicunque, <HI>who&s;oever they were, that ha|ving taken the Body of our Lord, ab&s;tained from the Cup.</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Prop. 23. p. 579.</NOTE> <HI>Radulphus de Rivo</HI> tran&s;cribes the ve|ry words of <HI>Micrologus,</HI> and both of them give the &s;ame rea&s;on of this precept, <HI>viz. For as he in the &s;ame Decree a&s;&s;erts, &s;uch a divi&s;ion of the</HI> Sacra|ments <HI>cannot come to pa&s;s without</HI> great Sacrilege. Now from the&s;e Te&s;timonies it is evident, 1. That from the Tenth to the Fourteenth Century, it was e&s;teemed an un|lawful and <HI>Sacrilegious</HI> thing, for any that were capable of both, to receive the Bread without partaking of the Cup. Yea <HI>Sacrilege</HI> is by them declared to be in&s;eparable from &s;uch a divi&s;io of this <HI>My&s;tery:</HI> It therefore mu&s;t according to the judgment of <HI>Pope Gela&s;ius,</HI> and of the following Ages who ap|proved of his Decree, be in&s;eparable from the con&s;tant pra|ctice of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> &s;ince te times of the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance.</HI> 2. Whereas the <HI>R. Doctors</HI> &s;ay this <HI>Decree</HI> was made again&s;t the <HI>Manichees, who held Wine in abomination, and therefore did refu&s;e the Cup;</HI> and &s;o concerns them only who refu&s;e upon a like account, to drink of it: It is ob&s;ervable, that neither <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> him&s;elf, nor any who have &s;ince that time took notice of this <HI>Law,</HI> have told us that it was peculiarly
<PB N="53" REF="35">made again&s;t the <HI>Manichees,</HI> who ab&s;tained from drinking of the Cup for the formantioned rea&s;on; but they without Ex|ception declare that by this Law it was not lawful <HI>for any one</HI> to receive the Fle&s;h without the Cup, and that <HI>who&s;oever</HI> did &s;o, was by virtue of it to be Excommunicated. And hence<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">L. 2. c. 8.</NOTE> <HI>Algerus</HI> in the <HI>Twelfth Century</HI> cites this <HI>Decree</HI> to prove that the Bread is &s;eparately to be con&s;ecrated into the Fle&s;h, and the Wine into the Blood of Chri&s;t, and that both are to be received by the Faithful. And they had rea&s;on to &s;peak thus generally of it, for that this <HI>Law</HI> of <HI>P. Gela&s;ius</HI> was not di|rected again&s;t the <HI>Manichean Here&s;ie,</HI> may be made evident from numerous con&s;iderations: For (1.) had this <HI>Pope</HI> made this Law again&s;t the <HI>Manichees,</HI> there can be no rea&s;on ima|gined why he, as well as <HI>Leo,</HI> &s;hould not mention them. <HI>2ly.</HI> That Expre&s;&s;ion in the body of this Law, that <HI>he knew not by what Super&s;tition they were bound up,</HI> cannot filty be applied to the <HI>Manichees,</HI> for it was, doubtle&s;s, a matter well known to <HI>Gela&s;ius,</HI> why the <HI>Manichees</HI> refu&s;ed the Cup, and not unto <HI>Ge|la&s;ius</HI> only, but to all the People. For <HI>Leo,</HI> who preceded him, had taken care that not only<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Omnia quae tam in Scripturis, quam in occultis traditionibus &s;uis habent profana vel turpia, ut no&s;&s;et populus quid refugeret aut vitaret, oculis Chri&s;tianae plebis certa manife&s;tatione probavimus. <HI>Decret. Leonis P. c.</HI> 6. <HI>Collect. &agrave; Diony&s;io ex|iguo, apud Ju&s;tel. p.</HI> 224.</NOTE> <HI>All the profane and filthy things which were in their Writings, but al&s;o that the things contained in their &s;ecret Traditions, &s;hould be manife&s;ted to the Eyes of Chri&s;tians, that the People might know what they are to avoid, and fly from. 3ly.</HI> The very word <HI>Su|per&s;tition</HI> &s;hews that <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> did not intend the <HI>Ma|nichees;</HI> for <HI>&s;uper&s;tition</HI> intimates a de&s;ign of Re|verence and Veneration of the Sacrament, al|though mi&s;placed, and not well de&s;igned, whereas the <HI>Mani|chees</HI> in their refu&s;al of the Cup, were acted by the gro&s;e&s;t <HI>Here|&s;ie;</HI> they refu&s;ed Wine as being <HI>unclean,</HI> and <HI>the Gall of the Devil;</HI> and as <HI>P. Leo</HI> &s;aith, condemned the Creature, <HI>in Creatoris in|juriam, to the reproach of the Creator. 4ly. Gela&s;ius</HI> &s;peaks only of tho&s;e per&s;ons who were then <HI>within the Country of</HI> Squillaci, and in the <HI>Dioce&s;s</HI> committed by him to <HI>Majoricus</HI> and <HI>John,</HI> whereas it is uncertain whether one <HI>Manichee</HI> was ever there, and is mo&s;t certain they did abound el&s;ewhere. Nor, <HI>5ly.</HI> can the&s;e words, <HI>Let them receive the entire Sacraments, or be excluded from them,</HI> be rea&s;onably applied to the <HI>Manichees;</HI> for none, who know the<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Vide Concil. Laod. can. 6. &amp; 33.</NOTE> Di&s;cipline of <HI>Ancient</HI> times, can think
<PB N="54" REF="36">that the Abettors of &s;o gro&s;s an <HI>Here&s;ie</HI> as that of <HI>Manes,</HI> which held,<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Aug. ad quod vult Deus, c. 46.</NOTE> <HI>That there were two fir&s;t Cau&s;es, one Good, the o|ther Evil;</HI> which <HI>denied the Wor&s;hip of the God of the Old Te|&s;tament, denied the Re&s;urrection, and the Virgin birth of our dear Lord,</HI> and <HI>wor&s;hipped the Sun as God,</HI> could be admitted to the participation of the Holy Sacraments, without a previous con|demnation of tho&s;e prodigious Errors, and a publick Penance; much le&s;s that they could be admitted with &s;uch freedom by that <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> who declares, That<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Cum nullo pror&s;us e|orum participare debetis, men&s;ae dominicae puritatem, quam majores no&s;tri &s;emper ab haeretica magnopere &s;er|varunt pollutione di&s;cretam. <HI>Cau&s;.</HI> 24. <HI>qu.</HI> 2. <HI>c. nec qui&s;|quam.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Chri&s;tians might not partake of the purity of the Lord's Table with an Heretick; which Table our Ance&s;tors have always abundantly kept &s;evered from all Heretical Pollution;</HI> and who &s;ucceeded that <HI>Leo</HI> who compelled the <HI>Manichees,</HI> before they were admitted to the Communion of <HI>Chri&s;ti|ans, to do publick Penance;</HI> and <HI>by a publick Pro|fe&s;&s;ion, and Sub&s;cription in the Church, to condemn the</HI> Maniche|an <HI>Here&s;y.</HI></P>
<P>Now the Confutation of this pretence, that <HI>Pope Gela&s;ius</HI> made this <HI>Decree</HI> again&s;t the <HI>Manichees,</HI> is a full confutation of all that <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> do offer to elude the force of it again&s;t them; for then it follows, that this <HI>Decree</HI> cannot rea&s;onably be re|&s;trained to them who regarded the &s;pecies of Wine <HI>as an object of aver&s;ion,</HI> or who ab&s;tained from the Cup out of <HI>an horrour of Wine,</HI> or <HI>of the blood of our Lord:</HI> For all the&s;e de&s;cants evi|dently do relate unto the Doctrine of the <HI>Manichees,</HI> and therefore they are all confuted by the refutation of that vain pretence, That <HI>P. Gela&s;ius</HI> made this Law again&s;t the <HI>Manichees.</HI></P>
<P>And whereas others tell us, that the&s;e were laws then made to re&s;train the liberty the <HI>Church</HI> before had granted to receive in publick in one kind; this, as it is &s;aid without any &s;hadow of proof, &s;o it is fully confuted by the very words of the De|crees of the&s;e Two <HI>Popes. Leo</HI> objects again&s;t the <HI>Manichees,</HI> that by avoiding of the Cup, they declined <HI>the drinking of the Blood of their Redemption.</HI> Now can it be &s;uppo&s;ed that he knew then of any liberty the <HI>Church</HI> had granted to the Faith|ful to <HI>decline the drinking the Blood of their Redemption;</HI> that is, of doing the very thing for which he &s;o &s;everely doth condemn the <HI>Manichees. Gela&s;ius</HI> decrees touching them of <HI>Squillaci,</HI> That <HI>they &s;hall either take the Sacraments entire, or be entirely dri|ven
<PB N="55" REF="36">from them;</HI> plainly in&s;inuating, that they who received not the Cup, received not an entire Sacrament; and could the Faithful in tho&s;e times receive the Sacrament &s;o, that in the judgment of &s;o great a <HI>Pope</HI> it was imperfectly received by them?</P>
<P>Moreover, that this practice mu&s;t in the judgment of the <HI>Holy Fathers</HI> be <HI>Sacrilegious,</HI> will farther be made evident from the comparing of their Sentiments, touching the di&s;tri|bution, and receiving of the Cup by all the Faithful, with tho&s;e de&s;criptions which the <HI>School-men</HI> given of <HI>Sacrilege.</HI> For,</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Sacrilege,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Medul. Theol. l. 3. Tr. 1. de primo praecepto Dec. c. 2. Dub. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Bu&s;enbaum, is the violation of a thing holy, that is dedicated to divine Wor&s;hip;</HI> and <HI>to violate what is holy, is</HI> (&s;aith<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">In 22. Di&s;p. 6. q. 15. punct. 1.</NOTE> <HI>Gregorius de Valenti&acirc;</HI>) <HI>nothing el&s;e, but to do &s;omething repugnant to that Wor&s;hip to which a thing is de&s;igned:</HI> Wherefore if the reception of the Cup by the Laity was de|&s;igned for <HI>their &s;hewing forth the Lord's Death,</HI> and the <HI>remem|brance of his Pa&s;&s;ion,</HI> it mu&s;t be <HI>Sacrilege</HI> to rob them of it; be|cau&s;e <HI>it is the violation of a thing dedicated to Divine Wor&s;hip,</HI> and the doing that which is repugnant to that Wor&s;hip to which the Cup was de&s;igned. Now the <HI>Fathers</HI> frequently tell us, af|ter St. <HI>Paul,</HI> That we are to eat this Bread, and <HI>drink</HI> this Cup to &s;hew forth the Lord's Death.<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Moral. c. 3. p. 432.</NOTE> <HI>We ought,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Ba&s;il, to eat the Body, and</HI> drink <HI>the Blood of Chri&s;t, in remembrance of our Lord's Obedience to the Death;</HI> and this he proves from our Lord's in&s;titution, <HI>Luke</HI> xxij. and from St. <HI>Paul</HI>'s re|hear&s;al of it, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> xi.<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Quoniam morte domi|ni liberati &s;umus, hujus rei memores in edendo &amp; potan|do carnem &amp; &s;anguinem quae pro nobis oblata &s;unt &s;ignifi|camus. <HI>In</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> xi. <HI>p.</HI> 170.</NOTE> <HI>Becau&s;e we are deli|vered by the death of the Lord, being mindful of this thing,</HI> &s;aith St. <HI>Ambro&s;e we &s;ignify it by eating and</HI> drinking <HI>of the things that are offered.</HI><NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Glaphyr. l. 2.</NOTE> <HI>The Com|municating of his holy Ple&s;h, and the Cup of his holy Blood, hath in it a Confe&s;&s;ion of Chri&s;t's Death, by the participating of</HI> the&s;e things <HI>in this world, we commemorate Chri&s;t's Death,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Cyril</HI> of <HI>Alex|andria. When the Hoa&s;t is broken,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Apud Grat. di&s;t. 2. c. de con&s;ecr. Lanfranc. de Sacr. Ench. p. 124.</NOTE> St. <HI>Au&s;tin, whil&s;t the Blood is poured out of the Cup in|to the Mouth of the Faithful, what other thing is &s;howed forth, but the offering of our Lord's Body on the Cro&s;s, and the Effu&s;ion of his Blood out of his Side? Chri&s;t in this
<PB N="56" REF="37">My&s;tery,</HI> &s;aith <HI>P. Gregory, is offered again for us,</HI><NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">Ibi Chri&s;ti Corpus &s;u|mitur ejus caro in populi &s;a|lutem partitur, ejus &s;anguis non jam in manus infidelium, &s;ed in os fidelium funditur. <HI>Dial. l.</HI> 4. <HI>cap.</HI> 58.</NOTE> <HI>for his Body is there taken, hsi Fle&s;h is parcell'd out for the Salvation of the People, his Blood is not given into the hands of Infidels, but poured into the Mouths of the Faithful.</HI><NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">Quem cum bibimus, quid aliud quam mortem do|mini annunciamus. <HI>De Corp. &amp; &s;ang. Dom. cap.</HI> 21.</NOTE> <HI>When we drink out of this Cup,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Pa&s;cha&s;ius, what do we el&s;e but de|clare the Lord's Death? This do,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">In 1 Cor. xi.</NOTE> <HI>An&s;elm, that is, drink this Cup in remembrance of me, as oft as you drink it, that you may never drink it without the Memory of my Pa&s;&s;ion, but may have in mind that I &s;uffered Death for you. Therefore, &s;aith the Apostle, our Lord &s;aid, This &s;hould be done in commemo|ration of him, for as oft as you &s;hall eat this Bread of Life, and &s;hall-drink this Cup of eternal Salvation, you &s;hall &s;hew forth, that is, &s;hall repre&s;ent, the Death Chri&s;t &s;uffered for us till he comes to Judgment.</HI><NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. In 1 Cor. xi. v. 25.</NOTE> <HI>By the Cup thou do&s;t celebrate the commemoration of our Lord's Death,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Theophylact.</HI><NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg">L. 2. cap. 8.</NOTE> <HI>Algerus</HI> in an&s;wer to this Que&s;tion, <HI>Why the Bread is con&s;ecrated into the Fle&s;h, and the Wine into the Blood apart?</HI> &s;aith, <HI>This was done becau&s;e the Cu&s;tom prevailed in the Church from Chri&s;t him&s;elf, who con&s;ecrated, and gave his Blood, not for divi&s;ion of the Sub|&s;tance, but for di&s;tinction of the Figure, that whil&s;t the Bread is grinded by the Teeth, it might &s;ignifie Chri&s;t's Body broken in his Pa&s;&s;ion; and whil&s;t the Wine is poured into the Mouth of the Faith|ful, it might &s;ignifie Chri&s;t's Blood &s;hed from his Side: nor is the Body and Blood &s;aid to be apart, as if the Body were without the Blood, or the blood divided from the Body; but it is &s;o &s;aid in memory of his Pa&s;&s;ion, becau&s;e in the Sacrament we ought to &s;hew forth the Death of Chri&s;t. When the Bread of the Lord, that is, the Body of the Lord is eaten,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">De Sacra. edit. Era&s;m. fol. 212.</NOTE> <HI>Petrus Cluniacen&s;is; when the Cup of the Lord, that is, the Blood of the Lord is drunk, the Death of the Lord is &s;hewed forth, that is, it is then repre&s;ented. What he did,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">Comment. in vi. Joh.</NOTE> <HI>Rupertus, that we well know we do in Commemoration of his Death,</HI> viz. <HI>Eat his Fle&s;h and to</HI> drink <HI>his Blood.</HI></P>
<P>And &s;urely when two things are equally de&s;igned, and &s;et a|part by <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> for the commemoration of his Pa&s;&s;ion, when they are equally apt, and proper to &s;hew forth, and bring to our remembrance the thing they were de&s;igned to &s;ignifie,
<PB N="57" REF="37">when <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> and his <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> do command both &s;hould be done in pro&s;ecution of that end, when the <HI>Fathers</HI> do, with one voice, declare, without the lea&s;t di&s;parity, di&s;tinction or li|mitation, that both concurr unto that end: And la&s;tly, when one naturally doth import, and &s;hew the breaking of Chri&s;t's Body on the Cro&s;s; the other doth as naturally &s;ignifie, &s;hew forth, and bring to our remembrance his Blood &s;hed, and &s;e|parated from his Body, and in both the&s;e con&s;i&s;ts the Pa&s;&s;ion of our <HI>Lord,</HI> to &s;ay, our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s Pa&s;&s;ion is wholly and entire|ly repre&s;ented by the Reception of one of the two Species only, is to reflect unworthily upon the Wi&s;dom of our <HI>Lord's In&s;ti|tution</HI> of them both, and his <HI>command</HI> to do both in order to the &s;hewing forth his Death, and evidently to contradict the plain A&s;&s;ertions, and the concurring Judgment of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> that <HI>by drinking, and receiving into our Mouths this Cup, this Blood, we do, and ought to declare, &s;ignifie, repre&s;ent, commemorate and &s;hew forth Chri&s;t's Death.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">L. 2. q. 99. Art. 1.</NOTE> <HI>thomas Aquinas, are &s;anctified by the Sacraments of Chri&s;t, and therefore what is done to the injury of Chri&s;tian People,</HI> pertinet ad irreverentiam rei &s;acrae unde ra|tionabiliter Sacrilegium dicitur, <HI>is Sacrilege, becau&s;e it appertain|eth to the irreverence of a &s;acred thing. To Sacrilege,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Q. 99. p. 1146.</NOTE> <HI>Becamus, is referred,</HI> omnis injuria, omni&s;que abu&s;io Sacramen|torum, <HI>all injury, and abu&s;e of the Sacraments;</HI> and this is evident even from the drift of the Commandment, <HI>Thou &s;halt not &s;teal,</HI> for that for bids, in reference to temporal concerns; <HI>omne no|cumentum quod homini inju&s;t&egrave; infertur in rebus exterioribus; All hurt done to them in external Things:</HI> In reference to &s;pirituals it there|fore mu&s;t for bid <HI>all spiritual hurt, or injury Men &s;uffer by the de|taining of things &s;piritual from them.</HI> Now &s;urely if <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> can be hurt orinjured, they mu&s;t be &s;o when they by others are de|prived of the means of Grace and of Sanctification, and &s;piritual Ble&s;&s;ings: Now of the&s;e, &s;ay the <HI>fathers, Chri&s;tians</HI> are depriv|ed as oft as they are thus deprived of the Cup of Ble&s;&s;ing. For, they con&s;tantly affirm, That the eating of the Bread and drinking of the Cup, did tend <HI>to the Sanctification both of Soul and Body.</HI><NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Paedag. l. 2. c. 2. p. 151.</NOTE> <HI>The Temperature of both the drink and the word,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Clemens</HI> of <HI>Alexan|dria, is called the Euchari&s;t, of which they who by Faith are made partakers, are &s;anctified in Body and
<PB N="58" REF="38">Soul. In the New Covenant,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Cyril</HI> of <HI>Jeru&s;alem, there is the Heavenly Bread, and the</HI> Cup <HI>of Salvation &s;anctifying the Soul and Body.</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Catech. My&s;tag. 5. p. 245.</NOTE> <HI>Come to the Cup, and receiving of the Blood of Chri&s;t,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>be thou &s;anctified. Who can expre&s;s,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Et Sacro&s;anctum vivifici corporis &amp; &s;anguinis &s;ui My|&s;terium Membris &s;uis tribu|ere, quibus corpus &s;uum, quod e&s;t Eccle&s;ia, pa&s;citur. <HI>In P&s;al.</HI> vi. <HI>poenit.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Gregory, the greatne&s;s of that Mercy by which Mankind was redeemed with the Effu&s;ion of Chri&s;t's precious Blood;</HI> and, <HI>The &s;acred My&s;tery of his Life-giving Body and Blood, was given to his Mem|bers, by which the Church, his Body, is fed and made to</HI> drink, <HI>is wa&s;hed and &s;anctified. The &s;uper &s;ub&s;tantial Bread, and the Cup con&s;ecrated by &s;olemn Benediction,</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Ad totius hominis vitam &s;alutemque proficit. <HI>Apud Cypr. p.</HI> 39, 40.</NOTE> <HI>doth profit to the Life, and the Salvation of the whole Man,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Arnoldus Carnoten&s;is, the Bread is Meat, the Blood is Life, the Bread for fitne&s;s of Nouri&s;hment, the Blood for efficacy of giving Life.</HI></P>
<P>Moreover this is written with a Sun-Beam in the <HI>Church</HI>'s <HI>Liturgies</HI> in which they call the Cup, received after the Body,<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Con&s;t. Clem. l. 8. c. 13. Lit. S Petri, p. 26. Lit. Greg. p. 22. Marc. p. 46.</NOTE> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the Cup of Life;</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the Cup of everla&s;ting Salvation.</HI> In which they declare that Chri&s;t Ble&s;&s;ing the Cup,<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Lit. Chry&s;o&s;t. p. 1001.</NOTE> <GAP DESC="foreign">, and <HI>filling it with the Holy Gho&s;t, &s;aid, Drink ye all of this,</HI> and &s;aid it was <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the fulne&s;s of the Holy Spirit;</HI> that it was <HI>the Blood of the New Te&s;tament &s;hed for many,</HI><NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Lit. St. Marc. p. 47.</NOTE> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>and di&s;tributed for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins;</HI> in which they order the <HI>Deacon</HI> when he hath received it, to &s;ay, <HI>This hath touched my Lips, and will take away mine iniquities, and purge away my Sin;</HI> and in which they la&s;tly pray, That<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Lit. Clem. Petri Marc. Chry&s;o&s;t. Ba|&s;il. Gregor.</NOTE> <HI>they who received it might be filled with all &s;piritual Benediction, and hea|venly Grace, and might receive it for Sanctification, and Renovation of Soul, of Spirit, and of Body, for the communication of eternal Life, for the Remi&s;&s;ionof Sins, that they might be confirmed in Piety, filled with the Holy Gho&s;t, made worthy of Chri&s;t, and obtain everla&s;ting Life.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="&sect;"> This, la&s;tly, even the <HI>School-men</HI> do confe&s;s, that it cannot, without immode&s;ty be doubted, that Chri&s;tians do receive the increa&s;e of Grace, by the participation of this Cup. <HI>It is not to be denied,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Apud Ca&s;|&s;and. de utra&abque; &s;pecie, p. 1032.</NOTE> <HI>Armachanus, but firmly to be a&s;&s;erted, that the Sacramental Sumption of the Body and Blood of our Saviour much
<PB N="59" REF="38">profits the Faithful to the increa&s;e of Spiritual Life.</HI> The<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Ibid.</NOTE> <HI>Dean</HI> of <HI>Lovain</HI> gives the&s;e Rea&s;ons why the Communion under both kinds &s;hould be more Fruitful, and conferr more Grace; 1. That <HI>there is one effect of Meat, and another of Drink; for Drink allays Thir&s;t, and Meat Hunger.</HI> 2. That <HI>under both Species the Euchari&s;t is truly a Sacrament, nor is Chri&s;t le&s;s efficacious by his Blood under the Species of Wine, than by his Body under the Species of Bread; nor can the drinking of Chri&s;t's Blood be unprofitable, if it be lawfully and worthily received.</HI> 3. <HI>Becau&s;e the Species of Wine is a Sacrament, and all Sacraments, according to the common rule, conferr Grace</HI> ex opere operato. <HI>The draught of Blood hath its proper &s;piritual effect, to allay &s;piritual Thir&s;t, or to confirm and aug|ment the Grace received in the Communion of the Body. And though Chri&s;t be under both Species, he operates only according to their &s;ig|nification and u&s;es,</HI> under one the <HI>Body, under the other the Blood as his In&s;trument; and &s;ince the Sacraments conferr the Grace they &s;ignifie, when the &s;ignification is more compleat, the Grace mu&s;t be &s;o.</HI><NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">In 3. D. Thom. di&s;p. 215. cap. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Va&s;quez</HI> &s;aith thus, <HI>The Opinion of them who &s;ay more Fruit of Grace is received from both Species of this Sacrament than from one,</HI> probabilior mihil &s;emper vi&s;a e&s;t, <HI>&s;eemed always more probable to me; and therefore that they who take the Cup receive an encrea&s;e of Grace.</HI> And<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Tom. 3. in 3. D. Thom. di&s;p. 63. &sect;. 6.</NOTE> <HI>Suarez</HI> informs us, That <HI>it was the Opinion of</HI> ma|ny Catholicks, <HI>that more Grace was given by both Species, than by one only, and that Grave Men &s;aid, That mo&s;t of the Fathers of the</HI> Trent <HI>Council held that Opinion, and that therefore the Council &s;aid warily, That the Faithful, by Communicating under one Species, were not defrauded of any Grace</HI> nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation. And truly, who&s;oever &s;aith, That no Grace is received by the due parti|cipation of the Cup, doth plainly make our <HI>Saviour's</HI> In&s;ti|tution of it a thing indifferent, and the receiving of the Cup, after the Body, to be the receiving of a thing of no &s;piritual or good effect; which to affirm of the worthy receiving of the &s;acred Blood of Chri&s;t is <HI>horrendum dictu,</HI> and &s;omewhat like the <HI>counting of the Blood of the Covenant an unholy thing.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="60" REF="39">
<HEAD>CHAP. VI. The Contents.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">In oppo&s;ition to the Decrees of the&s;e Councils Damning and Excom|municating all who &s;ay, That this Law of Communicating the Laity under one kind is Erroneous and &V;nlawful. The Fathers have declared that it is Erroneous and &V;nlawful to &s;ub&s;tract the Cup. This is proved from St. <HI>Cyprian,</HI> from the complaint of the Pro&s;byters of <HI>Ede&s;&s;a,</HI> again&s;t <HI>Iba</HI> their Bi&s;hop, <HI>&sect;. 1.</HI> From the Council of <HI>Braga, Pa&s;cha&s;ius,</HI> and <HI>Algerus, &sect; 2.</HI> In op|po&s;ition to the Council of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> decreeing them to be Ex|communicated who exhort the People to Communicate under both &s;pecies: The Fathers do exhort all People &s;o to do, <HI>&sect;. 3.</HI> Whereas the Councils of <HI>Con&s;tance</HI> and <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> &s;ay, That the Cu&s;tom of Com|municating in one kind was ob&s;erved for a long time in the Church, the contrary is plainly &s;hewed from Hi&s;tory, <HI>&sect;. 4.</HI></HEAD>
<P><MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="&sect;"> WHereas the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome</HI> in her <HI>Councils</HI> of <HI>Con|&s;tance,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Con&s;t. Se&s;&s;. 13. Ba&s;il. &mdash; 30. Trid. Se&s;&s;. 21. c. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> and <HI>Trent,</HI> declares this practice of mini|&s;tring the Communion in one kind to the fore-mentioned per|&s;ons, <HI>is to be received as a Law,</HI> and Damns and <HI>Excommuni|cates</HI> all tho&s;e who &s;ay this Novel Con&s;titution of theirs, is ei|ther <HI>Erroneous</HI> or <HI>&V;nlawful;</HI> The <HI>Fathers</HI> have declared ex|pre&s;ly, or by immediate and clear Con&s;equence, That it is <HI>Erroneous, &V;nlawful,</HI> and of evil con&s;equence to Religion to &s;ub|&s;tract the Cup, or one part of the Sacrament from Believers. <HI>If any Man be in that</HI> Error, &s;aith<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Ep. 63. p. 148.</NOTE> St. <HI>Cyprian,</HI> (<HI>viz.</HI> That it is not nece&s;&s;ary to offer and <HI>di&s;tribute</HI> to the People Wine mixed with Water) <HI>let him return to the Original of our Lord's Tradition;</HI> adding,<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">P. 157.</NOTE> That <HI>to contemn his Admonition, and to per&s;i&s;t in his</HI> old Error, <HI>would be to incurr the di&s;plea&s;ure of the Lord.</HI> And having &s;aid that Chri&s;t both by his Practice, and his Precept, taught the oblation and <HI>di&s;tribution</HI> of Wine mixed with Water to the People; he adds,<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Caeterum omnis Reli|gionis &amp; veritatis di&s;ciplina &s;ubvertitur, ni&s;i id quod &s;pi|ritualiter praecipitur fideli|ter ob&s;ervatur. <HI>P.</HI> 155.</NOTE> <HI>That the whole di&s;cipline of Religion and Truth is &s;ubverted, unle&s;s that which is &s;piritually command|ed, be faithfully ob&s;erved.</HI> The <HI>Pre&s;byters</HI> of <HI>Ede&s;&s;a</HI> accu&s;e <HI>Iba</HI> their <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> before the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Chal|cedon</HI>
<PB N="61" REF="39">on this wi&s;e; <HI>That in his Church, whil&s;t the memory of the Martyrs was Celebrated, there wanted Wine for the Sacrifice of the Altar, to be &s;anctified, and di&s;tributed to the people, there being but little, and that bad and muddy, ju&s;t newly pre&s;&s;ed out of the Grape; &s;o that they who were deputed to Mini&s;ter were forced to buy Six Quarts out of the Tavern, which al&s;o was bad, and not &s;ufficient;</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Concil. Chalced. Tom. 3. Concil. apud Bin. p. 382.</NOTE> <HI>&s;o that they called to them who di&s;tributed the holy Body to de&s;i&s;t, becau&s;e the Blood was wanting.</HI> Whence we learn,</P>
<P N="1">1. That though it be now no fault in the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome</HI> to provide no Con&s;ecrated Blood to be di&s;tributed to the peo|ple, it was then thought Crime &s;ufficient to accu&s;e a <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> of before a <HI>General Council.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. That then it was not deemed lawful to Communicate the people under the &s;pecies of Bread alone; for if &s;o, there would have been no need of running to the <HI>Tavern</HI> to fetch Wine, and much le&s;s for de&s;i&s;ting from di&s;tributing the Con|&s;ecrated Bread unto the People, becau&s;e they had not Con|&s;ecrated Wine to mini&s;ter to them afterwards. This &s;ure mu&s;t manife&s;tly &s;hew, that it was then e&s;teemed unlawful to mini&s;ter to the people one &s;pecies of the <HI>Euchari&s;t</HI> with|out the other.</P>
<P><MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="&sect;"> The <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Braga</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Relatus e&s;t in conci|one no&s;trorum omnium <HI>Error</HI> manife&s;tus, quidam enim Eu|chari&s;tiam vino madidam pro complemento Communionis credunt populis porrigen|dam. <HI>Concil. Tom.</HI> 6. <HI>p.</HI> 561.</NOTE> <HI>It is a mani|fe&s;t</HI> Error <HI>to deliver to the people the Con&s;ecrated Bread</HI> dipped <HI>in the Chalice for a Complement of the Communion, as being not agreeable to the In&s;titu|tion;</HI> and &s;urely for the &s;ame rea&s;on it mu&s;t be a more manife&s;t Error to give them the Con&s;ecra|ted Bread alone, for a <HI>compleat Communion;</HI> it being more di&s;&s;onant from the In&s;titution to give only one part, than to give both only in another manner than was appointed by the In&s;titution. <HI>The Blood is well joined to the Fle&s;h,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Pa&s;cha&s;ius, becau&s;e</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">&mdash; Nec caro &s;ine &s;an|guine, uti nec &s;anguis &s;ine carne jure communicatur, <HI>&amp;c. Cap.</HI> 19. <HI>Bi&s;.</HI></NOTE> <HI>neither the Fle&s;h without the Blood, nor the Blood without the Fle&s;h is rightly communicated; for the whole Man, which con&s;i&s;ts of Two Sub&s;tances is redeemed, and therefore fed together both with Fle&s;h and Blood.
<PB N="62" REF="40">Algerus,</HI> in an&s;wer to the Que&s;tion, <HI>Why Bread by it &s;elf is Con|&s;ecrated into the Fle&s;h of Chri&s;t, and the Wine into his Blood,</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>therefore the Blood, and Fle&s;h are &s;een apart in the Sacrament, that becau&s;e Chri&s;t dyed for redeeming our Body by his Body, and our Soul by his Soul, when we had peri&s;hed both in Body and Soul, it might be &s;ignified, that his Body and Soul were in Death divided.</HI><NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">&mdash; Unde ut ait Augu|&s;tinus, nec caro &s;ine &s;anguine, nec &s;anguis &s;ine carne jure communicatur. <HI>De Sacr. Euch. l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 8.</NOTE> And therefore <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>neither the Fle&s;h without the Blood, nor the Blood without the Fle&s;h is right|ly Communicated.</HI> In a word; this Con&s;tituti|on, thus e&s;tabli&s;hed for a Law, makes it a Sin to obey and comply with the In&s;titution of our <HI>Lord,</HI> by rea&s;on of the Laws of Men; and whether this be not <HI>Errone|ous,</HI> let any rea&s;onable per&s;on judge from this Con&s;ideration:</P>
<P>Had our Lord in&s;tituted this Sacrament to be Received un|der the Species of Bread alone, and had he &s;o di&s;tributed the &s;ame to his Di&s;ciples, none, coming after Chri&s;t could have thought it lawful to have added Con&s;ecrated Wine, and to have di&s;tributed it after the Bread: Therefore by parity of Rea&s;on, <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> having in&s;tituted the <HI>Euchari&s;t,</HI> in both the Species of Bread and Wine, and &s;o di&s;tributed it, no man can rightly think it fawful to Give the Sacrament in Bread alone to per&s;ons capable of both Species. For confirmation of this Argument, let it be con&s;idered, that the <HI>Trent Council</HI> declares this power was always in the <HI>Church,</HI> That in the di&s;pen&s;ati|on of the Sacraments,<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 21. c. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Salva illorum &s;ub&s;tantia, ea &s;tatueret, vel mutaret; That retaining their &s;ub&s;tance, &s;he may appoint or change tho&s;e things which &s;he doth judge expedient for the profit of the Receivers.</HI> If therefore when the Cup was in&s;tituted by Chri&s;t to be Received, &s;he may change &s;o far the In&s;titution as to make <HI>a Law,</HI> it &s;hall not be received by the <HI>Laity;</HI> if it had not been In&s;tituted, why might &s;he not appoint it &s;hould have been received by them?</P>
<P N="3"><MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="&sect;"> 3. Whereas the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> by the <HI>Authority</HI> of her <HI>Coun|cils</HI><NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Concil. Con&s;t. Se&s;&s;. 13.</NOTE> commands, That they be Excommunicated, <HI>Who,</HI> con|trary to her Decree, <HI>Exhort the People to Communicate under both Species of Bread and Wine, and who do take upon them &s;o to ad|mini&s;ter the Sacrament unto the People;</HI> and doth require, that they be treated as <HI>Hereticks, if they per&s;i&s;t without Repentance in
<PB N="63" REF="40">&s;o doing.</HI> The <HI>Fathers</HI> did not only thus admini&s;ter the Sacra|ment in publick, for a thou&s;and Years together, but al&s;o did exhort all <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> &s;o to do.<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Cat. My&s;t. 5. p. 245.</NOTE> <HI>After the Communion of the Body of Chri&s;t, come to the Cup,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Cyril</HI> of <HI>Jeru&s;alem. The Prie&s;t,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Eccle&s;. Hier. c. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Di|ony&s;ius</HI> the <HI>Areopagite, &s;hewing the Con&s;ecrated Gifts, comes him&s;elf to partake of them,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>and exhorts others &s;o to do.</HI> The Gifts he &s;hewed them were the Bread, and Cup apart, of the&s;e he therefore did exhort them to Communicate, after the u&s;ual manner; that is, apart. <HI>From taking of the Blood of this Sacri|fice,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Q. 57. in Levit.</NOTE> <HI>Au&s;tin, not only no Man is re&s;trained, but</HI> All Men are exhorted to drink it, <HI>who will have life.</HI> And again, <HI>They who have no eaten, and have no drunk, let them, being invited, make ha&s;te to the&s;e Banquets:</HI><NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Accedite ad carnem domini, accedite ad &s;angui|nem domini. <HI>Serm.</HI> 46. <HI>de verbo dom. cap.</HI> 4.</NOTE> <HI>Come to the Fle&s;h of the Lord, come to the Blood of the Lord.</HI> The <HI>Deacon,</HI> &s;aith the <HI>Liturgy</HI> of St. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom, bow|ing, takes the Cup with reverence, and lifting it up he &s;hews it to the People, &s;aying,</HI><NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Tom. 6. p. 1003.</NOTE> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Come to it with the Fear and Love of God.</HI> In the <HI>Antient Synodal</HI> form of Admoniti|on u&s;ed in the <HI>We&s;t,</HI> we find one Admonition to the<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Omnes fideles ad Com|munionem corporis &amp; fan|guinis domini accedere ad|monete. <HI>Apud Baluz. p.</HI> 605. Ad Communionem corporis domini no&s;tri Je&s;u Chri&s;ti in|vitate. 16. <HI>Not. in Reg. p.</HI> 609, <HI>&amp; p.</HI> 613.</NOTE> <HI>Prie&s;t to call upon all the Faithful to come to the participation of the body and the</HI> Blood <HI>of Chri&s;t.</HI> Whereas in the Two New Admonitions tran&s;cri|bed by <HI>Baluzius</HI> from the <HI>R. Pontifical,</HI> the in|junction is only to invite them <HI>to the Communion of the Body of Chri&s;t;</HI> which alteration &s;eems to be occa&s;ioned by the change of the Cu&s;tom of the <HI>Romi&s;h Church</HI> in this particular. The <HI>Jews drank of the Rock which followed them, and that Rock was Chri&s;t:</HI><NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Et tu hibe ut te Chri|&s;tus &s;equatur. <HI>De Sacr. l.</HI> 5. <HI>cap.</HI> 1.</NOTE> <HI>Drink thou al&s;o,</HI> &s;aith the &s;purious <HI>Ambro&s;e, that Chri&s;t may follow thee. The Jews came to Crucify him,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Hincmarus</HI> of <HI>Remes,</HI><NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">Tom. 2. p. 94.</NOTE> <HI>Let us come to him,</HI> ut corpus &amp; &s;anguinem ejus accipiamus, <HI>That we may receive his Body and Blood.</HI><NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">Sume vinum de torcu|lari crucis expre&s;&s;um. <HI>De tri|bus capitib.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Take the Wine pre&s;&s;ed out of the Fat of the Cro&s;s,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Fulbertus</HI> of <HI>Chartres.</HI> St. <HI>Paul</HI> doth in the like manner &s;ay, <HI>Let a Man examine him&s;elf, and &s;o let him eat of this Bread, and drink of this Cup.</HI> And a greater than St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Drink
<PB N="64" REF="41">ye all of this</HI> (for whom this Blood was &s;hed) <HI>for this is my Blood of the New Te&s;tament, &s;hed for many for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="&sect;"> La&s;tly, Whereas the <HI>Councils</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance</HI> and <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> to give the better colour to their ab&s;urd Decrees, &s;ay, That this Cu|&s;tom of Communicating under one kind only, was, <HI>ab Eccle&s;ia diuti&s;&s;im&egrave; ob&s;ervata, ob&s;erved for a long time in the Church,</HI> be|fore they had a&s;&s;embled to make this Cu&s;tom binding by their <HI>Laws</HI> and <HI>Sanctions,</HI> it is matter of Surprize, that two &s;uch great and numerous <HI>A&s;&s;emblies</HI> &s;hould with &s;uch confidence a&s;|&s;ert the&s;e things, &s;ince, as <HI>Lindanus</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Quod per occidentem fuerit populo utraque ad|mini&s;trata Species in proximum fere u&s;que Con&s;tantien&s;is Synodi Saeculum haud Prolixa opus e&s;t demon&s;tratione. <HI>Panopl. l.</HI> 4. <HI>&s;ub finem.</HI></NOTE> <HI>There needs no long demon&s;tration to prove that</HI> both kinds <HI>were admini&s;tred in the</HI> We&s;t <HI>almo&s;t till the times of the Council of</HI> Con&s;tance.</P>
<P>Was it thus in the Eleventh <HI>Century</HI> in which <HI>Lanfranck</HI> &s;aith, That<NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">Sanguis ejus de Calice fidelium ore potatur. <HI>De Sacr. Euch. f.</HI> 126. a.</NOTE> <HI>the Blood poured out of the Chalice, is taken by the Mouth, and poured into Mouth of the Faithful?</HI> In which <HI>Pope Pa&s;chal</HI> made a Decree, That <HI>the Body and Blood of the Lord &s;hould be received apart,</HI> and that<NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg">Sic &s;emper in Sancta Eccle&s;ia con&s;ervandum do|cemus.</NOTE> <HI>this Cu&s;tom &s;hould always be ob&s;erved in the Church, except in the ca&s;e of Infants and infirm Per&s;ons, not able to &s;wallow down the Bread:</HI> In which<NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">Apud Baron. Tom. 11. p. 971.</NOTE> <HI>Humbertus</HI> declares, That <HI>in the</HI> Roman <HI>Church the Sacrament was mini|stred in both kinds apart:</HI><NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">Rer. Liturg. l. 2. c. 18. p. 862.</NOTE> Why then is Cardinal <HI>Bona</HI> &s;o po&s;itive in his A&s;&s;ertion, that <HI>always and every where, from the beginning of the Church to the Twelfth Century, the Faithful Communicated under the Species of Bread and Wine?</HI> Was it &s;o in the Twelfth <HI>Century,</HI> when<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">L. 2. c. 8.</NOTE> <HI>Algerus</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>both the Body and the Blood were taken by the Faithful, and that neither the Fle&s;h without the Blood, nor the Blood without the Fle&s;h are rightly Communicated?</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Apud Cyp. p. 41.</NOTE> <HI>Arnoldus Carnoten&s;is,</HI> That <HI>we Chri&s;tians drink of the Blood by his Com|mand.</HI><NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">P. 217.</NOTE> <HI>Petrus Cluniacen&s;is,</HI> That <HI>they took the Body and drank the Blood in likene&s;s of Food.</HI> Why then doth<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">L. 4. di&s;t. 11. Lit. <HI>f.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Peter Lom|bard</HI> put the Que&s;tion, <HI>Quare &s;ub duplice &s;pecie &s;umitur, why is the Sacrament taken in both kinds?</HI></P>
<PB N="65" REF="41">
<P>Was it thus in the Thirteenth <HI>Century,</HI> when the<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Apud Che&s;n. f. 5. Franc. p. 840.</NOTE> <HI>Deam</HI> of <HI>Meaux</HI> with his Monks <HI>admini&s;tred the body and the blood of Chri&s;t, to the Souldiers of</HI> Charles <HI>King of</HI> Sicily; when<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Contra Gentiles <HI>l.</HI> 4. c. 61. Pro|vide in quibu&s;|dam Eccel&s;iis ob&s;ervatur ut populo &s;umen|dus &s;anguis non detur. <HI>In</HI> 3. &mdash; <HI>part. qu.</HI> 80. <HI>Ar.</HI> 12.</NOTE> <HI>Thomas Aquinas</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>the Sacrament of the Body is de|livered to us apart, under the Species of Bread, and the blood un|der the Species of Wine;</HI> and el&s;ewhere confe&s;&s;eth, That <HI>this cu|&s;tom of Communicating under both kinds, was still ob&s;erved in &s;ome Churches:</HI> When a <HI>Council</HI> held at<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">&mdash; Solis e|nim celebran|tibus, &s;anguinem &s;ub &s;pecie vini con&s;ecrati &s;umere <HI>in huju&s;modi minoribus Eecle&s;iis e&s;t conce&s;&s;um. Concil. Tom.</HI> 11. <HI>Part.</HI> 1. <HI>p.</HI> 1159.</NOTE> <HI>Lambeth A. D.</HI> 1281. &s;aith, That <HI>only the Celebrators in le&s;&s;er Churches were permitted to drink the blood under the Species of con&s;ecrated Wine,</HI> clearly in&s;inuating, That <HI>in &s;ome Churches</HI> all drank of it; when la&s;tly<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Sum. de Sacram. Euch. di&s;t 3. Tr. 2. c. 5.</NOTE> <HI>Albertus Magnus</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>under one Species we deliver the Body, under the other the Blood.</HI></P>
<P>Was it thus in the Fourteenth <HI>Century,</HI> when, &s;aith <HI>Nico|laus</HI><NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">In 1 Cor. 11.</NOTE> <HI>Lyra, the Sacrament is given under the</HI> double <HI>Species of</HI> Bread <HI>and</HI> Wine; when<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Vid. Ca&s;|&s;and. de utra&abque; &s;pecie, <HI>p.</HI> 1036.</NOTE> <HI>Petrus de Palude,</HI> expre&s;ly &s;aith, That <HI>in his Age it was the Cu&s;tom</HI> in many Churches to commu|nicate under both Species. And<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Id. Liturg. <HI>p.</HI> 77.</NOTE> <HI>Guilielmus de monte Laudano,</HI> That <HI>in many places they communicated with Bread and Wine, that is, with an entire Sacrament.</HI></P>
<P>Was it thus in the beginning of the Fifteenth <HI>Century,</HI> that very <HI>Century</HI> in which the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance</HI> forbad both Species? Why then doth<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Calixt. de Com. &s;ub utra|que &s;pecie, <HI>p.</HI> 110.</NOTE> <HI>Fervendus Bi&s;hop</HI> of <HI>Lucca</HI> &s;ay, That <HI>in many Churches or Mona&s;teries, either by Privilege or Cu|&s;tom, not the Conficient only, but others did communicate under both Species?</HI> And why doth <HI>Francis</HI> King of <HI>France</HI> de|clare, <HI>A. D.</HI> 1535. That<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Patrum memoria (di|cebat) di&s;tributum fui&s;&s;e per Galliam quibu&s;libet integram coenam, non quidem in me|dio Templo, &s;ed in Sacellis, hocillum a nonnullis accepi&s;&s;e Grandi aetate, qui ritum i&s;tum in Galliis fui&s;&s;e confir|ment ante centum &amp; viginti annos. <HI>Sleidar. Comment. l.</HI> p. <HI>p.</HI> 243. <HI>Ca&s;&s;and, de utraquc Specie, p.</HI> 1037.</NOTE> <HI>in the Memory of his Ance&s;tors the entire Supper was throughout</HI> France <HI>di&s;tributed to who&s;oever would have it, not indeed in the middle of the Temple, but in the Chapels, and that he received this from &s;ome Ancient Men, who affirmed that it was not</HI> 120. <HI>Years &s;ince the Cu&s;tom was &s;o in</HI> France. Now take 120 Years from 1535, and there remains 1415, which is the very Year in which the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance</HI> debarred the <HI>Laity</HI> of the <HI>Cup.</HI> And what is now become of tho&s;e <HI>many Ages</HI> in which the People Communi|cated
<PB N="66" REF="42">not, but in that manner, that is, under one Species on|ly? And what ju&s;t matter of admiration is it that Men of Learning &s;hould with &s;uch confidence a&s;&s;ert what may &s;o plain|ly be di&s;proved? And that even <HI>General Councils</HI> &s;hould be &s;o little to be credited in what they do &s;o con&s;idently &s;ay, and lay as the Foundation of their Definitions and Decrees?</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. VII.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub"><HI>The Contents.</HI> The Doctrine of Concomitance is confuted <HI>(1.)</HI> from the words of the In&s;titution, <HI>&sect;. 1. 2dly.</HI> From Rea&s;on, <HI>viz. (1.)</HI> Becau&s;e, according to this Doctrine, the depriving of the Laity of the Cup mu&s;t be depriving them of whole Chri&s;t and all his Benefits, <HI>&sect;. 2. 2dly.</HI> Becau&s;e Chri&s;t's In&s;titution, according to this Doctrine, mu&s;t be the In&s;titution of a thing directly contrary to the Law of <HI>Mo&s;es, &sect;. 3.</HI> Concomitance frees not the Romani&s;t from the Impu|tation of an half Sacrament, though it doth from the Imputation of giving half Chri&s;t, <HI>&sect;. 4.</HI> It is contrary to the received Cu&s;toms of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t, v.g. (1.)</HI> to the Cu&s;tom of putting a piece of the con&s;ecrated Bread into the Cup, and &s;aying, <HI>Fiat commix|tio Corporis &amp; &s;anguinis Domini. 2dly.</HI> To the Cu&s;tom of mixing the Bread and Wine when they communicated Infants, or per&s;ons extreamly &s;ick, and &s;o not able to &s;wallow the Bread dry, that they might truly &s;ay, The Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t profit thee, <HI>&amp;c. 3dly.</HI> To their con&s;tant Cu&s;tom of &s;peaking of the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t as two Sacraments. <HI>4ly.</HI> To that di&s;tinct effect they attribute unto the &s;everal Species. <HI>5ly.</HI> To their &s;aying that the Body is given under the one, the Blood under the other Species. <HI>6ly.</HI> To the Decrees of <HI>Leo</HI> and <HI>Gela&s;ius, &sect;. 5.</HI> Mr. <HI>Condom</HI>'s vain attempt to prove Concomitance con&s;idered, and found to be a farther Evidence, that the Church of Chri&s;t for a Thou&s;and Years knew nothing of it, <HI>&sect;. 6.</HI></HEAD>
<P>MOreover the better to conceal this <HI>Sacrilegious</HI> Defalca|tion of the Cup,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil. Con&s;t. Se&s;&s;. 13. Ba&s;il. Se&s;&s;. 30. Trid. Se&s;&s;. 43. cap. 3.</NOTE> the&s;e <HI>Councils</HI> jointly have determined, That <HI>by force of that natural Connexion and Concomitance, which is betwixt the parts of Chri&s;t's rai&s;ed Body, Chri&s;t's Body is entire
<PB N="67" REF="42">under the Species of Wine, and his Blood under the Species of Bread, it being firmly to be believed, and in no wi&s;e doubted, that the whole Body and Blood of Chri&s;t is contained as well under the Species of Bread, as under that of Wine, and not the Fle&s;h only under the Species of Bread, nor the Blood only under the Species of Wine: This who&s;oever &s;hall deny, let him be Anathema,</HI> &s;aith the <HI>Trent Council;</HI> who&s;oever <HI>being learned</HI> will not declare upon <HI>Oath</HI> that he believeth, and a&s;&s;erts this Doctrine of <HI>Concomitance,</HI> he mu&s;t &s;uffer as an<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 13. can. 1. Par|tinaciter dicentes oppo&s;itum tanquam haere&s;in &s;unt ar|cendi &amp; puniendi. Se&s;&s;. 45. apud Bin. Tom. 7. p. 1124.</NOTE> <HI>Heretick,</HI> &s;aith the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance:</HI> And yet this Do|ctrine which cannot be denied without incurring an <HI>Anathema,</HI> nor disbelieved without the Crime of <HI>Here&s;ie,</HI> is in it &s;elf ab&s;urd, and plainly con|trary to <HI>Scripture</HI> and to Rea&s;on, and that it was unque&s;tionably unknown to all the <HI>Ancient Fathers,</HI> and the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> is very ea&s;ie to demon&s;trate.</P>
<P>That this Doctrine is ab&s;urd, that it doth not expound, but rather doth expo&s;e our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s In&s;titution to the deri&s;ion of Men of Rea&s;on and Con&s;ideration, will be evident from the&s;e following Arguments: For,</P>
<P N="1"><MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="&sect;"> 1. This Novelty apparently de&s;troys the energy of the words u&s;ed in the In&s;titution of this Sacred Ordinance, in which our <HI>Lord,</HI> when he had given his Body broken to his own <HI>Di&s;ciples,</HI> and they had actually received it, &s;aith of the following Cup, <HI>Drink ye all of this,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Matth. xxvi. 27, 28.</NOTE> <HI>for this is the blood of the New-Te&s;tament &s;hed for you.</HI> Whereas if he knew any thing of this <HI>Concomitance,</HI> he mu&s;t know al&s;o they had received this <HI>blood of the New-Te&s;tament</HI> already, and therefore might have &s;pared his Cup and Rea&s;on both. <HI>This do as oft as you drink it</HI> came too late, for they had done what he commanded, in effect, before he bid them do it.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 13. c. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Tantundem &s;ub alterutr&acirc; &s;pe|cie atque &s;ub utraque continetur, as much is contained under either Species as under both,</HI> &s;aith the <HI>Trent Council, i. e.</HI> whole and en|tire Chri&s;t, his Body, Blood, his Soul, and his Divinity, and &s;o as much as is delivered in, and as much Grace conveighed by the Reception of one Species as both. For, I &s;uppo&s;e, that by participation of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> in this entire manner, we have en|tirely the Grace of the Sacrament. Why therefore did our <HI>Lord</HI> in&s;titute the other Species &s;o perfectly unnece&s;&s;ary to con|veigh
<PB N="68" REF="43">any thing of <HI>Christ,</HI> or of his Grace unto us? Why did he ble&s;s the Cup, and ble&s;&s;ing &s;aid, with like Solemnity, and with expre&s;s injunction, Drink ye all of this? Or why did he permit his <HI>Church</HI> for a whole Thou&s;and Years to give his Members, a thing which might be oft of a pernicious influence to them who did receive it unworthily, but could be of no &s;pi|ritual advantage to them who did receive it worthily; &s;ince after we have taken worthily the con&s;ecrated Body, we have taken as much as when we have received the Blood al&s;o?</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>Condom</HI> &s;ets down this as their Principle,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Treat. of Com|munion in both Kinds, <HI>p. 327.</HI></NOTE> <HI>That he who hath received the Bread of Life,</HI> has no need of receiving the &s;acred Blood, <HI>&s;eeing he has received, together with the Bread of Life, the whole Sub&s;tance of the Sacrament, and together with that Sub&s;tance, the whole e&s;&s;ential virtue of the Euchari&s;t.</HI> Now from this Principle it follows with the cleare&s;t evidence, that it was needle&s;s for our <HI>Saviour</HI> to have &s;aid to his <HI>Di&s;ciples,</HI> after they had received the Bread of Life, <HI>Drink ye all of this</HI> Cup. That his In&s;titution of the Cup to be received after the Bread of Life, was a <HI>needle&s;s In&s;titution,</HI> that the <HI>Church</HI> was imployed in a <HI>needle&s;s</HI> Action for a Thou&s;and Years, when &s;he di&s;tributed the Cup to all Believers. That when our <HI>Saviour</HI> &s;aid, <HI>Drink ye all of this, for this is my Blood of the New-Te&s;tament which is &s;hed for many for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins,</HI> he gave a <HI>needle&s;s</HI> rea&s;on of a <HI>needle&s;s</HI> Action, exhorting them to do what they had whol|ly done already, to the end here a&s;&s;igned by him of the drink|ing of it. And can that Principle be true which ca&s;ts &s;uch horrid Imputations on the Commands, the In&s;titution, and the Rea&s;on of that In&s;titution a&s;&s;igned by our <HI>Ble&s;&s;ed Lord,</HI> and on the con&s;tant Practice of the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>And indeed this new <HI>Capricio</HI> of <HI>Concomitance</HI> cannot well be thought of by a <HI>Roman Doctor,</HI> but pre&s;ently this Que&s;tion &s;tares him in the Face, <HI>To what purpo&s;e then was the In&s;titution of both Species?</HI> they being con&s;cious to them&s;elves that the very natural, and obvious Conclu&s;ion from it would be this, That our Lord's In&s;titution of both Species was to no purpo&s;e; they therefore have invented a new Rea&s;on of the nece&s;&s;ity of Con&s;ecrating both the Species apart,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Mr.</HI> Condom, <HI>ibid.</HI> p. 179, 180.</NOTE> <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>the Separa|tion once made upon the Cro&s;s of our Lord's Body and Blood, might never cea&s;e</HI> to appear on the Holy Table. Now is it not won|derful, that <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;hould &s;tabli&s;h a continual repre&s;entation
<PB N="69" REF="43">of the &s;eparation of his Blood from his Body by Species, which he commands us to believe, contain his Body and his Blood united. What a pretty My&s;tery do the&s;e Men make of the &s;acred In&s;titution of our <HI>Lord.</HI> Bread and Wine never cea&s;e to appear unto our Sen&s;es, and yet we mu&s;t not believe this Appearance, but by Faith believe there is no &s;uch thing; the &s;ame Faith teacheth me, that our <HI>Lord</HI>'s Body and Blood are united there, and yet I mu&s;t believe our <HI>Lord</HI> de&s;igned the continual repre&s;entation of them there as &s;eparate, where Faith informs me there is no &s;uch thing.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> This Doctrine of Concomitance &s;eems even to ri|dicule our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s words, and make them run to this effect; I &s;ay unto you, <HI>This is my Body broken,</HI> not by way of repre&s;en|tation only, but &s;ub&s;tantially &s;o; and yet I know my Body neither is &s;ub&s;tantially broken in this Sacrament, nor can it ever be &s;o. I bid you take this Cup, and to encourage you to do &s;o, I &s;ay, <HI>This is my Blood &s;hed,</HI> or &s;eparated from my Bo|dy, and yet I know that there is always in this Sacrament &s;uch a <HI>Concomitance,</HI> as renders it impo&s;&s;ible my Blood &s;hould be thus &s;eparated as I &s;ay it is. But notwith&s;tanding I in&s;titute a My&s;tery, which by &s;ome broken Accidents of Bread anni|hilated, or &s;ome few colours or bare Species of Wine, with|out a &s;ubject, &s;hall give &s;ome faint re&s;emblance of my Body broken, and my Blood &s;hed for you: This is my broken Body; that is, under the&s;e broken Accidents of Bread lyeth my Bo|dy whole, and united to my Blood, and therefore not my Body broken for you. This is my Blood, &s;hed for you; that is, under this empty &s;hew of Wine lieth my Blood united to my Body, and &s;o my Blood not &s;hed; and whether <HI>hoc e&s;t corpus,</HI> thus interpreted, doth not make Non&s;ence of the words, let the con&s;iderate Reader judge.</P>
<P><MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>Thirdly,</HI> If there be &s;uch a nece&s;&s;ary Concomitance in the Sacrament, then mu&s;t each part of the Sacrament exhibit whole and entire <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> with all his Benefits, and con&s;equent|ly the depriving the <HI>Laity</HI> of one part, or Species of the Sa|crament, mu&s;t be the depriving them of whole <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and all his benefits. Now then in doing this, either they are depri|ved of &s;ome &s;piritual Benefit, or not; if the fir&s;t, then mu&s;t the <HI>Romani&s;ts be Sacrilegious,</HI> becau&s;e they do deprive the peo|ple
<PB N="70" REF="44">of &s;ome &s;piritual Benefit from tho&s;e &s;acred My&s;teries they formerly received, and that agreeably unto the In&s;titution of our <HI>Lord,</HI> and the common practice of the <HI>Church</HI> for a Thou|&s;and Years. If the receiving of the <HI>Chalice</HI> worthily be of any advantage to Souls, then he, who does not receive it, is a loo&s;er; and he by whom they are deprived of this &s;piritual Good mu&s;t be a <HI>Sacrilegious</HI> per&s;on. If it be &s;aid that no &s;pi|ritual Benefit can accrue to them by drinking of the Cup, then mu&s;t it be a&s;&s;erted that albeit a Man receive entire <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> worthily, yet may he never be the better for it, and what is this but to <HI>e&s;teem the Blood of the Covenant</HI> thus received <HI>an un|holy thing.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>Fourthly,</HI> had our <HI>Lord</HI> taught Concomitance, his In&s;titu|tion of this Sacrament had been the In&s;titution of a thing direct|ly contrary to the Law of <HI>Mo&s;es, viz. The eating of Fle&s;h with the Blood,</HI> and then it mu&s;t have mini&s;tred offence to the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> and the fir&s;t <HI>Jewi&s;h Converts,</HI> who were all &s;trict ob&s;ervers of that Law. Since then we do not find that the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> the <HI>Jewi&s;h Con|verts,</HI> or even the <HI>Sects</HI> of <HI>Nazeranes</HI> and <HI>Ebionites</HI> did ever &s;cruple the receiving of the Sacrament on this account, we may pre&s;ume our <HI>Saviour</HI> taught no &s;uch <HI>Concomitance.</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="&sect;"> To conclude, &s;hould we admit of this imagination, it would not free the <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> from the Imputation of an half Sacra|ment, though it would from delivering of half Chri&s;t. For feeing a Sacrament is <HI>an outward vi&s;ible &s;ign,</HI> it follows evidently, he who hath but half of the outward vi&s;ible &s;igns, hath but half of the Sacrament, and con&s;equently an half Sacrament. He that receives only the Bread, receives only the Sacrament of the Body, and not the Sacrament of the Blood of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and &s;o receives not an entire Sacrament.</P>
<P><MILESTONE N="5" UNIT="&sect;"> That the <HI>Fathers</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> till the Tenth Century knew and believed nothing of this Doctrine of <HI>Concomitance,</HI> as it is evident from many of their Te&s;timonies cited in this Di&s;cour&s;e, &s;o may it fully be evinced from the received Cu&s;toms of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>And, <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> this may be proved from that received Cu&s;tom mentioned in all the <HI>Liturgies,</HI> both of the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> and the
<PB N="71" REF="44"><HI>We&s;tern Churches,</HI> which was to bite or break a piece of the con&s;ecrated Bread, and putting it into the Cup, to &s;ay the&s;e words,<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Fiat commixtio &amp; con|&s;ecratio corporis &amp; Sanguinis Domini no&s;tri. <HI>Ordo Rom. a|pud Ca&s;&s;andr. p.</HI> 112, 119.</NOTE> <HI>Let there be made a mixture, and a con&s;ecration of the Body and Blood of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI> For though<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Durant. de rit. Eccl. l. 2. c. 52.</NOTE> <HI>Durantus</HI> and<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Bona rerum Liturg. l. 2. c. 16. p. 814.</NOTE> <HI>Bona</HI> do, in conformity to the New Doctrine of <HI>Tran|&s;ub&s;tantiation,</HI> carefully remark that the <HI>Prie&s;t doth not thus &s;peak as if tho&s;e things were then united, which before were &s;eparated,</HI> and that they made no mixture of our <HI>Lord's</HI> Body and his Blood, <HI>ac|cording to their real e&s;&s;ences,</HI> but only <HI>according to their Sacramental Species,</HI> yet do the <HI>Liturgies</HI> refu&s;e this Subterfuge, and their <HI>Expo&s;itors</HI> &s;ufficiently confute this uncouth <HI>Glo&s;s,</HI> for they do never &s;peak of a Commixtion of the <HI>Sacramental Species,</HI> but always of <HI>the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t.</HI> They pray that <HI>this Commixtion and Con&s;ecration may avail to their</HI><NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">In vitam aeternam. <HI>Ord. Rom.</HI></NOTE> <HI>eternal Sal|vation,</HI> which cannot be expected from the <HI>Sacramental Spe|cies,</HI> but only from the real Body and the Blood. <HI>Albinus Flac|cus</HI> doth inform us, That this Commixtion is made<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Ut calix Domini totam plenltudinem contineat Sa|cramenti. <HI>Cap. de celebr. Mi&s;&s;. p.</HI> 93.</NOTE> <HI>that the Cup of the Lord may contain the whole fulne&s;s of the Sacrament, as it were by the Copu|lation of the &s;ame My&s;tery. This is not done in vain,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">De Eccle&s;. Offic. l. 3. c. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Amalarius, for corporal Life con&s;i&s;ts of Fle&s;h and Blood, whil&s;t the&s;e two continue in Man his Spirit or Life continues. In that Office is &s;hewn that the blood &s;hed for our Souls, and the fle&s;h dead for our Body, return to their proper Sub&s;tance, and that the New Man</HI> (Chri&s;t) <HI>is made lively by the quickening Spirit; that he who died for us, and ro&s;e again, can die no more.</HI><NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Per particulam oblata immi&s;&s;ae in calicem o&s;tendit Chri&s;ti corpus quod jam re|&s;urrexit a mortuis. <HI>De in&s;t. Cleric c. ult.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Ra|banus Maurus</HI> in like manner &s;aith, That <HI>the par|ticle con&s;ecrated, thus put into the Chalice, &s;hews that the Body of Chri&s;t is now ri&s;en from the Dead.</HI><NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Ad de&s;ignandam corpo|ris &amp; animae conjunctionem, in re&s;urrectione Chri&s;ti. <HI>cap.</HI> 17.</NOTE> <HI>Mi|crologus</HI> &s;aith, That <HI>this mixture is made to &s;ignifie the Conjunction of the Soul and Body of Chri&s;t in the Re&s;urrection,</HI> and that <HI>the particle put into the Cha|lice &s;ignifies the Body of our Lord ri&s;en from the dead.</HI> Now they who &s;ay this mixture was made that the Cup might contain the <HI>fulne&s;s of the Sacrament,</HI> did not believe that the Cup before contained the Sacrament compleatly, as it mu&s;t do, if it contained the Body before. And they who &s;ay, That
<PB N="72" REF="45">this is done to &s;hew <HI>that the Body of Chri&s;t is now alive,</HI> and <HI>ri&s;en from the dead,</HI> and that this mixture therefore &s;heweth this, becau&s;e it joineth, or uniteth Fle&s;h and Blood, did not believe they were before united by <HI>Concomitance.</HI> And as our <HI>Lord</HI> by con&s;ecrating the Wine, after he had di&s;tributed the Bread, and bidding them all drink thereof, becau&s;e it was the <HI>Blood of the New Te&s;tament,</HI> declared &s;ufficiently, that he did not con|ceive that his <HI>Di&s;ciples</HI> had received already that &s;ame Blood he Con&s;ecrated that they might receive it. Even &s;o the&s;e <HI>Chri|&s;tians,</HI> who mixed the Con&s;ecrated particle of our <HI>Lord's</HI> Body with his Blood, that &s;o the Union of both, in which our <HI>Sa|viour</HI>'s Life con&s;i&s;ted, might be repre&s;ented, &s;ufficiently declare, they did not think his Fle&s;h and Blood were by <HI>Concomitance</HI> be|fore united.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> This will be farther evident from that known Cu|&s;tom of the <HI>Church</HI> which was to mix the Bread and Wine, that &s;o when they Communicated <HI>Infants,</HI> or infirm per&s;ons who could not &s;wallow down the Bread alone, they might truly &s;ay, <HI>The Body and Blood of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t, profit thee to Life Eternal;</HI> for that this Decree of the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Tours,</HI> That <HI>the Sacred Oblation</HI> given to &s;uch per&s;ons <HI>&s;hould be dipped in the Blood of Chri&s;t, that &s;o the Prie&s;t,</HI> who gave it to them, <HI>might truly &s;ay to the infirm Per&s;on, The Body and Blood of Chri&s;t profit thee,</HI> &amp;c. was ob&s;erved in the <HI>Church</HI> from the Ninth to the Twelfth Century, we learn from<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">Quae &s;acra oblatio in|tincta debet e&s;&s;e in &s;anguine Chri&s;ti ut veraciter po&s;&s;it Presbyter dicere infirmo, cor|pus &amp; &s;anguis domini profi|ciat tibi, <HI>&amp;c. Regino de Ec|cle&s;. Di&s;cipl. l.</HI> 1. <HI>cap.</HI> 70. Pro|ficiat tibi in remi&s;&s;ionem pec|catorum &amp; vitam aeternam, <HI>Jvo Decret. part.</HI> 2. <HI>cap.</HI> 19. <HI>Burch. l.</HI> 5. <HI>c.</HI> 9.</NOTE> <HI>Regino, Ivo</HI> and <HI>Burchardus,</HI> who all make mention of this <HI>Canon,</HI> as a Law which was ob&s;erved in their times. That this practice was u&s;ed though not with Approbation, in the Fourth <HI>Century,</HI> even in the Admini&s;tration of this Sacrament in pub|lick, is evident from the Condemnation of it, by<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Concil. Tom. 2. p. 528.</NOTE> <HI>P. Julius, A. D.</HI> 336. in the&s;e words, <HI>We have heard that &s;ome, po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed with a Schi&s;matical Ambition, do deliver to the people the Euchari&s;t dip'd for a compleat Communion; which thing, how contra|ry it is to the Evangelical and Apo&s;tolical Doctrine, and how repugnant to the Cu&s;tom of the Church, it is not hard to prove, from the Fountain of Truth, from whom proceeded the ap|pointment of the My&s;teries of the Sacrament. For this they have not received from the Go&s;pel, where Chri&s;t commended his Body and his
<PB N="73" REF="45">blood to his Di&s;ciples, for there the commendation of the Bread a|part, and of the Cup apart, is rehear&s;ed; nor do we read, that Chri&s;t gave Bread dipp'd to any but to that Di&s;ciple whom he would &s;hew to be the betrayer of his Ma&s;ter by the &s;op dip'd. This,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Cap. 19.</NOTE> <HI>Micrologus,</HI> is the prohibition of <HI>Julius, the Thirty fourth Pope, writing to the Bi&s;hops of</HI> Egypt.</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> This will be farther evident from this Con&s;ideration, That the <HI>Fathers</HI> do certainly &s;peak of the Con&s;ecrated Bread and Wine, as of Two Sacraments; and that as really di&s;tinct as are the Sacraments of <HI>Bapti&s;m</HI> and <HI>Chri&s;m.</HI> This we may learn from all tho&s;e numerous pa&s;&s;ages in which they are &s;till &s;tiled by the <HI>Fathers</HI> of the <HI>We&s;tern Church,</HI> Sacramenta, My|&s;teria, Sacramenta Coele&s;tia, divina My&s;teria: <HI>The Sacraments,</HI> and <HI>My&s;teries</HI> (in the Plural), <HI>the heavenly Sacraments,</HI> and <HI>divine My&s;teries:</HI> and by the <HI>Ea&s;tern Fathers,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">: <HI>The Holy Gifts, the divine My&s;te|ries, the Holy Sacraments,</HI> &amp;c. Thus do the <HI>Greeks</HI> &s;peak of them to this very day; thus did the celebrated Writers of the <HI>We&s;t</HI> &s;peak and write of them till the <HI>Eleventh Century,</HI> when <HI>Tran|&s;ub&s;tantiation</HI> began to be e&s;tabli&s;hed, and with it the Doctrine of <HI>Concomitance. The Sacraments,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Sunt autem Sacramenta Bapti&s;mum &amp; chri&s;ma, corpus &amp; &s;anguis. <HI>Orig. l.</HI> 6. <HI>c.</HI> 19. <HI>Raban. M. de In&s;t. Cler. l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 24. <HI>Pa&s;ch. cap.</HI> 9.</NOTE> <HI>I&s;idore Hi&s;palen&s;is, are Bapti&s;m and Chri&s;m, the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t, which are therefore called Sa|craments, becau&s;e under the veil of Corporeal things, the divine Virtue doth more &s;ecretly work the Salva|tion of tho&s;e Sacraments.</HI> Which words are bor|rowed from <HI>Pope Gregory,</HI> and are repeated by <HI>Pa&s;cha&s;ius,</HI> only with this addition, <HI>The&s;e are the Sacraments of the Church of Chri&s;t. Rabanus Maurus</HI> hath the &s;ame words; and having di&s;cour&s;ed of <HI>Bapti&s;m</HI> and <HI>Chri&s;m,</HI> he proceeds thus, <HI>Becau&s;e we above di&s;cour&s;ed, as much as God enabled us, of Two Sacra|ments, Bapti&s;m and Chri&s;m,</HI><NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">De In&s;t. Cler. l. 1. c. 31.</NOTE> &s;upere&s;t ut de reliquis duobus, id e&s;t, Corpore &amp; Sanguine Domini diligentius inve&s;tigemus, <HI>It remains that we di&s;coi &s;e of the Two other Sacraments,</HI> viz. <HI>The Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t.</HI> Whence fir&s;t we learn that then the Sacraments were not accounted Seven, as they are now at <HI>Rome;</HI> but only Four, or rather Two, <HI>Chri&s;m</HI> being held as one with <HI>Bapti&s;m,</HI> and the Body and Blood of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> being, as to the Species in which it was to be celebrated, double; which Species were therefore called <HI>Sacraments</HI> by <HI>Gregory,</HI>
<PB N="74" REF="46">&s;aith<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">In 4. Sent. di&s;t. 12. Art. 2. q. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Bonaventure,</HI> yet are they but one <HI>Sacrament</HI> by vir|tue of the In&s;titution, and end for which both are de&s;ign'd, <HI>viz. The &V;nion of the body My&s;tical.</HI> Now they who do &s;o of|ten &s;peak of both the&s;e Species as <HI>Sacraments,</HI> the <HI>Sacraments of the Church,</HI> and as <HI>Two Sacraments,</HI> becau&s;e they have their di|&s;tinct operations towards the health or the Salvation of tho&s;e who worthily Receive them, and both conduced to the Uni|on of the <HI>My&s;tical Body</HI> of the <HI>Lord,</HI> could not imagine, that by virtue of that <HI>Concomitance,</HI> of which they never &s;peak one word of &s;yllable, the virtue of both Species was contained in, and was intirely conveighed by one alone. For they mu&s;t be &s;uppo&s;ed to hold the Cup a <HI>Sacrament</HI> of our <HI>Lord</HI>'s In&s;ti|tution, and therefore not &s;uperfluous; that it was <HI>Sacrae rei Signum: a Sign of a thing Sacred,</HI> which did conveigh the Grace it &s;ignified, and operated to the Salvation of tho&s;e who worthily Received it, after they had received the Body, and which conduced unto the Union of the Body <HI>My&s;tical,</HI> to their head <HI>Chri&s;t Je&s;us.</HI> They la&s;tly mu&s;t conceive, that to deprive Chri&s;t's Members of the Cup, was to deprive them of one Sa|crament.</P>
<P>And, <HI>Fourthly,</HI> this appears from tho&s;e &s;ayings of the <HI>Fathers</HI> which attribute a di&s;tinct effect unto the &s;everal &s;pecies;<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Caro &s;alvatoris pro &s;a|lute corporis, &s;anguis vero pro anima no&s;tra effu&s;us e&s;t. <HI>In</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> xi. <HI>p.</HI> 270.</NOTE> <HI>The Fle&s;h of Chri&s;t was delivered,</HI> &s;aith St. <HI>Ambro&s;e, for the Salvation of the Body; and the Blood was poured out for our Souls,</HI> &amp;c.<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">Haym. in 1 Cor. xi. p. 129. An&s;elm. ibid.</NOTE> <HI>Haymo</HI> and <HI>An&s;elm</HI> u&s;e the &s;ame words with a little variation; &s;aying, That <HI>we receive the Sa|craments for &s;afety of the Body and Soul; for the Fle&s;h was offered for the Salvation of the Body, and the Blood &s;hed for our Souls, that both our &s;ub&s;tances might receive the inhe|ritance of Eternal Life.</HI><NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">L. 4. di&s;t. 11. Quare &s;ub duplici &s;pecie.</NOTE> <HI>Peter Lombard,</HI><NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Decret. p. 2. c. 7.</NOTE> <HI>Ivo Carnoten|&s;is,</HI><NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">Tom. 5. c. 6.</NOTE> <HI>Hugo de Sancto Victore,</HI> and<NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg">Sum. Theol. part 3. num. 29. Art. 9.</NOTE> <HI>Alexander</HI> of <HI>Hales</HI> cite the very words of <HI>Ambro&s;e,</HI> to prove the &s;ame thing.</P>
<P>And, <HI>Fifthly,</HI> This will be farther evident from tho&s;e <HI>Fa|thers</HI> who a&s;&s;ert, That the Body is given under the one, the Blood under the other Species: This <HI>Cyril</HI> of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> in|forms tho&s;e whom he Catechi&s;ed, That<NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">Catech. My&s;t. 4. p. 237.</NOTE> <HI>in the Species of Bread is given the Body of Christ, and in the Species of Wine his
<PB N="75" REF="46">Blood.</HI> The<NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">Lit. Chry|&s;o&s;t. Tom. 6. p. 998.</NOTE> <HI>Liturgies</HI> do in like manner pray, That <HI>God would make this Bread the precious body of Christ, and that which is in the Cup the precious blood of Christ.</HI><NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">F. 11, 12.</NOTE> <HI>Lanfrank</HI> informs us, That <HI>&s;umitur quidem caro per &s;e, &amp; &s;anguis per &s;e, The Fle&s;h is taken by it &s;elf, and the Blood by it &s;elf, the Fle&s;h under the form of Bread, and the Blood under the form of Wine.</HI> They therefore &s;eem not even in his days to have been acquainted with the new Doctrine of <HI>Concomitance.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Sixthly,</HI> This is apparent from the <HI>Decrees</HI> of <HI>Leo</HI> and <HI>Ge|la&s;ius</HI> concerning tho&s;e who in their time ab&s;tained from the Cup. For of the <HI>Manichees</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Serm. 4. in quadrage&s;. cap. 5.</NOTE> <HI>P. Leo</HI> &s;aith, That they in|deed received the Body of Chri&s;t, but <HI>they declined, haurire &s;an|guinem Redemptionis no&s;trae, to drink the Blood of our Redemption;</HI> he therefore thought that they could not drink the Blood, ac|cording to our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s In&s;titution, who received not the Cup.<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Apud Ivon. decr. part. 2. cap. 89.</NOTE> <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> &s;aith, That the declining of the Cup was <HI>the dividing of one and the &s;ame My&s;tery,</HI> which could not truly be affirmed, if by taking of the Bread alone an entire Sacrament, and whole <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> Body and Blood were taken and received. He al&s;o adds, <HI>Let them either take the whole Sacrament, or be driven from the whole,</HI> clearly intimating, that by receiving the Bread only they received not the whole.</P>
<P>But it is needle&s;s to proceed in confutation of this vain ima|gination, for had it ever entered into the Heads of the Re|nowned <HI>Fathers</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> they would not &s;o unanimou&s;ly have &s;aid, the Cup was nece&s;&s;ary to be received <HI>for the remem|brance of our Lord's Death and Pa&s;&s;ion, for the procuring of our union to Chri&s;t, for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins, for the increa&s;e of Grace, for the Sanctification and Salvation both of Soul and Body;</HI> they would not have concluded the Sacrament was imperfect when it was not received; nor would they with &s;uch Pa&s;&s;ion have ex|horted tho&s;e who had received the Body <HI>to come and be partakers of the Cup;</HI> or &s;tiled it, as in their <HI>Liturgies</HI> they always do, <HI>the Cup of Life, Redemption</HI> and <HI>Salvation,</HI> as we have &s;een they did.</P>
<P><MILESTONE N="6" UNIT="&sect;"> Mr. <HI>Condom</HI> neverthele&s;s thus Triumphs over us; <HI>Gentlemen open your own Books, open</HI> Aubertine,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 356.</NOTE> <HI>the mo&s;t learned Defender of your Doctrine, you will find there, in almo&s;t every Page, pa&s;&s;ages taken from St.</HI> Ambro&s;e, <HI>St.</HI> Chry&s;o&s;tom, <HI>the two</HI> Cyrils, <HI>and from many others, where you may read, That in receiving the &s;acred Body
<PB N="76" REF="47">of our Lord, they received his Per&s;on it &s;elf; &s;eeing they received, &s;ay they, the King in their Hands, they receive Je&s;us Chri&s;t, and the Word of God; they received his Fle&s;h as living, not as the Fle&s;h of a meer Man, but as the Fle&s;h of God; is not this to receive the Di|vinity together with the Humanity of the Son of God? and, in a word, his entire Per&s;on; after this what would you call Concomitancy?</HI></P>
<P><MILESTONE UNIT="An&s;w."> What is all this to the purpo&s;e? Is this the manner of &s;peak|ing u&s;ed by the <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> &s;ince the New Doctrine of <HI>Tran&s;ub|&s;tantiation</HI> was invented, and &s;ince the <HI>Sacrilegious</HI> Defalcation of the Cup? Do they expre&s;s <HI>Concomitance</HI> by &s;aying, <HI>You re|ceive Je&s;us Chri&s;t, the King, the Word of God, the living Fle&s;h of God?</HI> Is it not this they carefully and frequently inculcate, that <HI>under that one Species alone,</HI> which is di&s;tributed to them, they receive <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t whole and entire?</HI> Doth not the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance</HI> thus expre&s;s it, That<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 13. vi|de Ba&s;il. Se&s;&s;. 30. <HI>Concil Tom.</HI> 12. <HI>p.</HI> 601.</NOTE> <HI>it is firmly to be believed, and no way to be doubted, that the whole Body and Blood is truly contained both under the Species of Bread, and likewi&s;e under the Species of Wine?</HI> Doth not the<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 13. cap. 3. &amp; can. 1</NOTE> <HI>Trent Council</HI> &s;ay, That <HI>by virtue of this Concomitance, the Body is under the Species of Wine, and the Blood under the Species of Bread, Anathematizing</HI> them who teach the contrary; and that <HI>under one Species is contained a true Sacra|ment?</HI> Are not the <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> &s;till endeavouring to po&s;&s;e&s;s the People with the&s;e Sentiments, That <HI>in receiving one Species alone they loo&s;e nothing,</HI> &s;ince by <HI>Concomitancy</HI> they receive both the Body and the Blood? Is it not this which the<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 13. cap. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Trent Coun|cil</HI> is &s;o concerned to teach, that <HI>as much is contained under either Species as under both?</HI> Let therefore <HI>Mr. Condom,</HI> if he believes the <HI>Fathers</HI> held Concomitancy, &s;hew out of all their Writ|ings any thing of this Nature, which may convince us that they did a&s;&s;ert it, or let him re&s;t a&s;&s;ured, that what the <HI>Romanists,</HI> &s;ince the Twelfth Century<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Attendant in&s;uper Sacer|dotes quod cum Communio|nem &s;acram porrigant &s;impli|cibus, &s;ollicite eos in&s;truant &s;ub panis &s;pecie &s;imul eis dari corpus &amp; &s;anguinem Domini.&mdash;<HI>Concil. Lambeth. A.D.</HI> 1281. <HI>Concil. Tom.</HI> 11. <HI>part.</HI> 1. <HI>p.</HI> 1159.</NOTE> have been continually inculcating, and obtruding upon others, what filleth all their Books, and their Di&s;cour&s;es on this Subject, but never was once mentioned by any <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Writer for a Thou|&s;and Years, though they were equally concerned, and had all the &s;ame rea&s;on, if they believed <HI>Con|comitancy;</HI> yea, and the &s;ame occa&s;ion, if they had generally practi&s;ed the <HI>half Communion;</HI> &s;o to do, is but a Novelty invented by the <HI>Romi&s;h Doctors</HI> only to &s;erve a cau&s;e,
<PB N="77" REF="47">and ju&s;tifie the <HI>Defalcation</HI> of the Cup. When the <HI>Doctors</HI> of that Church would in their <HI>&s;uppo&s;itious Treati&s;es</HI> make the An|cients &s;peak in this new <HI>Dialect,</HI> they do not mince the matter thus, but make them &s;peak exactly in their <HI>Roman Language.</HI> Thus in that <HI>Epi&s;tle</HI> fal&s;ly &s;aid to be writ by <HI>I&s;idore Hi&s;palen&s;is</HI> to <HI>Redemptus,</HI> they introduce him &s;peaking thus,<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Cum praedictorum fuerit con&s;ecratio, non, ut quidam putant indocti, &s;ub panis &s;pe|cie, &s;ola caro Chri&s;ti, &amp; in Calice tantummodo &s;umitur &s;anguis, &s;ed in utro&abque; Deus &amp; homo in corpore glorifica|to totus &amp; integer Chri&s;tus, integer Chri&s;tus in calice, pa|nis vivus qui de coelo de&s;cen|dit totus e&s;t in utro&abque;. <HI>Epi&s;t. I&s;idori ad Redemptum, p.</HI> 696.</NOTE> <HI>When the con&s;ecration of the Elements is made, there is under the Species of Bread not the Fle&s;h of Chri&s;t only, and in the Chalice not his Blood only, as &s;ome unskilful per&s;ons think, but in both there is God and Man, whole and entire Chri&s;t in his Glo|rified Body, whole Chri&s;t in the Cup, the living Bread who came down from Heaven is entire and whole in both.</HI> Here is plain dealing, only the <HI>Language</HI> and other unque&s;tionable circum&s;tances, as<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">De Euchari&s;t. p. 902.</NOTE> <HI>Au|bertine</HI> well notes, demon&s;trate, that the <HI>Author</HI> could not write before the middle of the Eleventh <HI>Century,</HI> becau&s;e the Controver&s;ie betwixt the <HI>Greeks</HI> and <HI>La|tins</HI> touching <HI>unleavened Bread,</HI> which gave occa&s;ion to that Di&s;cour&s;e, began not till the year 1053.</P>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="appendix">
<PB N="78" REF="48">
<HEAD>APPENDIX.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">CHAP. VIII.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><LABEL>The Contents.</LABEL> The A&s;&s;ertions of <HI>J. L.</HI> touching Communion in one kind, <HI>&sect;. 1.</HI> Again&s;t whom it is proved, <HI>(1.)</HI> That Chri&s;t's In&s;titution of the Sacrament is virtually a Command, obliging all the Faithful, as much as in them lieth to receive both kinds, which is proved by Three Rea&s;ons, <HI>&sect;. 2. 2dly.</HI> That it appears not from the words of our Saviour, <HI>Joh. vi.</HI> that Chri&s;t left that Practice indiffe|rent; where by many Arguments it is proved, That nothing in that Chapter relates to the Sacramental eating of the Euchari&s;t, <HI>&sect;. 3. 3dly.</HI> That this appears not from the Practice of our Lord or his Di&s;ciples, <HI>&sect;. 4. 4ly.</HI> That it was the Cu&s;tom of the Church for a Thou&s;and Years to give the Sacrament to the Sick in both kinds, <HI>&sect;. 5.</HI> And in like manner to Infants capable of re|ceiving both, <HI>&sect;. 6. 5ly.</HI> That neither <HI>Leo</HI> nor <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> gave any precept to the Church touching this matter, <HI>&sect;. 7.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P><MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="&sect;."> BY way of <HI>Appendix</HI> to this Treati&s;e, I &s;hall con&s;ider what the <HI>Author</HI> of <HI>a Papi&s;t mi&s;repre&s;ented and repre&s;ented</HI> hath di&s;cour&s;ed upon this Subject, <HI>Chap.</HI> 21. where he a&s;&s;erts, <Q REND="margQuotes">"That <HI>the Papi&s;t truly repre&s;ented,</HI> believes, That he is obliged to obey all the Commands of Chri&s;t, and that neither his <HI>Church,</HI> nor any other Power upon Earth can limit, alter or anull any precept of Divine In&s;titution, contrary to the in|tention of the Law-giver. Neither is the denial of the Cup to the Laity a practice any way oppo&s;ite to this his Belief; he being taught, that though <HI>Christ</HI> In&s;tituted the ble&s;&s;ed Sacrament under both kinds, and &s;o delivered it to his <HI>Apo|stles,</HI> who only were then pre&s;ent, and whom he had made
<PB N="79" REF="48"><HI>Priests</HI> ju&s;t before; yet he gave no command, that it &s;hould be &s;o received by all the Faithful, but left this indifferent; as is evident from his own Words, where he attributes the obtaining Life everla&s;ting, (the end of the In&s;titution) &s;ometimes to the receiving under both kinds, &s;ometimes un|der one; as when he &s;ays, <HI>If any Man eat of this Bread, he &s;hall live for ever. He that eateth me, even he &s;hall live by me. He that eateth of this Bread &s;hall live for ever,</HI> (Joh. vi. 51, 57, 58.) And a curious <HI>Reader</HI> may find as many Texts for thus receiving under one kind, as for the other. And St. <HI>Augu|stin</HI> who was &s;o far of this Opinion, that he &s;ays, That Chri&s;t him&s;elf admini&s;tred the Sacrament to &s;ome of his Di&s;|ciples under one kind only, <HI>viz.</HI> to tho&s;e two going to <HI>Emaus,</HI> (<HI>Luc. c. last.</HI> 30.) and that the <HI>Apostles</HI> afterwards did of|ten practi&s;e the like, when they a&s;&s;embled to break Bread, (<HI>Acts</HI> ii. <HI>&amp;c.</HI>) which place he and many other <HI>Fathers</HI> ex|plicate of the Sacrament, (<HI>Aug. l.</HI> 49. <HI>de Con&s;. Evang.</HI>) And this was the Cu&s;tom of the <HI>Primitive Christians,</HI> to give it under one kind to <HI>Children,</HI> the <HI>Sick</HI> u&s;ed &s;o to carry it with them, is atte&s;ted by all ancient Writers, and modern <HI>Hi|&s;torians.</HI> Nay he finds that this was the practice of the Church, to communicate under one kind only, or el&s;e under both, as every one thought good, e&s;pecially in all <HI>Private Communions,</HI> for the fir&s;t Four hundred years after <HI>Christ;</HI> and that the fir&s;t precept of receiving under both kinds was given to the Faithful by <HI>Pope Leo</HI> I. in the Year 443, and confirmed by <HI>Pope Gela&s;ius</HI> in 490. Not for correcting any Abu&s;e that had crept into the <HI>Church,</HI> but for the di&s;cover|ing the <HI>Maniches,</HI> who being of Opinion that <HI>Christ</HI> had no true Blood, and that Wine was <HI>the Gall of the Devil,</HI> u&s;ed to lurk among the <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> and receiving under the form of Bread only, as the re&s;t did, remained undi&s;tingui&s;hed, till by this obligation of all receiving the Cup (which they judged unlawful and abominable) they were all detected. And now, if a thing till that time indifferent, was for the&s;e motives determined by an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Precept, and &s;o ob|&s;erved for many hundred Years, without &s;crupling or que|&s;tioning the Authority; why &s;hould he doubt to &s;ubmit to the &s;ame Authority, when upon different motives and cir|cum&s;tances, they i&s;&s;ue forth another Precept? Which <HI>Ha|rangue</HI> contains the&s;e two A&s;&s;ertions.</Q></P>
<PB N="80" REF="49">
<LIST>
<ITEM>I. <HI>That Chri&s;t gave no Command that the Sacrament of the Eu|chari&s;t &s;hould be received in both kinds by the Faithful.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>II. <HI>That he left this indifferent;</HI> and that this appears,
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. From his own words, <HI>Joh.</HI> vi.</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. From his own practice, and from the practice of his own <HI>Di&s;ciples</HI> admini&s;tring the Sacrament to the Faithful in Bread alone.</ITEM>
<ITEM>3. From the Cu&s;tom of the <HI>Primitive Church,</HI> who gave it to the Sick, to Infants, to Men in a Journey to carry with them, in one kind only.</ITEM>
<ITEM>4. Becau&s;e it was a thing indifferently practi&s;ed, even in the <HI>Church</HI> till <HI>Leo</HI> the Fir&s;t, in the Year 443, upon occa&s;ion of the <HI>Manichees;</HI> and for Conviction of them, commanded the Receiving in both kinds; and <HI>Pope Gela&s;ius, A. D.</HI> 490. con|firmed that Precept.</ITEM>
</LIST></ITEM>
</LIST>
<P>In Oppo&s;ition to which A&s;&s;ertions, I dogmatically affirm,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> <Q REND="margQuotes">"That <HI>Chri&s;t's In&s;titution of this Sacrament is virtually a Command, which lays an Obligation on all the Faithful, as much as in them lieth, to receive both kinds.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Secondly, <Q REND="margQuotes">"<HI>That it doth not appear either from the words of our Saviour,</HI> Joh. vi. <HI>or from the practice of him&s;elf, or his Di&s;ciples, that he left this practice indifferent.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Thirdly, <Q REND="margQuotes">"<HI>That it was the Cu&s;tom of the Church for a Thou|&s;and Years together, to give the Sacrament to the Sick, and to Infants capable of Receiving it in both kinds.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Fourthly, <Q REND="margQuotes">"<HI>That neither</HI> Leo, <HI>nor</HI> Gela&s;ius <HI>gave any new Precept to the Church touching this matter.</HI></Q> And,</P>
<P><MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="&sect;"> <HI>Fir&s;t,That Chri&s;t's In&s;titution of this Sacrament is virtually a Command, obliging all the Faithful, as much as in them lieth, to receive both kinds,</HI> will be apparent from the&s;e following Ar|guments:</P>
<P N="1">1. That our Lord &s;aid in the In&s;titution of this Sacrament, <HI>Drink ye All of this.</HI> For whereas <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> pretend, That <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;aid only, <HI>Drink ye all of this, to them, to whom he &s;aid, when &s;peaking of the Bread, Do this;</HI> and that tho&s;e words were only &s;poken to his <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> whom he then made <HI>Prie&s;ts.</HI> To
<PB N="81" REF="49">this I an&s;wer, That we have clear and convincing Evidence that the&s;e words, <HI>Drink ye all of this,</HI> are to be applied to others be&s;ides the <HI>Apo&s;tles:</HI> As V. Gr. 1. From <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s In&s;ti|tution, whence I argue thus, <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> In&s;tituted no other Sup|per, than that which he admini&s;tred to his <HI>Di&s;ciples;</HI> if then he did not in&s;titute that for <HI>all Believers</HI> capable, they have no right to any part of it, by virtue of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s In&s;titution; it can be unto them no Sacrament, for whom it was not in|&s;tituted by <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;ince, by the definition of the<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 7. c. 1.</NOTE> <HI>Trent Coun|cil,</HI> the Sacraments of the <HI>New Te&s;tament</HI> were <HI>all in&s;tituted by him;</HI> they can expect no ble&s;&s;ing from it, &s;ince that depends upon <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s Ordinance; nay they mu&s;t be e&s;teemed <HI>Sacri|legious &V;&s;urpers,</HI> as laying claim to that Sacrament which ne|ver by <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s In&s;titution did belong unto them. If <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> did In&s;titute that Sacrament for all Believers capable, that is, to be a &s;tanding Ordinance by which, as his <HI>Di&s;ciples</HI> then did, &s;o all Believers capable, &s;hould afterwards eat of what he called his Body, and drink of what he called his Blood, then did he In&s;titute it to be received of all that were fitted for, and capable to receive it, and in it &s;aid unto them, <HI>Drink ye all of this.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. This appears farther from the Rea&s;on annexed to the Receiving of the Sacrament by <HI>Chri&s;t's Apo&s;tles;</HI> for &s;ince that Rea&s;on equally concerns all <HI>Believers</HI> capable, and fitted to Re|ceive it, the In&s;titution mu&s;t concern them all. Now the rea|&s;on why <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;aid to his <HI>Apo&s;tles, Take, and eat</HI> what I have <HI>broken,</HI> is by him&s;elf declared to be this; becau&s;e it was <HI>his Body broken,</HI> or his <HI>Body given</HI> for them; take it, &s;aith <HI>Chri&s;t, this is my Body given for you;</HI> this therefore being the Rea&s;on why they were to take, and eat, and this Rea&s;on concerning all Believers capable, and fitted to receive it, as much as the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> and &s;ucceeding <HI>Prie&s;ts,</HI> the In&s;titution, or command to take and eat mu&s;t equally concern them. This Argument transferred unto the <HI>Cup</HI> runs thus: The Rea&s;on of the Par|ticipating of the <HI>Cup, viz.</HI> becau&s;e <HI>it is the Blood of the New Te&s;tament, which is &s;hed for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins,</HI> doth concern <HI>Laicks</HI> as well as <HI>Prie&s;ts,</HI> his Blood being equally &s;hed for both; therefore the Command, <HI>Drink ye all of this,</HI> to which the Rea&s;on is annexed, concerns them al&s;o. Again, another Rea&s;on why <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;aid to his <HI>Apo&s;tles, Eat this Bread, and
<PB N="82" REF="50">drink this Cup,</HI> was, that by &s;o doing they might <HI>remember his death,</HI> his Body broken, and his blood &s;hed for them, &s;aith St. <HI>Luke,</HI> and <HI>&s;hew it forth</HI> till his &s;econd coming, &s;aith St. <HI>Paul.</HI> Now this, as St. <HI>Paul</HI> clearly &s;hews in his di&s;cour&s;e to the <HI>Corinthians,</HI> and all the World believes, as well concern|eth all Believers as it doth <HI>Prie&s;ts;</HI> and therefore the drinking of the Cup, by which, as well as eating of the Bread, this Commemoration is by our <HI>Lord</HI>'s In&s;titution to be made, mu&s;t equally concern them.</P>
<P>A Second Argument to prove that <HI>Lay</HI>-men, by virtue of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s In&s;titution, have a right to, and are obliged to Re|ceive this Cup of Ble&s;&s;ing, is taken from the&s;e words of the Evangeli&s;t St. <HI>Mark,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Chap.</HI> xiv. 23.</NOTE> <HI>And taking the Cup, giving thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank of it;</HI> For here the <HI>Evange|li&s;t</HI> informs us, That <HI>All the Apo&s;tles</HI> drank of this Cup, and I pre&s;ume, they did it, becau&s;e our <HI>Saviour</HI> gave it to them for that end, for to what other end it &s;hould be given them the <HI>Roman Doctors</HI> have not yet inform'd us. Now hence it follows, that <HI>Lay</HI>-men al&s;o have a right to be partakers of the Cup; for the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> were then <HI>Lay</HI>-men; they being afterwards made <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> by our Lord's &s;aying,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Joh. xx. 22.</NOTE> after his Re&s;urrection, <HI>As my Father hath &s;ent me, &s;o &s;end I you, receive the Holy Gho&s;t.</HI> For as our <HI>Saviour</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Joh. vij. 39.</NOTE> <HI>The Holy Gho&s;t was not yet given, be|cau&s;e Je&s;us was not glorified, or ri&s;en from the dead.</HI> I know the <HI>Roman Doctors,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Syn. Trid. Se&s;&s;. 22. cap. 1.</NOTE> and <HI>J. L.</HI> from the <HI>Trent Council</HI> teach, That the <HI>Apo&s;tles were made Prie&s;ts when Chri&s;t &s;aid, Do this:</HI> and that then he gave them the <HI>Chalice,</HI> as Repre&s;entatives of the <HI>Clergy,</HI> not of the People. But,</P>
<P N="1">1. Let it be con&s;idered how unlikely it is, that <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;hould at one time in&s;titute Two Sacraments, as they e&s;teem them, <HI>viz.</HI> that of <HI>Ordination,</HI> and the <HI>Euchari&s;t,</HI> and yet &s;peak no|thing of the U&s;e or the Rea&s;on, or the Benefit or the Nece&s;|&s;ity of one of them, nor tell them that he did &s;o, nor expli|cate the My&s;tery, nor di&s;tingui&s;h the Rite, or the Words, (though the nature of the&s;e Sacraments, being &s;o extreamly different, required the&s;e things) but that he &s;hould leave all this to be &s;uppo&s;ed by the mo&s;t improbable con&s;truction in the World.</P>
<P N="2">2. If the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> were made <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> by, <HI>Hoc facite, Do this,</HI> &s;poken before the In&s;titution of the <HI>Chalice,</HI> then mu&s;t <HI>Judas</HI>
<PB N="83" REF="50">al&s;o be made a <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> by <HI>Chri&s;t;</HI> for that he al&s;o did receive the Sacrament, is extreamly evident from the&s;e words of <HI>Luke,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Luk. xxij. 20, 21.</NOTE> <HI>This Cup is the New Te&s;tament in my Blood &mdash; but be|hold the Hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the Table.</HI> And,</P>
<P N="3">3. If the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> were made <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> by our <HI>Lord</HI>'s &s;aying, <HI>Do this,</HI> then were they doubly Con&s;ecrated, and the <HI>Chara|cter</HI> of <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> was twice imprinted on them, which contra|dicts the common tenet of all <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> that <HI>the Sacrament of Orders is not to be reiterated;</HI> and the peculiar Tenet of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil. Trid. Se&s;&s;. 7. Can. 9.</NOTE> That <HI>Sacraments which impre&s;s a Character mu&s;t not be reiterated.</HI> The rea&s;on of the Con&s;equence is plain, be|cau&s;e, as the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> witne&s;&s;es, our Lord &s;aid,<NOTE PLACE="marg">1 Cor. xi. 24, 25.</NOTE> <HI>Do this,</HI> both after the giving of the Bread, and after the giving of the Cup.</P>
<P N="4">4. Had the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> been made <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> by our Lord's &s;peak|ing of the&s;e words to them, yet being not <HI>Conficients,</HI> they had no right to receive it as <HI>Prie&s;ts,</HI> more than the <HI>Laity;</HI> for the fore-mentioned <HI>Councils</HI> have determined, That <HI>Clerks being not Conficients, are by no Divine Right obliged to Receive under both Species.</HI> There being then no difference betwixt them and the <HI>Laity,</HI> in reference to this matter, &s;ince <HI>All the Apo&s;tles</HI> drank of this Cup, why &s;hould not the Laity do &s;o too?</P>
<P>A Third Argument to prove that Lay-men, by virtue of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s In&s;titution, are obliged to receive the Cup of Ble&s;&s;ing, is taken from the Recapitulation of our Lord's In&s;titution by St. <HI>Paul,</HI> who doth expre&s;ly teach us, That <HI>our Lord Je&s;us,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">1 Cor. xi. 25.</NOTE> <HI>in the &s;ame Night in which he was betrayed, took the Cup, &s;aying, This Cup is the New Te&s;tament in my Blood; this do ye, as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me.</HI> Now in the Three <HI>Evangeli&s;ts</HI> no &s;uch words are expre&s;sly to be found; nor any thing like them &s;poken at the di&s;tribution of the Cup, unle&s;s the&s;e words, <HI>Drink ye all of this, for this is my Blood of the New Te|&s;tament, that is &s;hed for many, for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins,</HI> be of like import with the words of St. <HI>Paul.</HI> Since therefore the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> doth expre&s;ly teach, That our <HI>Lord</HI> u&s;ed the&s;e words at his la&s;t Supper, and that he received them from the <HI>Lord,</HI> as words which he had &s;poken, then what remains, but they virtually are the &s;ame with tho&s;e recorded by St. <HI>Matthew;</HI> and then they mu&s;t al&s;o be a Command obliging all to drink
<PB N="84" REF="51">of this Cup, as being the Memorial of the Blood of the New Te&s;tament &s;hed for them, and therefore to be drunk by all, in the remembrance of the Blood &s;hed for them, as often as they did pre&s;ent them&s;elves to Celebrate that <HI>Holy My&s;tery.</HI> I &s;ay, obliging all that are capable, when they pre&s;ent them|&s;elves before God, to Celebrate the memory of his precious Death, and his Blood &s;hed for their Redemption, to drink of that Cup, which is the Memorial and Symbol of his Blood &s;hed for them. For &s;ure, the means which <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> appointed for &s;uch an end, ought to be u&s;ed by all who are obliged to pur&s;ue that end: Since therefore all <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> are obliged Sacramentally to remember, That <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;hed his Blood for them, and by that Blood &s;hed, confirmed the <HI>New Covenant</HI> to them; and &s;ince <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> hath appointed the drinking of this Cup and this alone, to be the memorial of his Blood &s;hed, all <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> capable of doing &s;o, mu&s;t be obliged, when they do Sacramentally Commemorate the&s;e Mercies, to drink of this Cup. And this demon&s;tratively follows from the en&s;u|ing words, <MILESTONE N="26" UNIT="Ver&s;."> <HI>Do this, as oft as you drink it, in remembrance of me;for as often as you eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, you &s;hew the Lord's death till he come;</HI> for they do manife&s;t, that as well by drinking of the Cup, as eating of the Bread the <HI>Lord</HI>'s Death is &s;hewed, and that until his &s;econd coming, both the&s;e things are to be done in order to that end: And &s;ince the&s;e words are not the words of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> but of St. <HI>Paul,</HI> who &s;peaks here of the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Corinth;</HI> the words preceeding, <HI>Do this, as oft as you &s;hall drink it, in remembrance of me,</HI> mu&s;t belong al&s;o to all the Members of that <HI>Church,</HI> becau&s;e of the connective Particle which joins the <HI>25th</HI> and <HI>26th</HI> Ver&s;es, and makes it nece&s;&s;ary that the &s;ame per&s;ons &s;hould be &s;poken to in the words. <HI>This do,</HI> &amp;c. and in the fol|lowing words, <HI>For as often as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup.</HI> And if this was the Duty of the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Co|rinth,</HI> it mu&s;t be equally the Duty of the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> there being no peculiar rea&s;on why the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Co|rinth</HI> &s;hould be obliged to drink this Cup, in order to the&s;e ends, more than all other <HI>Chri&s;tian Churches.</HI></P>
<P>And when our <HI>Lord</HI> hath taken &s;o great Care to tell us, That the Bread is <HI>his broken Body,</HI> and therefore is to be eaten in remembrance of him, <HI>i. e.</HI> of his Body broken; that the
<PB N="85" REF="51">Cup is <HI>the New-Ta&s;tament in his Blood,</HI> and therefore is to be drank in remembrance of his Blood &s;hed for us: When his <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> doth as di&s;tinctly &s;ay,<NOTE PLACE="marg">1 Cor. x. 16.</NOTE> <HI>The Bread which we break is the Communion of the Body of Chri&s;t, the Cup which we ble&s;s is the Communion of the Blood;</HI> and neither of them have hinted in the lea&s;t, that the Cup is the Communion of his Body, or the Bread of his Blood, but by a particular and &s;eparate in&s;tituti|on, di&s;tribution, and &s;ignification a&s;cribed to them, have &s;trogly in&s;inuated the contrary; for men, after all this to &s;ay one of the&s;e Species will &s;uffice, for the Bread is as well the blood &s;hed as the broken Body, and the participation of it is the Communion of the Blood of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and that by the parta|king of it, we do as well remember and &s;hew forth the &s;hedding of his Blood upon the Cro&s;s, as by the partaking of the Cup, is to my apprehen&s;ion an affront offered to our dear <HI>Lord,</HI> and to the Wi&s;dom of the <HI>Holy Gho&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>In An&s;wer to the&s;e Arguments, &s;ome of the <HI>Roman Doctors</HI> are plea&s;ed to &s;ay, that this Di&s;cour&s;e of the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> imports <HI>only a conditional Order to do this in Remembrance of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, as often as one &s;hall do it, and not an order ab&s;olutely to do it.</HI></P>
<P>To this I An&s;wer, <HI>1st.</HI> He who not only doth command us at the celebration of the Sacrament, to remember his Blood &s;hed, but al&s;o In&s;titutes a &s;ign for the memorial of it, and doth command us to u&s;e this &s;ign, becau&s;e it is appointed to be the memorial of it; commands us when we receive the Sacrament, to receive that &s;ign, for he who wills the end, mu&s;t will the means which he hath in&s;tituted for the accompli&s;hing that end; but this doth <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> for he in&s;titutes a Cup of Wine to repre|&s;ent his Blood &s;hed; he &s;aith, <HI>Drink ye all of this, for this is my Blood &s;hed,</HI> this I command you to do in remembrance of me: He therefore doth command us when we receive the Sacra|ment to receive this &s;ign, which, in his In&s;titution of this Sa|crament, he appointed as the means of this remembrance.</P>
<P N="2"><HI>2dly.</HI> He who commands us to drink this Cup, <HI>as oft as we drink it in remembrance of him,</HI> becau&s;e we do by drinking of it <HI>&s;hew forth the Lords Death till he come,</HI> commands us to do it as oft as we receive the Sacrament, &s;eeing as oft as we receive the Sacrament, we &s;hew forth the Lord's Death; but <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;aith the <HI>Apo&s;tle,</HI> did lay upon us this command for this very Rea&s;on, &s;aying, <HI>Do this, as oft as you &s;hall drink it, in no|membrance
<PB N="86" REF="52">of me, for as often as you &s;hall eat this Bread and drink this Cup, you &s;hew forth the Lord's Death till he come.</HI></P>
<P N="3"><HI>3dly.</HI> Where there is parity of Rea&s;on, there the command may very well be deemed of equal latitude and extent, for <HI>ratio legis e&s;t lex,</HI> where there is equal rea&s;on to command, there may we rea&s;onably &s;uppo&s;e the will of the <HI>Law-giver</HI> to be equal in commanding, but ther is equal rea&s;on why our <HI>Lord</HI> &s;hould ab&s;olutely command the drinking of the Cup in re|membrance of his Blood &s;hed, as why he ab&s;olutely &s;hould &s;ay, touching the eating of the Bread, <HI>Do this in remembrance of me,</HI> the one being as much the Symbol of his Blood &s;hed, as is the other of his broken Body, and the one &s;hewing forth his Death as much as doth the other; we therefore have no cau&s;e to doubt, but that he equally intended the doing both in order to this end.</P>
<P><MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="&sect;"> Second, <HI>That it doth not appear either from the words of our Saviour,</HI> Joh. vi. <HI>or from the practice of him&s;elf or his Di&s;ciples, that he left this practice indifferent,</HI> will be made evident from an impartial con&s;ideration both of our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s words and of his practice, and fir&s;t to clear up the true meaning of our <HI>Lord's</HI> Di&s;cour&s;e in the Sixth Chapter of St. <HI>John;</HI> Let it be ob&s;erved,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> That our <HI>Lord</HI>'s my&s;tical Expre&s;&s;ions of <HI>labouring for the Meat that doth not peri&s;h,</HI> of <HI>eating the true Bread from Hea|ven,</HI> are by him&s;elf plainly expounded to import only the be|lieving on him, or the embracing of him as their <HI>Prophet</HI> and their <HI>Saviour;</HI> for when he had exhorted them <HI>to labour for the meat that did not peri&s;h,</HI> he tells them, <HI>v.</HI> 29. That this was <HI>to believe on him that God had &s;ent;</HI> when he had told them, <HI>v.</HI> 35. That <HI>he was the Bread from Heaven,</HI> he immediately adds, <HI>He that cometh to me &s;hall never hunger, and he that believeth in me &s;hall never thir&s;t.</HI> Having &s;aid, that he was <HI>he Bread which cometh down from Heaven, and giveth. Life unto the World, v.</HI> 33. He confirms this Expre&s;&s;ion, <HI>v.</HI> 40. by the&s;e words, <HI>This is the Will of my Father, that every one that &s;eeth the Son, and believeth on him &s;hould have eternal Life.</HI> And again, <HI>v.</HI> 47. <HI>Verily, verily, I &s;ay unto you, he that believeth on me hath everla&s;ting Life, I am that Bread of Life.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> Ob&s;erve, that nothing was more common among the <HI>Ea&s;tern Nations,</HI> than to expre&s;s the Actions of believing,
<PB N="87" REF="52">embracing, and obeying the words of <HI>Wi&s;dom,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Vide Leight. Hor. Hebr. in Joh. p. 112, 113.</NOTE> or hearkening to her Councils and In&s;tructions, by eating and by drinking of them: Thus Wi&s;dom cryeth in the Streets, &s;aith <HI>Solomon, Come eat of my Bread, and drink of my Wine that I have mingled;</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Prov. ix. 5.</NOTE> that is, <HI>Go in the way of under&s;tanding,</HI> v. 6. <HI>Eat you that which is good, and let your Soul delight it &s;elf in Fatne&s;s;</HI> that is,<NOTE PLACE="marg">I&s;a. lv. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Incline your Ear, hear, and your Soul &s;hall live.</HI> And by the Son of <HI>Sy|rach</HI> Wi&s;dom is introduced &s;peaking thus, <HI>They that eat me &s;hall yet be hungry, and they that drink me &s;hall yet be thir&s;ty,</HI> Ecclu&s;. xxiv. 21. <HI>i. e. He that obeys me, v.</HI> 22. Hence <HI>Philo</HI> the <HI>Jew</HI> in|forms us, That, <GAP DESC="foreign">,<NOTE PLACE="marg">In Joh. vi. <HI>v.</HI> 51.</NOTE> <HI>to eat is a Symbol of Spiritual nouri&s;hment.</HI> Add to this that of Mr. <HI>Leight|foot,</HI> That <HI>the Talmudi&s;ts make frequent mention of eating the Me&s;|&s;iah,</HI> and thereby under&s;tand only their being made partakers of his Benefits: And that of <HI>Clemens</HI> of <HI>Alexandria,</HI> upon that pa&s;&s;age of St. <HI>Paul, I have fed you with Milk,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Strom. l. 5. p. 579.</NOTE> <HI>and not with &s;trong Meat,</HI> viz. <HI>Milk is the rudiments of Faith, or the Doctrines of the Catechi&s;m, the fir&s;t nouri&s;hment of the Soul, &s;trong meat, a comtemplation which makes us to di&s;cern the divine power and e&s;&s;ence,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>the&s;e,</HI> Contemplations, <HI>are the Fle&s;h and Blood of the Word;</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the meat and drink of the divine Word is the knowledge of the divine E&s;&s;ence.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> Ob&s;erve that from the&s;e <HI>Metaphors</HI> our <HI>Lord</HI> pro|ceeds to that contained in the&s;e words objected by the <HI>Roman Doctors, v.</HI> 51. <HI>The Bread which I will give is my Fle&s;h, which I will give for the Life of the World;</HI> that is, It is my Body which I will give up unto death, that by it the world may have life, which is a greater Benefit exceedingly than that which you received from that <HI>Manna</HI> which <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> gave you in the Wilderne&s;s, or from that meat with which I did &s;o lately fill your Bodies. The <HI>Jews</HI> taking the&s;e words in a gro&s;s &s;ence, as if our Lord had promi&s;ed to give his <HI>real Fle&s;h to be &s;wallowed down their Throats, and eaten by them as they had eaten Bread the day before,</HI> and as their fore-<HI>Fathers</HI> had eaten <HI>Manna</HI> in the Wil|derne&s;s, exclaimed again&s;t him, as promi&s;ing a thing ab&s;urd, in|humane and impo&s;ible, &s;aying, <HI>How can this Man give us his Fle&s;h to eat?</HI> to this our <HI>Saviour</HI> An&s;wers, <HI>v.</HI> 53. in words &s;till more expre&s;&s;ive of his violent and bloody Death for the &s;alva|tion of Mankind; <HI>viz. Except you eat my Fle&s;h, and drink my
<PB N="88" REF="53">Blood, &amp;c.</HI> Now the&s;e words are by &s;ome conceived to import thus much, <HI>&V;nle&s;s you with the Mouth of your Bodies do eat my real and corporeal Fle&s;h, and drink my proper Blood, you cannot have eternal Life.</HI></P>
<P>Having premi&s;ed the&s;e Ob&s;ervations, I &s;hall now proceed to &s;hew both from this <HI>Chapter,</HI> and from other Rea&s;ons, that our <HI>Lord</HI> &s;pake not here of <HI>oral</HI> and <HI>corporeal</HI> eating of his natu|ral Fle&s;h, and drinking of his proper Blood, but only of doing of the&s;e things <HI>&s;piritually;</HI> and that not only in the celebration of that <HI>Sacrament</HI> which by our Lord was In&s;tituted for the remembrance of his Death and Pa&s;&s;ion, but generally believ|ing that by his Death and Pa&s;&s;ion he became the <HI>Saviour</HI> of the World, and purcha&s;ed Pardon and Salvation for all that heartily believed in him, and would &s;incerely yield Obedience to his precepts. And,</P>
<P N="1">1. Again&s;t the gro&s;s, and for the &s;piritual Interpretation of the&s;e words I argue from the 51. <HI>v.</HI> thus, The Fle&s;h which Chri&s;t here promi&s;ed to <HI>give for the Life of the World,</HI> is the &s;ame with <HI>the Bread of God that cometh down from Heaven, and giveth Life unto the World, v.</HI> 33. for &s;o we learn expre&s;ly from the&s;e words; <HI>I am the living Bread which came down from Heaven, if any Man eat of this Bread he &s;hall live for ever; and the Bread which I will give is my Fle&s;h, that I will give for the Life of the World.</HI> And again, having &s;aid, <HI>He that eateth my Fle&s;h and drinketh my Blood hath eternal Life,</HI> v. 54. and <HI>he that eateth me &s;hall live by me, v.</HI> 57. he adds immediately, <HI>This is the Bread which came down from Heaven &mdash; and he that eateth of this Bread &s;hall live for ever.</HI> Now our Lord hath expre&s;ly taught us, that the eating of this Bread of Life imported only our believ|ing on him, <HI>v.</HI> 35. as hath already been made evident from our &s;econd Ob&s;ervation; therefore the eating of his Fle&s;h doth certainly import the &s;ame &s;piritual Action. Moreover we are only to eat of <HI>Christ</HI> as <HI>Fle&s;h,</HI> in that importance of the Phra&s;e in which we are to eat of Chri&s;t as <HI>Bread,</HI> for as Chri&s;t &s;aith, he will give <HI>Fle&s;h to eat,</HI> &s;o doth he &s;ay, he will give <HI>Bread to eat;</HI> as he &s;aith, <HI>He that eateth of my Fle&s;h &s;hall live for ever,</HI> &s;o he &s;aith <HI>He that eateth of this Bread &s;hall live for ever;</HI> but none can &s;ay that <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> was or could properly be Bread, or eaten by the Mouth as &s;uch, wherefore he being only figuratively and &s;piritually Bread, could only figuratively and &s;piritually
<PB N="89" REF="53">be eaten as Bread; if therefore in the &s;ame importance only we are to eat his Fle&s;h, that al&s;o is to be eaten in a &s;piritual Sence.</P>
<P N="2">2. From the&s;e words, <HI>v.</HI> 52. <HI>How can this Man give us his Fle&s;h to eat?</HI> 'tis evident the <HI>Jews</HI> conceived that our <HI>Lord</HI> promi&s;ed to give them his proper Fle&s;h to eat, and &s;wallow down their Throats, as they had done the Bread with which he fed them. And it on all hands is agreed, that they mi&s;took the &s;ence of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s words, and fan&s;ied &s;uch a meaning of them as he did not intend; but had our <HI>Lord</HI> intended the <HI>corporeal</HI> eating of his Fle&s;h and drinking of his Blood, 'tis certain that it mu&s;t be &s;wallowed down their Throats, as properly as was the Bread which they had eaten; and therefore no Man who maintain|eth this corporeal eating of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s Fle&s;h to be intended here, can, &s;uitably to his Opinion, &s;ay, That they impo&s;ed a fal&s;e &s;ence upon our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s words, &s;ince from this &s;ence it does in|evitably follow, that <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> intended that his humane Fle&s;h &s;hould properly be eaten; and their words &s;ignifie no more. Add to this one Con&s;ideration, which &s;hews what apprehen&s;i|ons the <HI>Fathers</HI> of the fir&s;t Three <HI>Centuries</HI> had of this eating of the Fle&s;h of <HI>Chri&s;t, viz.</HI> when 'twas objected to them by the <HI>Heathens</HI> that they did <HI>eat Man's Fle&s;h,</HI> they con&s;tantly in their <HI>Apologies</HI> reject the accu&s;ation as the vile&s;t calumny, and as a mo&s;t abominable thing &s;ufficient to di&s;cover that the <HI>Author</HI> of &s;uch an in&s;titution mu&s;t be &s;ome wicked <HI>Damon,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>We Chri&s;tians,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Apol. 2. p. 70. 1. 50.</NOTE> <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr, do not own the eating of humane fle&s;h,</HI> it is an infamous thing, and fal&s;ly is reported of us: This is, &s;aith<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Ad Authol. l. 3. p. 119, 126.</NOTE> <HI>Theophilus,</HI> the mo&s;t <HI>wicked</HI> and <HI>inhumane</HI> of all Crimes objected to us, <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>that we partake of humane fle&s;h,</HI> it is not po&s;|&s;ible we &s;hould be guilty of &s;o vile a thing. <HI>A|mong&s;t us there is no eating of Man's fle&s;h,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">, Contr. Graec. p. 162.</NOTE> <HI>Ta|tian,</HI> you <HI>are fal&s;e witne&s;&s;es</HI> who &s;ay this of us. <HI>No Man,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Legat. p. 38.</NOTE> <HI>Athenagoras, who is not mad,</HI> can charge us with this thing, <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>for we may not eat humane fle&s;h.</HI> It is the Calumny of the <HI>Devil,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">P. 32.</NOTE> <HI>Minutius. You may be a&s;hamed to object it to us</HI> Chri&s;tians, &s;aith<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Apol. cap. 9.</NOTE> <HI>Tertullian;</HI> whereas had they re|ceived this as an Article of <HI>Christian</HI> Faith, that they did daily eat the Fle&s;h of the Man Chri&s;t, and thought that this Di&s;cour&s;e
<PB N="90" REF="54">not only taught, but even obliged them &s;o to do, I know not with what Truth or what Sincerity they could, without all limitation or exception, not only have denied, but even de|te&s;ted the doing &s;o.</P>
<P>But that which puts it without dubt, that <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> in the <HI>Primitive Ages</HI> had no apprehen&s;ion, that <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> by this Di&s;|cour&s;e had taught them, that his proper fle&s;h and Blood was to be eaten in the Sacrament, is the memorable Hi&s;tory of <HI>Sanctus</HI> and <HI>Blandina,</HI> two <HI>Chri&s;tian Martyrs,</HI> written by <HI>Iraenene</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Lions,</HI> and pre&s;erved to us in<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">In 1 Pet. ii. 12. p. 149. g. a.</NOTE> <HI>Oecumenius</HI> thus, That <HI>the Heathens having apprehended the Servants of Chri&s;tians Catechized, and u&s;ing force with them, that from them they might learn &s;omething &s;ecret; the Servants having nothing to &s;ay that might be plea&s;ing to their Tormentors, in as much as they had heard from their Ma&s;ters, that the Holy Sacrament was the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>they thinking that it had indeed been fle&s;h and blood, told this to the Inqui&s;itors, who apprehending,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>as if the Chri&s;tians had done that very thing, gave notice of it to other Heathens, and they endeavoured by torments to force the May tyrs,</HI> Sanctus <HI>and</HI> Blandina, <HI>to confe&s;s it, to whom</HI> Blandina <HI>readily and boldly an&s;wered, &s;aying, How &s;hould they endure the&s;e things who &s;o fa&s;t as not to enjoy lawful Fle&s;h.</HI> This, I &s;ay, is a clear indication, that the <HI>Ancient Christians</HI> did not believe that in this Sacrament they did eat <HI>Christ</HI>'s proper fle&s;h and blood, or that our <HI>Lord</HI> did here require them to do &s;o; for if they had thus thought, how could <HI>Irenaeus</HI> have repre|&s;ented it as a plain mi&s;take, both in the&s;e <HI>Servants</HI> and the&s;e <HI>Heathens,</HI> to think the Sacrament was, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>really Christ's fle&s;h and blood;</HI> and that the <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> by receiving of it did really eat Fle&s;h and Blood? How could he have introduced <HI>Blandina</HI> refuting this Imagination, had it been the Sentiment of the then <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;ince by &s;o doing, &s;he mu&s;t have rejected one great Article of <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Faith? How, la&s;tly, could <HI>Oecumenius</HI> have in&s;erted the&s;e words into his Commentary, without en|deavouring to &s;weeten, and explain, and reconcile them to the Doctrine of the proper Manducation of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s Fle&s;h and Blood.</P>
<P>Again, &s;ince that this Doctrine came into the world, that is, &s;ince it was broached fir&s;t by <HI>Pa&s;cha&s;ius</HI> in the <HI>Ninth Cen|tury,</HI> the A&s;&s;ertors of it give two Rea&s;ons why, though we
<PB N="91" REF="54"><HI>corporally eat that very Fle&s;h which &s;uffered on the Cro&s;s,</HI> and drink <HI>that very Blood which was then &s;hed</HI> corporeally, yet is that Fle&s;h and Blood concealed from our outward Sen&s;es under the &s;hape of Bread and Wine. The <HI>first</HI> is this,<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">C. 13. Al. 36.</NOTE> <HI>&V;t ridiculum nullum fiat Paganis quod cruorem occi&s;i hominis bibamus, that we might not be ridiculous to the</HI> Pagans, <HI>by eating humane Fle&s;h, and drinking the Blood of a &s;lain Man; for this,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>would make our Religion execrable, and cau&s;e them to condemn the Chri&s;tians as the vilest of Men:</HI> And again, &s;hould the &s;hape of Fle&s;h ap|pear, it would be<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">C. 37.</NOTE> <HI>Perfidis execratio, execrable to the Hea|thens.</HI> 'Tis thus concealed, &s;aith<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Alger. l. 2. c. 3. f. 15. b.</NOTE> <HI>Algerus, Ne infidelibus pa|teat, &amp; eorum Bla&s;phemiis vile&s;cat, Lea&s;t it &s;hould appear to Infidels, and lie open to their Bla&s;phemies, and lea&s;t they &s;hould judge us in|humane and cruel, as being eaters and drinkers of humane Fle&s;h and Blood. Secondly,</HI> Lea&s;t <HI>Chri&s;tians perceiving things raw and bloody, &s;hould be filled with horrour,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">P. 133. b.</NOTE> <HI>Lanfrank,</HI> lea&s;t <HI>if the Faithful &s;hould perceive the Colour and the ta&s;te of Fle&s;h and Blood,</HI> humana pietas abhorreret, <HI>humane piety &s;hould abhorr the Action,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">L. 2. c. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Algerus.</HI> Should it appear thus, &s;aith<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">P. 224.</NOTE> <HI>Hugo Lingonene&s;is, Rarius in terris e&s;&s;et qui hoc non abhorreret, There would be &s;carce a Man on Earth that would not abhorr it. It would,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">P. 215. h.</NOTE> <HI>Petrus Cluniacen&s;is,</HI> Fidem laedere, vel ad &s;candalum quorum|libet po&s;&s;it corda movere, <HI>Be prejudicial to the Faith, and &s;canda|lize the Minds of all Men.</HI> The profit of the receiv|ing the Sacrament would be hindred, &s;aith<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Impediretur percepti|onis ejus commoditas pro humani corporis comedendi horrore injecto. <HI>L.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 7. <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 16.</NOTE> <HI>al|gerus, by the horror of eating humane fle&s;h,</HI> quoniam Chri&s;tum vorari dentibus fas non e&s;t, <HI>for it is not lawful to devour Christ with the Teeth.</HI> Now let us in the fear of God con&s;ider, whether that Sence of <HI>Scripture</HI> is to be received, which makes that certain|ly to be believed by the eye of Faith, which if it werre per|ceived by the Eye of Sen&s;e, would render our Religion Ridi|culous, and execrable to the <HI>Pagan</HI> World; which, did we &s;ee our &s;elves but ready to perform what actually we do, we &s;hould utterly abhorr to do, and &s;hould be horribly &s;can|dalized at our own Actions, which did Men &s;ee us do, they could not but e&s;teem us cruel and inhumane: Since that the <HI>Heathens</HI> have under&s;tood this is become an <HI>Article</HI> of <HI>Chri|stian</HI> Faith, do they not open their Mouths in <HI>Bla&s;phemies</HI> a|gain&s;t us, as freely as if they &s;aw us eat and drink <HI>Glorist</HI>'s
<PB N="92" REF="55">fle&s;h and blood corporeally? Did not<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">Apud Diony&s;. Carth. in Sent. 4. Di&s;t. 10. Art. 1.</NOTE> <HI>A|verroes</HI> declare in the <HI>12th.</HI> Century, <HI>He found no Sect more fooli&s;h than the Chri&s;tians, becau&s;e they ate the very God they wor&s;hipped?</HI> Doth not<NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">Apud Hotting. Hi&s;t. Eccl. Saec. 16. Part. 2. p. 160.</NOTE> <HI>Ach|med Ben Edris</HI> &s;ay, <HI>We u&s;e Christ wor&s;e than did the Jews, becau&s;e it is more Savage to eat his fle&s;h and drink his blood, than only to procure his Death?</HI> Do not the<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Mon&s;ieur la Boulay Voyag. part. 1. c. 10. p. 21.</NOTE> <HI>Mahometans</HI> point at us, &s;aying, There goes a <HI>God-eater?</HI> And doth not then this their Doctrine render their Religion as plainly Execrable and Ridiculous to the <HI>Heathen</HI> world, as if they &s;aw them eat of humane fle&s;h and drink of humane blood?</P>
<P N="3">3. The 53. <HI>v.</HI> affords two further Arguments in Refutation of the <HI>corporeal</HI> &s;ence of the&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions, 1. That it follows plainly from it, that the <HI>Thief</HI> upon the <HI>Cro&s;s,</HI> and all the pious and believing <HI>Jews</HI> who heard the&s;e words, and died before our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s Pa&s;&s;ion,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Joh. vi. 4.</NOTE> mu&s;t of nece&s;&s;ity be damned, for our <HI>Lord</HI> &s;aith with an <HI>a&s;&s;everation</HI> to them, <HI>Except you eat the fle&s;h, &amp;c.</HI> now this was &s;aid at lea&s;t above a Year before our <HI>Sa|viour</HI>'s Pa&s;&s;ion, and &s;o before the In&s;titution of that Sacrament, in which alone his fle&s;h could be corporally eaten; and there|fore had it been intended of <HI>corporeal</HI> and &s;acramental eating, it was impo&s;&s;ible that any per&s;on of tho&s;e Hearers could be &s;aved, who died in the en&s;uing year. 2. The&s;e words inter|preted in the corporeal Sence do plainly and inevitably inferr, That they who do deprive the <HI>Laity</HI> all their whole lives of drinking of this blood, expo&s;e them to inevitable damnation, <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> having &s;aid, <HI>Except you drink the Blood of the Son of Man, you have no Life in you;</HI> for though eating and drinking being taken figuratively, do &s;ignifie the &s;ame thing, <HI>viz.</HI> believing in a crucified <HI>Saviour;</HI> yet being taken properly, they cannot be reputed the &s;ame thing: For albeit they who receive the body only, may be well &s;aid to eat the fle&s;h of <HI>Christ,</HI> becau&s;e they take &s;omething by way of Meat into their Mouths, yet cannot they be &s;aid to drink his blood, if they take nothing into their Mouths by way of Drink: Since therefore eating and drinking are two di&s;tinct Actions, &s;o that he cannot properly be &s;aid to drink, who only eats, &s;ince the privation of Life is here connected with not drinking of <HI>Christ</HI>'s Blood, as much as with not eating of his fle&s;h, according to the corporeal Inter|pretation
<PB N="93" REF="55">pretation of the&s;e words, he mu&s;t certainly be deprived of the Life here promi&s;ed, who doth not receive the Cup; becau&s;e he is deprived of drinking of the Blood of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="4">4. From <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 54, 56. the Argument runs thus, who&s;eover eateth the Fle&s;h, and drinketh the Blood of Chri&s;t in the &s;ence here &s;poken of, <HI>abideth in Chri&s;t, and Chri&s;t in him;</HI> and there|fore is a true and living Member of Chri&s;t's Body, and he <HI>&s;hall have Eternal Life,</HI> and be partaker of an happy <HI>Re&s;urrecti|on,</HI> and &s;o no per&s;on can be either wicked here, or deprived of Everla&s;ting Life hereafter, who in this &s;ence here mention|ed eats of the Fle&s;h, and drinketh of the Blood of Chri&s;t. Now this is very true of eating Spiritually, and by Faith, as it imports believing on <HI>Chri&s;t;</HI> for <MILESTONE N="40" UNIT="Ver&s;."> <HI>This,</HI> &s;aith Chri&s;t, <HI>is the Will of him that &s;ent me, That every one who believeth on the Son may hve Everela&s;ting Life; and I will rai&s;e him up at the lat Day:</HI> but then of Sacramental eating of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI>'s Fle&s;h, it is as fal&s;e; for this was eaten by a <HI>Judas,</HI> and continually is eaten by Mil|lions who are both wicked here, and will be damned hereaf|ter; this therefore cannot be the import of our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s words: and here ob&s;erve, 1. That our Lord &s;peaks in the general, <HI>who&s;oever eats.</HI> 2. That he &s;peaks thus, not by way of Promi&s;e, which might be conditional, but by way of plain A&s;|&s;ertion, and declaration of a thing mo&s;t certain. And, 3. That the Text &s;hews the eating mentioned here, can never be per|formed unprofitably, no not without the greate&s;t benefit; for 'tis oppo&s;ed to the eating of <HI>Manna</HI> in the Wilderne&s;s, on this account, that whereas that gave only Temporal Life, this would a&s;&s;uredly conferr Eternal; whereas that was not able to pre&s;erve from Temporal, this would pre&s;erve from Death Eternal.</P>
<P N="5">5. Moreover, <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 61, &amp; 62. our Lord &s;peaks thus, <HI>Doth this offend you, what if you &s;hall &s;ee the Son of Man a&s;cend up where he was before: i. e.</HI> are you offended that I thus &s;peak of giving you my Fleh to eat; do you look on this Expre&s;&s;ion <HI>now</HI> as &s;o ab&s;urd and unintelligible, what then will you think of it, when this Body &s;hall be removed hence to Heaven? <HI>i. e.</HI> HOw will you then be &s;candalized, and think it &s;till more difficult, and more impo&s;&s;ible to apprehend how you &s;hould eat my Fle&s;h and drink my Blood, provided you go on to un|der&s;tand my words in the gro&s;s carnal Sence. For <HI>Athana|&s;ius</HI><NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">In illud E|vang. Quicun|que dixerit, P. 979.</NOTE>
<PB N="94" REF="56">&s;aith well, That Chri&s;t here mentioneth his a&s;cent into Heaven, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>That he might divert them from the corporeal &s;ence;</HI> and therefore argued thus, <Q REND="margQuotes">"Seing it will be hen impo&s;&s;ible that you &s;hould corporally eat my Fle&s;h, when it is &s;o far removed from you; by this you may di&s;cern,</Q> I &s;peak of a &s;piritul eating of it. Whence by the way we learn, That <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> thought his A&s;cen|tion into Heaven &s;ufficient demon&s;tration to the <HI>Jews,</HI> his Fle&s;h could not be eaten upon Earth; and why it &s;hould not be &s;o to the <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> I am yet to learn.</P>
<P N="6">6. The 63. <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> affords us a more plain and certain Expo|&s;ition of our <HI>Saviour</HI>'s meaning in the precedent words; for thus they run, <HI>It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the Fle&s;h profiteth nothing;</HI><NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Eu|&s;eb. de eccle&s;iaftic. Theolog. l. 3. c. 12.</NOTE> <HI>The words that I &s;peak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life:</HI> For the import of the&s;e words is to this effect; unto that eating and drinking, of which in this Di&s;|cour&s;e I have &s;till &s;poken, I have annexed the Promi&s;e of Life, &s;aying expre&s;sly, <HI>He that eateth me &s;hall live by me;</HI> he &s;hall by me be quickned: Now all Men know, That 'tis the Spirit in them that gives them Life, and when that Spirit is taken from them, the Fle&s;h cannot live, or mini&s;ter to the continuance of their Life; by which &s;imilitude you may plainly learn, I &s;pake not of my real Fle&s;h, when I told you, that by eating it, you &s;hould have Life, but of my Word and Do|ctrine, that of my <HI>Pa&s;&s;ion</HI> more e&s;pecially; for my words which I &s;peak to you, they are Spirit, and they are Life; <HI>i.e.</HI> if you will hearken to them, they will make you live Spiritually here, Eternally hereafter, and by &s;o doing will be Life: yea, where they are embraced, they are that to the new Man, which is the Spirit to the Fle&s;h; they give him Life, Activity, and Moti|on, and therefore they are Spirit. Had our Lord &s;aid, it is the Spirit that quickeneth, the Fle&s;h profiteth nothing, <HI>therefore the Fle&s;h which I will give, &s;hall be &s;till joined to my Divinity, and by the virtue of it give you Life,</HI> he had &s;aid &s;ome|what
<PB N="95" REF="56">like the &s;ence which others put upon this Text; but &s;ay|ing only, <HI>The words which I &s;peak unto you, they are Spirit,</HI> we cannot doubt but he &s;peaks of eating and of drinking of his words &s;piritually.</P>
<P N="7">7. Our <HI>Saviour</HI> having &s;aid unto the Twelve, <HI>Will ye al&s;o go away?</HI> St. <HI>Peter</HI> An&s;wers, <HI>To whom &s;hould we go? Thou hast the words of eternal Life, and we believe thou art that Christ the Son of the living God.</HI> Where, (1.) ob&s;erve, that <HI>Peter</HI> here doth as it were repeat the words of <HI>Chri&s;t; My words are Life,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Chri&s;t; Thou hast the words of Life eternal,</HI> &s;aith St. <HI>Peter;</HI> whereas, if he had under&s;tood our <HI>Saviour,</HI> to have &s;poken here of <HI>Oral</HI> Manducation, his <HI>An&s;wer</HI> would in all probability have been to this effect, <HI>What&s;oever appearance there may be of inhuma|nity, ab&s;urdne&s;s, and impo&s;&s;ibility in eating of thy natural Fle&s;h, and drinking of thy Blood; yet we believe it, becau&s;e thou hast &s;aid it, who art Truth it &s;elf, and who art able to make good thy words;</HI> we therefore hearing nothing of this tendance from him, we may conclude, that he knew nothing of this import of them. And, 2. ob&s;erve, that he thought it &s;ufficient to &s;ay, <HI>We belive thou art the Christ,</HI> which if our Lord &s;pake here of <HI>Oral</HI> Man|ducation, was nothing to the purpo&s;e, but if he only &s;pake of &s;piritual eating of him, was the very thing which was de|&s;igned by our <HI>Lord</HI> in this Di&s;cour&s;e, and which he &s;pake of in tho&s;e words, which &s;o much offended others. We therefore conclude with <HI>Clemens</HI> of <HI>Alexandria,</HI> That<NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">, &amp;c. Paedag. lib. 1. cap. 6. pag. 100. <GAP DESC="foreign">, &amp;c. ibid. pag. 104, 105.</NOTE> <HI>when our Lord &s;aid, Eat my Fle&s;h and drink my Blood, he allegorically meant the drinking of Faith, and of the Promi&s;es, and that our Lord is by way of Allegory to tho&s;e that believe in him, Meat, Fle&s;h, and Nouri&s;hment, and Bread, and Blood.</HI> With <HI>Tertullian,</HI> That<NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">De Re&s;ur. Carn. cap. 36, 37.</NOTE> <HI>our Lord all along urged his intent by Allegory, calling his word fle&s;h, as being to be hungred after, that we might have Life;</HI> au|ditu devorandus, ruminandus intellectu, &amp; fide digerendus, <HI>to be devoured by the Ear, ruminated upon by the mind, and by Faith dige&s;ted.</HI> With <HI>Origen,</HI> That<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Bibere au|tem dicimur &s;anguinem ejus veruse&s;t ci|tanquam mundo 73.</NOTE> <HI>we are &s;aid to drink his Blood, when we receive his words, in which Life con&s;i&s;ts,</HI>
<PB N="96" REF="57">that <HI>his fle&s;h is meat indeed, and his blood drink indeed, becau&s;e he feedeth all Mankind with the fle&s;h and blood of his word, as with pure meat and drink.</HI> With<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Ubi &s;upra.</NOTE> <HI>Eu&s;ebius,</HI> That <HI>his Words andDoctrines are Fle&s;h and Blood.</HI> With <HI>Arhana|&s;ius,</HI> That<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Tom. 1. pag. 979.</NOTE> <HI>the words which Chri&s;t &s;pake were not carnal but &s;piritual; for how many could his Body have &s;ufficed for Meat, that it &s;hould be made the Food of the whole World.</HI> With St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Tract. 25. in. Johan. Tom. 9. p. 218. &amp; Tract. 26. p. 223</NOTE> <HI>&V;t quid paras dentes, &amp; ventrem, crede &amp; manduca&s;ti, credere enim in eum, hoc e&s;t manducare panem vivum, why provide&s;t thou Teeth and a Belly, believe, and thou ha&s;t eaten, for to believe in him, is to eat the living Bread.</HI> And la&s;tly with<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Licet &amp; in Myfterio po&s;&s;it intelligi, tamen verius Corpus Chrifti, &amp; &s;anguis ejus &s;ermo &s;cripturarum e&s;t. <HI>In P&s;al.</HI> 147. <HI>fol.</HI> 94. a.</NOTE> St. <HI>Jerom, In the true&s;t Sence, the Body and the Blood of Christ is the Word and Doctrine of the Scripture:</HI> Caro Chri|&s;ti &amp; &s;anguis ejus in auribus no&s;tris infunditur, <HI>the fle&s;h and blood of Christ is poured into our Ears.</HI> We &s;ay in the Language of <HI>Origen,</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Hom. 7. in Levit. <HI>ibid.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Si filii e&s;tis Eccle&s;iae, &mdash; agno&s;cite quia figurae &s;unt, &mdash; &s;i enim &s;edundum literam &s;equaris; If you are Sons of the Church, own the&s;e things to be Figures, for if you follow the Letter, this very &s;aying, Except you eat the Fle&s;h, is a killing Letter:</HI> In the words of<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Ubi &s;upra.</NOTE> <HI>Eu&s;ebius</HI> pronounced in the name of <HI>Christ, do not think that I &s;peak of that Fle&s;h with which I am compa&s;&s;ed, as if you must eat of that, neither imagine that I command you to drink of my &s;en&s;ible and bodily Blood, but under&s;tand well, that the words that I have spoken to you, they are Spirit and Life;</HI> for, as St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> &s;aith, touching the Expo&s;ition of Scripture Phra&s;es,<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">De Do|ctrin. Chrifti|ana li. 3. cap. 16.</NOTE> <HI>If the &s;aying be preceptive, either forbiding a wicked Action, or command|ing that which is good, it is no figurative Speech, but if it &s;eems to command any wickedne&s;s, or to forbid what is profitable and good, it is figurative. This &s;aying, Except you eat,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>&s;eems to command a wicked thing, it is therefore a figure, enjoining us to communicate in the Pa&s;&s;ion of our Lord, and &s;weetly and profitably to remember that his Fle&s;h was wounded and Crucified for us.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2.<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 4. Luc. xxiv. 30.</NOTE> I &s;hould proeed Secondly to &s;hew, That it doth not ap|pear from the practice of <HI>Christ</HI> him&s;elf in breaking Bread, and giving it unto Two <HI>Di&s;ciples</HI> at <HI>Emaus;</HI> nor from the pra|ctice of this <HI>Di&s;ciples,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Acts ij. 42.</NOTE> who are &s;aid to have <HI>continued in breaking
<PB N="97" REF="57">of Bread,</HI> and who were <HI>gathered together to break Bread;</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Acts xx. 7.</NOTE> that both our <HI>Lord</HI> and his <HI>Di&s;ciples</HI> communicated in one ikind only: But the&s;e Preten&s;ions have been &s;o fully an&s;wered by a late excellent Di&s;cour&s;e of <HI>Communion in one kind,</HI> in An&s;wer to the <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> of <HI>Meaux</HI> from Pag. 22 to 28, that it is &s;uper|fluous further to in&s;i&s;t upon them, e&s;pecially &s;eeing the Author of the<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">Li 6. pag. 486.</NOTE> <HI>Hi&s;tory</HI> of the <HI>Trent Council</HI> hath informed us, that 'twas the Judgment of &s;ome of the <HI>Fathers</HI> there, That <HI>all the&s;e places must be laid a&s;ide as impertinent to this matter, or in&s;ufficient to prove that for which they are produced, becau&s;e had they concern|ed the Eucharist, they must have been In&s;tances, not only of taking, but al&s;o of con&s;ecrating the Holy Sacrament in one kind, and &s;o by them it would be concluded that it was not sacrilege to con&s;ecrate one kind without the other;</HI> which, &s;ay they, <HI>is contrary to all the Doctors, and the meaning of the Church, and overthroweth the di&s;tinction of the Eucharist, as it is a Sacrifice, and as it is a Sacrament.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. Waving this therefore, I proceed Thirdly to &s;hew,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 5.</NOTE> that <HI>it was the Cu&s;tom of the Church to give the Sacrament to the Sick, and to Infants capable of receiving of it, in both kinds.</HI> And,</P>
<P N="1">1. Whereas <HI>J.L.</HI> doth with true <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> confidence affirm, <HI>That all ancient Writers do attest, that it was the cu&s;tom to give this Sacrament under one kind to the Sick;</HI> the contrary is extream|ly evident, not only by the in&s;tances collected by the learned<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">De Cultu Lat. l. 5. c. 11. p. 641, 642.</NOTE> <HI>Dally,</HI> of Sick Per&s;ons who communicated in both kinds from the 4th. to the 10th. Century, but al&s;o from the <HI>Canons</HI> of the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t;</HI> for in the third Century St. <HI>Cyprian,</HI> and the <HI>Presbyters</HI> of <HI>Rome</HI> inform us, That <HI>they had agreed that</HI><NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Si urgere exitus cepe|rit. <HI>Ep.</HI> 18. Si premi infir|mitate aliqua &amp; periculo coe|perint. <HI>Ep.</HI> 19. si de Saeculo excederint. <HI>Ep.</HI> 20. item <HI>Ep.</HI> 30, 31.</NOTE> <HI>if the lap&s;ed Penitents were indangered by &s;ickne&s;s,</HI> and they were nigh to Death's door, <HI>they &s;hould be admitted to the peace of the Church,</HI> and that <HI>they &s;hould be relieved in the thing which they de&s;ired.</HI> How was it that they did relieve the infirm when death approached? even the &s;ame way that they did the &s;trong,<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Ep. 57.</NOTE> <HI>Protectione &s;anguinis, &amp; corporis Chri&s;ti, With the protection of the Body and the Blood of Christ,</HI> faith <HI>Cyprian.</HI> What was it that they de&s;ired, and &s;ome of them invaded? St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> informs us that it was<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">Ep. 31.</NOTE> <HI>Sanctum Domini, The Holy of the Lord;</HI> it was the <HI>Eucha
<PB N="98" REF="58">rist,</HI> that is, <HI>the Body and the Blood of Christ;</HI> which St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> &s;hews plainly, by &s;aying it ought not to be given to them till they had done penance, confe&s;&s;ed and received impo|&s;ition of hands, becau&s;e it is written,<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Ep. 16.</NOTE> <HI>He that eats the Bread or drinks the Cup of the Lord unworthily, &s;hall be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord.</HI> What was it that they en|deavoured to extort? St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> &s;aith, It was<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Vis infertur corpori e|jus &amp; &s;anguini, <HI>De Lap&s;is, p.</HI> 128.</NOTE> <HI>the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t,</HI> being angry with, and even threatning the <HI>Priests,</HI> that <HI>they did not</HI><NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Quod non &s;tatim Do|mini corpus inquinatis mani|bus accipiat, aut ore polluto Domini &s;anguinem bibat.</NOTE> <HI>pre&s;ently receive the Body of Christ into their defiled Hands, or drink the Blood of the Lord with their polluted Mouth.</HI> What was it that <HI>Tro|phimus</HI> a lap&s;ed <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> was admitted to? St. <HI>Cy|prian</HI> &s;aith, It was<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg">Ut Laicus communicet, <HI>Ep.</HI> 55.</NOTE> <HI>Lay-Communion.</HI> Now what that was,<NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg">Haec erat tunc tempo|ris cummunio Laica cujus adeo participes Euchariftica Sacramenta, Speciem in|quam utramque panis &amp; vini &s;umebant.</NOTE> <HI>Rigaltius</HI> upon the place in|forms us, &s;aying, That it was <HI>the participation of both Species, but as a Lay-man, not in the Order of Prie&s;ts,</HI> to which having once lap&s;ed, he was not by the Di&s;cipline of tho&s;e Times to be again ad|mitted, and this was the Law e&s;tabli&s;hed by the <HI>Councils</HI> of tho&s;e Times in <HI>Rome, Africa,</HI> and many other places, touching the receiving of Penitents. This, &s;aith<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Hoc e&s;t, apud Cypri|anum lap&s;is pacem dari, Hoc e&s;t, ad communionem corpo|ris &amp; &s;anguinis Domini ad|mitti. <HI>Not in Can.</HI> 11. <HI>Con|cil. Tolet. undecimi.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Gar&s;ias Loai&s;a</HI> is that which <HI>Cyprian</HI> &s;tiles, <HI>af|fording them the peace of the Church, even the giving them admi&s;&s;ion to the Body and the</HI> Blood <HI>of Christ.</HI> According to this Law which generally obtained, <HI>Diony&s;ius</HI> of <HI>Alexandria</HI> le&s;t it in command to his <HI>Pre&s;hyter,</HI> that <HI>if any of the Penitents who were about to depart this Life, &s;hould ask is, and chiefly, if they had before been Supplicatns for it,</HI><NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">Hi&s;t. Eccl. l. 6. cap. 44. Vide Not. in locum.</NOTE> <HI>they &s;hould participate of the Divine Gifes, and &s;o be &s;ent out of the World.</HI> This is that<NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg">O <GAP DESC="foreign">. Can. 13.</NOTE> <HI>old Canonical</HI> Law, confirmed by the fir&s;t <HI>Nicene Council,</HI> that if any one (who had not fini&s;hed his time of Penance) was about to die, he &s;houldnot be deprived, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>of his la&s;t and most nece&s;&s;ary Viati|cum;</HI> that is, &s;ay <HI>Zonaras</HI> and <HI>Balfanon,</HI> he &s;hould not be de|prived, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>of the participation of the con&s;ecrated</HI> Gifts: <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>of the par|ticipation of the Divine</HI> My&s;teries, &s;aith<NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">Con. Oxon. Tom 2. p. 180.</NOTE> <HI>Matthew Bla&s;tares.</HI>
<PB N="99" REF="58">This is that Law of the <HI>Fathers</HI> of which<NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. Ca|non. p. 121.</NOTE> <HI>Gregorius Ny&s;&s;en</HI> &s;peaks, when he &s;aith, That <HI>the Philanthropy of the Fathers took care, that if any departed this Life, having not fini&s;hed his Pe|nance, he &s;hould, <GAP DESC="foreign">, participate of the con|&s;ecrated</HI> Gifts, <HI>that he might not be &s;ent out of the World without his Viaticum.</HI></P>
<P>The &s;ame we learn from the 6th Canon of the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Ancyra,</HI> which commands, If the&s;e Penitents be in danger of Death, they &s;hall then be permitted, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to Come to full Communion;</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>to the Com|munion of the</HI> Holy Gift, &s;aith <HI>Zonaras:</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>To the participation of the Divine Sacraments,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Bal&s;amon.</HI> From the 73 <HI>Canon</HI> of<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">.</NOTE> St. <HI>Ba&s;il,</HI> which Decrees, That <HI>he who denies Chri&s;t</HI> (in times of Peace) <HI>&s;hall be a Penitent all his Life, and only be admitted to the participation of the</HI> Sacra|ments <HI>at his Death;</HI> and from the Second <HI>Canon</HI> of <HI>Gregorius Ny&s;&s;en,</HI> which Decrees in like manner, That &s;uch a one &s;hall be, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>deprived of the My&s;tical</HI> Sacraments <HI>till he comes to die, and only then partake of them.</HI></P>
<P>Now albeit tho&s;e Canons &s;peak chiefly of &s;uch per&s;ons as were in a &s;tate of <HI>Penitence,</HI> yet &s;ince, as<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Not. in Can. 11. Con. Tolet undec.</NOTE> <HI>Garfia Loai&s;a</HI> notes, it was looked upon by the <HI>Ancients</HI> as <HI>an Argument of eternal Life, and an heavenly Gift granted to tho&s;e who were going to their eternal Re&s;t, to be worthily refre&s;hed, pabulo</HI> Corporis &amp; Sanguinis Domini, <HI>with the Food of</HI> the Body and the Blood of our Lord, <HI>which therefore was fitly called their Viaticum.</HI> And &s;ince it cannot be imagined, that the <HI>Faithful</HI> &s;hould at the clo&s;e of their Life be excluded from what was granted to the <HI>Penitents,</HI> the&s;e <HI>Canons</HI> mu&s;t convince us, that it was a &s;tanding and uni|ver&s;al Cu&s;tom of the whole <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> confirmed as &s;uch by the fir&s;t <HI>Nicene Council,</HI> to give the Sacrament <HI>in both kinds</HI> to dying Per&s;ons. And though we cannot doubt that a Cu&s;tom e&s;tabli&s;hed by &s;o many <HI>Canons,</HI> continued to be ob&s;erved in the <HI>Church,</HI> had we no other Evidence of its continuance to future Ages, yet in this ca&s;e we find great evidence of the con|tinuance of this Cu&s;tom for a Thou&s;and Years. For the <HI>11th. Council</HI> of <HI>Toledo</HI> &s;aith, That<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Solet hu|maze naturze infirmitas, in ip&s;o mortis exitu praegravata, tanto &s;iccitatis pondere deprimi, ut nullis ciborum illationibus refici, &s;ed vix tandem illati delectetur poculi gratia &s;uftentari, quod etiam in multorum exitu vidimus, qui optatum &s;uis votis S. Communionis expetentes Viaticum, collatam &s;ibi a Sacerdote Euchari&s;tiam rejecerunt, non quod infidelitate hoc agerent, &s;ed quod, praeter Dominici Calicis hau&s;tum, traditam &s;ibi non po&s;&s;unt Eucha|ri&s;tiam deglutire.&mdash; Quicunque ergo fidelis inevitabili qualibet infirmitate coactus, Euchari&s;tiam perceptam rejecerit, in nullo Eccle&s;iae damnationi &s;ubjaceat. <HI>Concil. Tom.</HI> 6. <HI>pag.</HI> 552.</NOTE> <HI>the infirmity of humane nature
<PB N="100" REF="59">was often at the time of Death depre&s;&s;ed with &s;uch a weight of drought that they could &s;carce receive the Cup, that they had &s;een this in the exit of many, who de&s;ired the wi&s;hed for Viaticum of the Holy Com|munion, have ca&s;t out of their Mouths the Euchari&s;t given to them by the Prie&s;t, not out of infidelity, but becau&s;e they could &s;wallow nothing be&s;ides a draught of the &s;acred Cup.</HI> Whence they De|cree. That <HI>who&s;oever of the Faithful, by an inevitable infirmity being compelled to do it, ca&s;ts out of his Mouth the &s;acred Eucha|ri&s;t, &s;hall be &s;ubject to no penalty for &s;o doing.</HI> Whence we learn, <HI>1&s;t.</HI> That dying Per&s;ons then de&s;ired this Viaticum inboth kinds. <HI>&s;dly.</HI> That the <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> accordingly did attempt to give it them in both kinds. <HI>3dly.</HI> That it was culpable then not to receive both, except in ca&s;es of nece&s;&s;ity unavoidable.</P>
<P N="3">3. This will be farther evident from the very Forms of Communicating the Sick, u&s;ed in the <HI>Ancient Liturgies</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> and from the <HI>Canons</HI> which concern this Affair. For, after the <HI>&V;nction</HI> of the infirm Per&s;on, it was the Cu&s;tom to give him the Communion, and that he received in both kinds, is evident from the words of the <HI>Prie&s;t,</HI> who mi|ni&s;tred the <HI>Sacrament; viz.</HI><NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Corpus &amp; &s;anguis Do|mini no&s;tri Je&s;u Chri&s;ti cu&s;to|diat animam tuam in vitam zeternam. <HI>Amen.</HI></NOTE> <HI>The Body and</HI> Blood <HI>of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t pre&s;erve thy Soul to Life eternal:</HI> And from the following Prayer, viz.<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Domine Sancte Pater Omnipotens aeterne Deus, te fideliter deprecamur ut acci|pienti huic fratri no&s;tro fa|mulo tuo Sacro-&s;anctum Cor|pus &amp; &s;anguinem Je&s;u Chri&s;ti filii tui Domini noftri tum Corporis &amp; animae &s;it &s;alus. <HI>Ex Theodori Poeniten. p.</HI> 326.</NOTE> <HI>Father omnipotent, eternal God, we faith|fully pray thee that the Holy Body and</HI> Blood <HI>of our Lord received by our Brother, thy Servant, may tend to the Salvation of his Body and Soul.</HI><NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Apud Larroq. Hi&s;t. Euch. p. 135, 136.</NOTE> <HI>Hugh Menard</HI> tells us from a Manu&s;cript of St. <HI>Remy</HI> of <HI>Rheims,</HI> That <HI>when the sacrament was mini&s;tred to &s;uch as were not extream ill, it was &s;aid unto them &s;eparately, the Body of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t keep you to life everla&s;ting, the Blood of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t ran&s;om you to Life everla&s;ting,</HI> which words make a &s;eparate and di&s;tinct reception. But as for tho&s;e who were at the point of Death, the&s;e two Expre&s;&s;ions were joined toge|ther,
<PB N="101" REF="59"><HI>The Body and Blood of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t pre&s;erve thy Soul unto everla&s;ting Life,</HI> becau&s;e there was given to the Sick Per&s;on in a Spoon the Body of our Lord &s;teeped in the Holy Blood. The rea&s;on of this &s;teeping we learn from the<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Quae &s;acra oblatio in|tincta debet e&s;&s;e in &s;anguine Chri&s;ti, ut veraciter Presby|ter po&s;&s;it dicere infirmo, cor|pus &amp; &s;anguis Domini profi|ciat tibi in vitam aeternam. <HI>De Di&s;cip. Eccle&s;. l.</HI> 1. <HI>can.</HI> 70.</NOTE> <HI>Canon</HI> of the <HI>Council</HI> of <HI>Tours,</HI> cited by <HI>Regino,</HI> That <HI>every Prie&s;t &s;hall have his</HI> Pyx <HI>or Ve&s;&s;el worthy of &s;o great a Sacrament, where the Body of our Lord &s;hall be carefully re&s;erved for the Viaticum of the Sick, and that this &s;acred Oblation</HI> ought to be &s;teeped in the Blood of Chri&s;t, <HI>that the Prie&s;t may truly &s;ay to the Infirm,</HI> The Body and the Blood <HI>of our Lord profit thee to Life eternal, and for the Remi&s;|&s;ion of Sins.</HI></P>
<P>Now this practice, and the rea&s;on of the practice here a&s;|&s;igned and approved of, do expre&s;ly &s;hew their Faith was this, That the <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> could not name them both without a Lye, unle&s;s he gave both; and that they who enjoined that what <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> had in&s;tituted to be received &s;eparately, &s;hould rather be received together, than that either Species &s;hould not be received at all, did think both Species nece&s;&s;ary to a full and entire Communion, as it hath been well noted by <HI>Ca&s;&s;ander.</HI> For to what purpo&s;e &s;hould hey &s;o carefully require this intin|ction, if they had then believed that there was nothing wanting to the Grace, or the integrity of the Communion, when they received under one Species alone?</P>
<P>And though this be abundantly &s;ufficient to &s;hew what was the practice of the Church till the <HI>12th Century,</HI> yet it is ea&s;ie to produce farther evidence of this matter. A <HI>Synod</HI> held in the <HI>Region</HI> of <HI>Ticinum,</HI> and therefore &s;tiled <HI>Synodus Regio Ticinen&s;is,</HI> thus Decrees, That<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">Si is qui infirmatur pub|licae poenitentiae mancipatus e&s;t, non pote&s;t hujus myfterii con&s;equi medicinam, ni&s;i pri|us reconciliatione percepta communionem corporis &amp; <HI>&s;anguinis.</HI> Chri&s;ti meruerit. <HI>Concil. Tom.</HI> 8. <HI>p.</HI> 64.</NOTE> <HI>if who is infirm is in a &s;tate of Penance, he cannot have the benefit of this My&s;tery,</HI> viz. of Sacred Unction, <HI>unle&s;s being fir&s;t reconciled, he be worthy of the Com|munion of</HI> the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t. And mong&s;t the things which <HI>vi&s;ibly</HI> and <HI>whole|&s;omly</HI> are done in the <HI>Church,</HI><NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg">In perceptione corporis &amp; &s;anguinis ejus &mdash; infirmis Viaticum dari. <HI>L.</HI> 1. <HI>de Sacr. Euch. cap.</HI> 7. <HI>fol.</HI> 18. b.</NOTE> <HI>Algerus</HI> men|tioneth <HI>the giving the Body and Blood of our Lord for the Viaticum of the Sick,</HI> In the 13th Century<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg">L. 3. contr. Albing. cap. 7.</NOTE> <HI>Lucas Pi&s;hop</HI> of <HI>Tuy</HI> informs us of an <HI>Heretick,</HI> who being Sick was admoni&s;hed by his
<PB N="102" REF="60">Ho&s;t <HI>to &s;end for a Prie&s;t, and di&s;cour&s;e with him as a Penitent, that he might receive from him,</HI> Sancti&s;&s;imum Sacramentum cor|poris &amp; fanguinis Domini, <HI>the mo&s;t holy Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord.</HI> Now all the&s;e In&s;tances do plainly &s;hew, that it was far from being a received and <HI>authorized Cu&s;tom</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> to Communicate the Sick under the Species of Bread alone, or to give nothing to them, but one Species only.</P>
<P>On the contrary, it is extreamly evident from all the <HI>Canons</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> produced, touching the ca&s;e of <HI>Penitents</HI> and others, that it was a thing e&s;tabli&s;hed by the highe&s;t <HI>Authority</HI> of the <HI>whole Church</HI> of <HI>Christ,</HI> that both the holy <HI>My&s;teries</HI> &s;hould be exhibited to the infirm and dying Per&s;on. And &s;eeing the <HI>Ancients</HI> looked upon it as &s;o great a benefit to dying Per&s;ons, to be refre&s;hed with the food of the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t, &s;ince they took &s;o much care to give the Bread &s;teeped in the con&s;ecrated Wine to them, who, through in|firmity of Body, could not &s;allow it down dry, and to mini|&s;ter each Species apart to them who were not extream ill; &s;ince, as<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">De Di&s;cipl. eccle&s;. l. 1. c. 195.</NOTE> <HI>Regino</HI> doth inform us, they determined, that great care was to be taken, lea&s;t the doing this being de|ferr'd too long, it &s;hould prove to the de&s;truction of the Soul, our <HI>Lord</HI> having &s;aid, unle&s;s you eat the Fle&s;h of the Son of Man and drink his Blood, you &s;hall have no life in you. I &s;ay, from all the&s;e things it is extreamly evident, that it was a re|ceied, and in &s;ubjects capable, was deemed a nece&s;&s;ary thing to communicate the infirm and dying per&s;on under both Species of Bread and Wine.</P>
<P>Moreover,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect; 6.</NOTE> that Children al&s;o, if capable of doing &s;o, re|ceived in both kinds, will be evident again&s;t the precarious A&s;|&s;ertion of <HI>J.L.</HI> 1. From the clear Te&s;timony of St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> in his Book <HI>De Lap&s;is,</HI> for there he introduceth the Children who by their Parents were carried to eat things offered to <HI>Idols,</HI> or to offer to them, thus pleading of their Cau&s;e to God,<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Nos nihil fecimus, nec derelicto cibo &amp; poculo Do|mini, ad profana contagia &s;ponte properavimus, perdi|dit nos aliena perfidia, paren|tes &s;enfimus parricidas, <HI>p.</HI> 125.</NOTE> <HI>We have done nothing, nor did we of our own accords, leaving</HI> the Meat and Cup of the Lord, <HI>ha&s;ten to the&s;e prophane contagious Solemni|ties, our Parents were our Parricides.</HI> Where he affords us a plain demon&s;tration, that they then
<PB N="103" REF="60">ordinarily received both the Elements; for had they not, as many as were capable, received the Bread, as well as the Cup, why doth he introduce them purging them&s;elves from the neglect of both? Why doth he make them, with as much care, to plead, <HI>We did not leave the meat,</HI> as we left not <HI>the Cup of the Lord?</HI></P>
<P>Having thus &s;hewed the cu&s;tom of this Age, I &s;hall con&s;ider what is, from St. <HI>Cyprian,</HI> &s;ugge&s;ted to the contrary, <HI>viz.</HI> that he relates, That <HI>the &s;olemnities being ended, the Deacon who pre|&s;ented the Holy Cup to the Faithful, being to give it to a Child,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Pag. 67.</NOTE> <HI>&s;he turned away her face, as not able to &s;upport &s;o great Maje&s;ty; &s;he &s;hut her Mouth, and refu&s;ed the Chalice, and when the Deacon had forced &s;ome of it into her Mouth, &s;he could not retain it in tho&s;e de|filed Entrails, &s;o great was the power and Maje&s;ty of our Lord.</HI> Whence it is argued, that &s;he received the Cup only. Now to give a clear and &s;atisfactory An&s;wer to this <HI>Objection,</HI> it will be nece&s;&s;ary to reflect a little upon the Cu&s;toms of the&s;e times, as <HI>V. Gr.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. The bu&s;ine&s;s of the <HI>Deacon,</HI> which was not to admini&s;ter the Bread, but when the <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> or <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> had admini&s;tred that, to follow with the Cup. So the <HI>Apo&s;tolical Con|&s;titutions</HI> order,<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Lib. 8. c. 13.</NOTE> <HI>Let the Bi&s;hop give the Oblati|on, &s;aying, The Body of Chri&s;t</HI>&mdash;And <HI>the Deacon let him hold the Cup, and giving it, let him &s;ay, The Blood of Chri&s;t, the Cup of Life.</HI> and accordingly here, this happened, faith St. <HI>Cyprian,</HI><NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">Ubi Calicem Diaconus offere prae&s;entibus coepit. <HI>P.</HI> 132.</NOTE> <HI>When the Deacon began to di&s;tribute the Cup</HI> to them that were pre&s;ent; and is it then to be admired, that here is no mention made of the Body? if hence it follows, That no Body was di&s;tributed to this Child, it al&s;o follows, that no Body was given to the re&s;t of the <HI>Faithful</HI> then pre&s;ent; for there is no more mention made of the Body given to them, than of the Body given to the Child. Nor could S. <HI>Cyprian</HI> regularly &s;peak of it, when di&s;cour&s;ing of the <HI>Deacon,</HI> who then mini&s;tred the Cup only.</P>
<P N="2">2. Note Secondly, That the <HI>Children</HI> received in the Rank of the <HI>Women;</HI> &s;o the &s;ame <HI>Con&s;titutions,</HI> &s;peaking of that or|der in which the <HI>Enchari&s;t</HI> was to be received, &s;aith,<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Ibid.</NOTE> <HI>A|mong&s;t the Women let the Diacone&s;&s;es, the Virgins, and the Widows Receive, and then the Children;</HI> and this was doubtle&s;s or|dered
<PB N="104" REF="61">&s;o, that the Women might take care of their <HI>Children,</HI> and a&s;&s;i&s;t them in Receiving;<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibid.</NOTE> accordingly, this <HI>Child</HI> comes in the Arms of its Mother, and when &s;he had Received, <HI>Locus ejus advenit, Came the time for the Child to Receive too.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. Note thirdly, That the Bread was not then put into the Mouth, as it is now in the <HI>R. Church,</HI> but it was given into the Hand of the <HI>Receiver,</HI> to eat at lea&s;ure of it, whil&s;t the <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> or <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> went on di&s;tributing, as is acknowledged by the learn|ed<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg"><HI>Vid</HI> Dallae|um de cult. lat. l. 5. c. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Doctors</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> and proved by innume|rable Te&s;timonies of the <HI>Ancients,</HI> Now it is not to be concei|ved that they who had a reverence for the Holy Sacrament would put it into the Hands of little <HI>Children,</HI> who might let it fall, or throw it away, or that the <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> &s;hould &s;tay till he could make the Child eat, or &s;wallow it down, but rather, that he &s;hould give it to the <HI>Mother,</HI> from who&s;e Hands the Child more likely would receive it, and who could better chew it for, and put it down his Throat. This being &s;o, the Bread might be given to the <HI>Mother</HI> for the Child to eat at lea&s;ure, and the <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> take no notice of her refu&s;al to receive it; but then, becau&s;e the Cup was by the <HI>Deacon</HI> to be re|ceived again into his hands to be di&s;tributed to otehrs, he mu&s;t &s;tay till the Child had participated, and &s;o he mu&s;t endea|vour to make it drink of it. And this, I verily believe, is the whole Truth touching this in&s;tance; which therefore is no proof at all, that both the Symbols were not offer'd, or di|&s;tributed to this Child, but only that &s;he had not eaten of the Bread given to her Mother for her u&s;e, before the <HI>Deacon</HI> followed with the Cup. Nor can this rea&s;onably be que&s;ti|oned, if we con&s;ider how con&s;tantly the Tradition of the <HI>Church</HI> informs us in all the following Centuries, that Children received in both kinds: For,</P>
<P>To omit the pa&s;&s;age in the <HI>Apo&s;tolick Con&s;titutions,</HI> where they are reckoned among&s;t tho&s;e who received the <HI>Euchari&s;t;</HI> when without any di&s;tinction or exception, the <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> &s;epa|rately gave the Bread, and the <HI>Deacon</HI> the Cup to all. <HI>Di|ony&s;ius</HI> in the <HI>Fourth Century</HI> informs us, That<NOTE N="(r)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Phot. c. 177. Eccle&s;. Hier. c. 7. p. 360, 361.</NOTE> <HI>little Children did partake of the mo&s;t holy</HI> Symbols <HI>of the divine Communion.</HI> And <HI>Theodorus Bi&s;hop</HI> of <HI>Mop&s;ue&s;tia,</HI> expre&s;ly notes, That<NOTE N="(s)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"></NOTE> <HI>they
<PB N="105" REF="61">gave to Infants the Communion of the immaculate Body for the Remi&s;&s;ion of Sins,</HI> where<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. P. 400.</NOTE> <HI>Photius</HI> adds, That he invented many ab&s;urd things, that he might &s;olve the que&s;tion of tho&s;e that asked, <HI>Why do Children partake of the</HI> Holy My&s;teries? in the plural, and that he might have found out better Solutions of that que&s;tion, and given better accounts of that Cu&s;tom then he did; he therefore Synecdochically &s;pake of the Receiving both the&s;e <HI>My&s;teries.</HI> The pa&s;&s;ages of St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> in the fifth Century are very numerous, in which he both a&s;&s;erts it as an <HI>univer&s;al Practice,</HI> that little Children did partake of the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t, and al&s;o &s;aith, that <HI>without eating of his Fle&s;h and drinking of his Blood, they could not have eternal Life.</HI> But having produced the&s;e already, I only add his Te&s;timony that<NOTE N="(t)" PLACE="marg">Innocentius P. &s;ine Bap|ti&s;mo Chri&s;ti &amp; &s;ine parti|cipatione corporis &amp; &s;anguinis Chri&s;ti vitam non habere parvulos dicit, <HI>Contra duas Ep. Pelag. l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 4.</NOTE> <HI>Pope Innocent</HI> the Fir&s;t declared, <HI>That Infants could not have Life without the participation of the Body and the Blood of Christ.</HI></P>
<P>To proceed now in farther confirmation of our A&s;&s;ertion, <Q REND="margQuotes">"There is no better proof, nor better interpreter of a Cu&s;tom, than the Cu&s;tom it &s;elf, nothing which more demon&s;rates that a Cu&s;tom comes from the fir&s;t Ages, than when it is &s;een to continue &s;ucce&s;&s;ively to the la&s;t:</Q> This of communi|cating little Children, not under the Species of Wine only, but of Bread al&s;o, or of both, is evidently &s;uch; for, in the 6th. Century<NOTE N="(u)" PLACE="marg">De glor. Martyr. l. c. 10.</NOTE> <HI>Gregory</HI> of <HI>Tours</HI> makes mention of a <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Child coming with other Children <HI>to the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood.</HI> In the 7th. Century the<NOTE N="(x)" PLACE="marg">Concil. Tom. 6. p. 552.</NOTE> 11th. <HI>Council of Toledo,</HI> excu&s;es tho&s;e from cen&s;ure, <HI>qui Euchari&s;tiam receptam in tempore infantiae rejecerunt, who in their Infancy have cast out the Bread received into their Mouths.</HI> In the 8th. <HI>Century</HI> we are inform|ed by <HI>Charles</HI> the <HI>Great,</HI> that this was then the general Cu|&s;tom of the <HI>Church</HI> of God; for, again&s;t the Doctrine of the Second <HI>Nicene Council,</HI> and of the <HI>Roman Church</HI> pronouncing <HI>Anathema</HI> to tho&s;e who did not wor&s;hip Images, he and his <HI>Council</HI> of 300 <HI>Bi&s;hops</HI> argue thus, that <HI>then Infantes</HI><NOTE N="(y)" PLACE="marg">Car. Mag. de Imaginib. l. 2. c. 27.</NOTE> <HI>Bap|ti&s;matis unda loti, &amp; corporis dominici edulio &amp; &s;anguinis hau&s;tu &s;atiati, pereunt; Infants who have been Baptized, and have re|ceived
<PB N="106" REF="62">the Sacrament of our Lord's Body and Blood must peri&s;h.</HI> In the 9th. <HI>Century</HI> we are told by<NOTE N="(z)" PLACE="marg">Apud Menardum Not. in Greg. Sacr. <HI>p.</HI> 107.</NOTE> <HI>Je&s;&s;e Bi&s;hop</HI> of <HI>Amiens,</HI> That the Infant was con|firmed <HI>by the</HI> Body and Blood <HI>of Christ, that he might be his Member.</HI> By<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Corpore &amp; &s;anguine Dominico omne praecedens Sacramentm in eo confir|matur, quia haec ideo acci|pere debet, <HI>&amp;c. De In&s;lit. Cleric. l. 1. cap. 29.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Rabanus Maurus,</HI> who &s;aith, That <HI>the precedent Sacrament of Bapti&s;m is confirmed in the Baptized Por&s;on by</HI> the Body and Blood <HI>of our Lord; for he therefore ought to receive the&s;e things, that he may be his Member who died, and ro&s;e again for us, and may de&s;erve to have God dwelling in him: For he who is Truth it &s;elf &s;aith, He that eateth my Fle&s;h and drinketh my Blood abides in me, and I in him, and al&s;o, Except you eat the Fle&s;h of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, you &s;hall have no Life in you.</HI> By<NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">De Ord. Baptiz. c. 18.</NOTE> <HI>Theodulph Bi&s;hop</HI> of <HI>Orleans,</HI> That <HI>when any one is new born by Water and the Spirit, he is nouri&s;hed with the body of our Lord, and</HI> drinks his Blood. By the old<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Statim autem confir|metur infans &amp; communice|tur ab Epi&s;copo ita dicente, Corpus &amp; Sanguis Domi|ni, &amp;c. <HI>Baluz. Not. in Reg. p.</HI> 551.</NOTE> <HI>Roman Ponti&s;icial,</HI> which &s;aith, That <HI>the Infant being Baptized, he is pre&s;ently confirmed and communicated by the Bi&s;hop, &s;aying,</HI> The Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> In the 10th. <HI>Century</HI> we are informed of the conti|nuance of the &s;ame Cu&s;tom from a <HI>Pontificial</HI> writ|ten about the year 980, &s;aith <HI>Baluzius,</HI> where it is commanded,<NOTE N="(d)" PLACE="marg">Statim enim confirma|ri oportet Chri&s;mate, &amp; poftea communicari, &amp; &s;i E|pi&s;copus dee&s;t, communicetur 2 Presbytero dicante, Cor|pus Domini Je&s;u Chri&s;ti cu|&s;todiat te in vitam aeternam. <HI>Bal. not. in Reg. p.</HI> 552.</NOTE> <HI>That the Baptized Infant &s;hould pre&s;ently be Confirmed and Communicated by the Bi&s;hop, or in his ab&s;ence by the Priest, &s;aying, The</HI> Body <HI>of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t keep thee in Life eter|nal.</HI> In the 14th. <HI>Century</HI> we find the &s;ame Cu|&s;tom in<NOTE N="(e)" PLACE="marg">Ne lactentur antequam communicent. <HI>De Sabb. Pa&s;ch. p.</HI> 64.</NOTE> <HI>Alcuin</HI> from the very &s;ame words, which, &s;aith he, were then u&s;ed at the Commu|nicating of the Infant after <HI>Bapti&s;m.</HI> And in the Three and thirtieth <HI>Epi&s;tle</HI> of <HI>Lanfranck</HI> we find the&s;e words,<NOTE N="(f)" PLACE="marg">Credimus enim gene|raliter expedire omnes om|nibus aetatibus tam viventes quam morientes dominici cor|poris &amp; &s;anguinis perceptione|&s;e munire. <HI>Apud Baluz. ibid. p.</HI> 657.</NOTE> <HI>We believe that it is generally very expedient for all Per&s;ons, of all Ages, living and dying, to arm them&s;elves with the Reception of</HI> our Lord's body and his blood. Whence, faith<NOTE N="(g)" PLACE="marg">Nor. ad librum Sa|cram, <HI>p.</HI> 298.</NOTE> <HI>Baluzius,</HI> we gather, That <HI>in his time is was the Cu&s;tom to give</HI> to Children the Communion of the Lord's Body and his Blood. And <HI>Hugh Me|nard,</HI> doth ingenuou&s;ly confess, That <HI>the Cu&s;tom
<PB N="107" REF="62">of giving the body of Chri&s;t to Children, continued till the time of</HI> Pa&s;chal <HI>the Second,</HI> and that they gave it to them then dipp'd in the <HI>Wine,</HI> by rea&s;on of the wekne&s;s of their Age.</P>
<P>That this was the Opinion of the <HI>Greek Church</HI> even almo&s;t to our pre&s;ent Age, we learn from<NOTE N="(h)" PLACE="marg">L. 3. de S. Euch. cap 40.</NOTE> <HI>Arcadius,</HI> who&s;e words are the&s;e, <HI>They judge the Sacrament of the Euchari&s;t to be required of nece&s;&s;ity to Salvation, both to Adult and Infants, &s;o teach</HI> Simeon The&s;&s;alonicen&s;is, Nicholaus Caba&s;ilas, <HI>and</HI> Gabriel Philadelphien&s;is, who all &s;ay, that the<NOTE N="(i)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">.</NOTE> <HI>Com|munion is</HI> therefore <HI>nece&s;&s;ary,</HI> becau&s;e the Lord hath &s;aid, <HI>If you do not eat my Fle&s;h and drink my Blood, you have no life in you. We Baptize In|fants,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(k)" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Act. cum Virtum. E. 1. c. 9. p. 85.</NOTE> <HI>Jeremiah</HI> their <HI>Patriarch, and afterwards we give them the Communion; for, ac|cording to St.</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>he that is regenerated, wants &s;till &s;piritual Food; and our Lord hath &s;aid, &V;nle&s;s you eat,</HI> &amp;c.<NOTE N="(l)" PLACE="marg">Eccl. ord. c. 9. p. 98.</NOTE> <HI>Metrophanes Critopulus</HI> adds, That <HI>their Infants are Baptized, and that then they afterwards partake as oft as their Parents will, <GAP DESC="foreign">, of both Species, at the Lord's Table,</HI> The <HI>Georgians, Circa&s;&s;ians,</HI> and <HI>Mengrelians</HI> are of the &s;ame Religi|on with the <HI>Greek Church</HI> in all things, and therefore mu&s;t be sof the &s;ame Opinion in this Matter. The <HI>Armenians</HI> mini|&s;ter the sacrament of the <HI>Eucharist</HI> to Infants in both kinds. So do the <HI>Haba&s;&s;ines,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(m)" PLACE="marg">Viagg. de Aethiop. c. 22.</NOTE> <HI>Alvarez,</HI> and the <HI>Maronites,</HI> &s;aith<NOTE N="(n)" PLACE="marg">P. 178.</NOTE> <HI>Brierwood.</HI></P>
<P>And here let it be noted, that not the latter <HI>Grecians</HI> only, but the <HI>Ancient Fathers</HI> did generally hold that this was nece&s;|&s;ary to be done, by virtue of that Precept, <HI>Except you eat my Fle&s;h and drink my Blood, you &s;hall have no Life in you,</HI> from whence it is extreamly evident, that neither in the Fifth Age, when Infants were by virtue of this Text admitted to the Sacrament; nor in the following Ages of the <HI>Church,</HI> could it be an e&s;tabli&s;hed Cu&s;tom, to give to Children the Cup only.</P>
<P><HI>La&s;tly,</HI> That neither <HI>Leo</HI> nor <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> gave any <HI>new Precept to the Church</HI> touching this Matter,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&sect;. 7. Chap. 5. &sect;. 2.</NOTE> is partly evident from what hath been already &s;aid, nor are there any Foot&s;teps of this new imaginary Law to be found in their <HI>Decrees:</HI> For the
<PB N="108" REF="63">words of <HI>Leo</HI> only command, That when the sacrilegious di&s;&s;embling of the <HI>Manichees</HI> was di&s;covered, <HI>they &s;hould be driven by the Prie&s;ts Authority from the Society of the Saints.</HI> And the words of <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> do only &s;ay, That <HI>they, who, in the Region of</HI> Squillaci, <HI>were bound up by a Super&s;tition unknown to him, from receiving the Cup, &s;hould either receive the whole sacrament, or be kept back from the whole.</HI> Where now, I pray you, is any appearance of this new pretended <HI>Law,</HI> or <HI>Fir&s;t Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Precept,</HI> That <HI>all the Faithful &s;hould from henceforth be obliged to receive under both Species,</HI> unle&s;s tho&s;e words of <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> import, that the Receiving of the Bread without the Cup is not Recei|ving an <HI>entire Sacrament;</HI> or, unle&s;s his following Rea&s;on, That <HI>the divi&s;ion of one and the &s;ame My&s;tery cannot happen without Sa|crilege,</HI> be a general Rule concerning all the Faithful?</P>
<P>But to di&s;pute no longer in a ca&s;e &s;o plain, both <HI>Leo</HI> and <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> &s;ufficiently inform us of the practice of their times; for <HI>Leo</HI> doth not only &s;ay, That<NOTE N="(o)" PLACE="marg">De pa&s;&s;. domini Serm. 14. p. 284.</NOTE> <HI>participatio Corporis &amp; &s;anguinis Chri&s;ti, this participation of the Body and Blood of</HI> Chri&s;t <HI>is that by which the New Creature is fed and inebriated, from the Lord him&s;elf,</HI> That<NOTE N="(p)" PLACE="marg">Ep. 46. c. 2. p. 518.</NOTE> <HI>in the Church of God, in the My&s;tical di&s;tribution of the &s;piritual Nouri&s;hment, the Body and the Blood of Chri&s;t is taken:</HI> But adds, That<NOTE N="(q)" PLACE="marg">Ser. Sancto de jejun. Sept. men&s;is Ser. 89.</NOTE> <HI>the Lord &s;aying, &V;nle&s;s you eat the Fle&s;h of the Son of Man, and</HI> drink <HI>his Blood, you &s;hall have no Life in you; we ought &s;o to communicate of this Holy Table, as not to doubt of the Truth of the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t. Gela&s;ius</HI> al&s;o &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Di&s;p. de dua|bus naturis. Chri&s;ti Bib. pa|trum. Tom. 4. p. 432.</NOTE> That <HI>the Sacraments we take of the Body and Blood of Chri&s;t are a Divine Thing, whence by them we are made partakers of a Divine Nature, and yet the Sub&s;tance and Nature of Bread and Wine doth not cea&s;e to be, or to remain,</HI> and in this Decree, that <HI>the taking of both Species is the taking of one and the &s;elf-&s;ame My&s;tery,</HI> which therefore is not celebrated by taking of one Species only, and that the not receiving of the Cup, when the Bread hath been taken, is <HI>the dividing of one and the &s;elf-&s;ame My&s;tery,</HI> or the de&s;troying of its Unity; &s;o that he argues again&s;t this practice from a Rea&s;on e&s;&s;ential to the <HI>My&s;tery,</HI> and which re&s;pects the Unity thereof, which, by the practice of receiving in one kind only, is de&s;troyed.</P>
<P>Having thus demon&s;trated that the <HI>Fathers</HI> and <HI>Doctors</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> till the 12th. Century taught,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cap. 1.</NOTE> <HI>That the Laity by divine Precept were obliged to receive both kinds,</HI> when they were capable
<PB N="111" REF="63">of doing &s;o.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cap. 2.6.</NOTE> That they condemned <HI>all variation from the matter of the In&s;titution,</HI> and the Doctrine of <HI>Concomitance.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Cap. 3.5.</NOTE> That they conceived the Receiving of the Cup by the Laity was requi&s;ite <HI>to their &s;hewing forth the Lord's Death, their &V;nion to Christ, the increa&s;e of Grace, the Remi&s;&s;ion of their Sins, the Sanctification and Salvation of their Souls and Bodies;</HI> and la&s;tly,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cap. 4.</NOTE> for their receiving an <HI>entire Communion.</HI> That <HI>they con&s;tantly ex|horted the People, having received the Bread, to take the Cup al&s;o,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Cap. 6.5.</NOTE> declaring that it was <HI>&V;nlawful, Erroneous,</HI> and even <HI>Sacrilegious</HI> to receive the one without the other, if they were capable of receiving both; and having fully an&s;wered and confuted all that <HI>J.L.</HI> hath offered to the contrary,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cap. 8.</NOTE> I &s;hall conclude in the&s;e words of Mr. <HI>Condom</HI> on this &s;ubject a little varied; <HI>viz. Thus many con&s;tant practices of the Primitive Church,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 160.</NOTE> <HI>thus many different Circum&s;tances, whereby it appears in particular and in publick, and always with an univer&s;al approbation, and according to the e&s;tabli&s;hed Law, that &s;he gave the Communion under</HI> [both] <HI>Species, &s;o many Ages before the Council</HI> of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> and from the <HI>origin</HI> of <HI>Chri&s;tianity, till the time of this Council, do invin|cibly demon&s;trate, that this Council did</HI> [thwart] <HI>the Tradition of all Ages,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 161.</NOTE> <HI>when it defined that the Communion under one kind was as good and &s;ufficient as under both, and that in which man|ner &s;oever they took it, they neither contradicted the In&s;titution of Je&s;us Christ, nor deprived them&s;elves of the Fruit of this Sacra|ment.</HI></P>
<P>In his Second Part,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 194.</NOTE> Sect. 4th. he lays down this as a prin|ciple which alone carries along with it the deci&s;ion of this Que&s;tion.<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 195.</NOTE> <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>in all practical Matters we mu&s;t always regard what has been under&s;tood and practi&s;ed by the Church.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 196.</NOTE> That <HI>the true means to under&s;tand God's Holy Law, is to con&s;ider in what manner it has been always under&s;tood and ob&s;erved in the Church. Since there appears in this Interpretation and perpetual Practice, a Tradition which cannot come but from God him&s;elf,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 200.</NOTE> <HI>and that Sence thereof which hath always appeared in the Church is as well inspired as the Scripture it &s;elf. Now by this,</HI> as he well &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 203.</NOTE> <HI>our Que|&s;tion is decided, for in the sacred Ceremony of the Lord's Supper, we have &s;een that the Church hath always believed and taught for a Thou&s;and years and upwards, that the Laity by divine Precept, and for the ends forementioned, were obliged to receive both Species, that the Fathers exhorted them to do &s;o, and did, both by expre&s;s
<PB N="110" REF="64">Declarations, and by many Cu&s;toms and determinations, &s;ufficiently condemn the contrary Practice, when any Hereticks or Super&s;ti|tious Per&s;ons did decline the Cup. That they did generally &s;o Interpret our Saviour's In&s;titution, that it as well concerned the Laity as Clergy, and with one voice a&s;&s;erted it was not lawful to vary from it, or celebrate the Mystery otherwi&s;e than it was delivered by Christ and his Apostles, and practi&s;ed in the Primitive Church. Behold what has been always practi&s;ed, behold what ought to &s;tand for a Law, in oppo&s;ition to all the Definitions of the Councils of</HI> Con&s;tance, Ba&s;il, Trent, <HI>and all their</HI> Non ob|&s;tante<HI>'s to our Lord's Institution, and to the Practice of the Primi|tive Church.</HI></P>
<TRAILER>FINIS</TRAILER>
<PB REF="64" MS="y">
<PB REF="65">
<PB REF="65" MS="y">
</DIV1>
</BACK>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
