,;.;:'> 189 Confession - v. ;,.-:; I 190 Absolution ... ; , ,;.*/.! jgj Trisagium . . ,7. . 194 Consecration . t ^QJ Post-communion. Gloria in Excelsis . .V, r . 205 Benediction . ... 206 Xll CONTENTS. CHAPTER VI. ERRORS ANE OBJECTIONS. Page I. Perfection necessary ..... . , . . 211 II. Mistaken passages in Scripture . . . 216 III. Not universally necessary . . -:^ 225 IV. Sin afterwards unpardoned . . . , 231 V. Deferring to Sickness . . ,-. . 236 VI. Want of time for Preparation . . . 242 VII. Frequency . . . . . . . 246 CHAPTER VII. MOTIVES. I. The command of Christ . . . . 259 II. Gratitude .265 III. Extension ofChrist's kingdom upon earth . 273 IV. Our own spiritual welfare .... 285 CHAPTER VIII. REQUISITES. Page Ecclesiastical. I. Baptism . . .$ . 294 II. Confirmation . . . . 302 Personal III. Repentance . . ... 307 IV. Charity . . . .... 312 V. Thankful remembrance ofChrist's death . . .'/ . . 318 VI. Intention of Amendment . . 324 VII. Faith 329 PART IT. THE DIARY. I. THE LORD'S DAY. Page Meditation upon hearing the notice of the holy Eu- charist read by the minister .... 339 II. MONDAY. STATE OF MAN BY NATURE. The Meditation Inability of Man . . . ''.-' 342 The Remedy . . .:.," 347 The Prayer . . : ] V ' ":' : ." ' ! plJp 350 HI. TUESDAY. STATE OF MAN BY THE LAW. The Meditation Condemnation of Man . . . 353 The Remedy . . . . ... 359 The Prayer . . . . . ' . . 362 IV. WEDNESDAY. SINS OF HABIT. The Meditation Difficulty of Change . . 365 The Remedy 370 The^Prayer 374 CONTENTS. V. THURSDAY. SINS OF TEMPTATION. Page The Meditation Continual Danger . . . 378 The Remedy 384 The Prayer 390 VI. FRIDAY THE GRACES OF THE GOSPEL. The Meditation Difficulty of Attainment . . 394 The Means . . 401 The Prayer . . 405 VII. SATURDAY. HEAVENLY MINDEDNESS. The Meditation Difficulty of Attainment . . 408 The Means . .... 415 The Prayer .... . 420 VIII. THE MORNING OF THE EUCHARIST A Prayer 424 IX. AFTER THE RECEPTION OF THE EUCHARIST. A Prayer 427 THE EUCHARIST. PART I. HISTORY, DOCTRINE, AND PRACTICE. " Before all things, this we must be sure of especially, that this Supper be in such wise done and administered, as our Lord and Saviour did, and commanded to be done ; as his holy apostles used it, and the good fathers in the primitive church frequented it." CHURCH OF ENGLAND HOMILY. " If ye love me, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS." John xiv. 15. THE EUCHARIST. PART I. CHAPTER I. NATURE AND DESIGN. LUKE xxii. 15. And he said unto them, with desire I have desired to eat THIS PASSOVER with you before I suffer. EVERY religion has certain forms and ceremo- nies by which its professors are distinguished certain badges or tokens by which mankind publicly proclaim their assent and concurrence in the faith which that religion upholds. In human institutions, and societies which are established for the mutual protection, or mutual pleasure, of the community, a man cannot be called a member, cannot be allowed to share the benefits which they propose, or enjoy the privi- leges which they confer, unless he professedly conforms to their usages, and obeys their rules. How, therefore, in a church, or religious society, can a man be called a member, or hope to share the benefits which are held forth, or enjoy the A NATURE AND DESIGN. privileges which are conferred unless, in the same manner, he openly coincides with the pub- lic usages, and obeys the common laws which such an institution considers to be necessary? Now, in the Christian religion, in what do we find these ordinances, or public usages, or common laws, to consist ? for whatever they may be, those only can be said to be members of that religion, who have conformed, or intend to conform, to them. First, then, we find the Christian religion to be parted into two great divisions; one called the Roman Catholic the other, the Protestant, or reformed church; and if we enter into the causes of this division, we shall find that they consist very mainly in the different opinions x_ which they hold respecting these very ordi- nances. But let us observe, although the two churches diifer, although they separate from one another in consequence of that difference, and set up rules of faith in direct opposition one to another, on many material points ; still they both agree in the great and fundamental axiom with which we are at present dealing : namely, that there are some ordinances in the Christian religion which are necessary to be observed ; they both say that no man can be a member of the church of Christ, unless he perform those ordinances which the church of Christ has commanded ; and it does not therefore interfere with the point at issue, that there should be any difference of opinion as to what those ordinances should be if anything, NATURE AND DESIGN. 3 it increases the principle and strength of the con- clusion, namely, that in every church there is a necessity of conforming with such public ordi- nances, usages, and ceremonies, as that church, or religious society, maintains. And mark! a matter of necessity, not a matter of choice. Whether, therefore, a Christian be a Roman Catholic, or Protestant, there can be no loop- hole or evasion by which he may escape the duty of performing those outward rites which his church has ordained. If he refuse to perform them, he cannot be a member of that church, for he virtually withdraws himself from her. He virtually gives up the benefits which are held out. He virtually says to this effect: I differ from you on the obligation of this or that law, which you, as a body, have commanded; / do not deem necessary, that which you do deem necessary ; I will not observe those forms which you assert to be necessary for the right constitution of a member of your society ; I therefore, am no longer a member of you; I withdraw from your institution. The obligation then of performing those ordi- nances which the church appoints, being once established ; let us go on to see what those or- dinances are : In the Roman Catholic division, we shall find that they consist of seven distinct ceremonies. In the Protestant, we shall find that they consist of two distinct ceremonies. These are called sacraments. The seven of the A 2 4 NATURE AND DESIGN. Roman Catholic church, are Confirmation, Mar- riage, Holy Orders, Penance, Extreme Unction, Baptism, and the Lord's Supper. Of these, the Church of England considers four as holy cere- monies, having services in her liturgy for each : the Confirmation service the Marriage service the Ordination service and the Commina- tion, " or, denouncing of God's anger and judg- ment against sinners," which is used on the first day of Lent, but she will not allow them to be sacraments Extreme Unction she en- tirely rejects as unscriptural and on the re- maining two only, she agrees with the Roman church, in pronouncing them sacraments, and necessary to salvation* * The doctrine of the two churches, as to the sacraments, is thus set forth : "Those five, commonly called sacraments, that is to say, confirmation, penance, orders, matrimony, and extreme unction, are not to be counted for sacraments of the gospel, being such as have grown, partly of the corrupt following of the apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the scriptures, but yet have not like nature of sacraments with baptism and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained by God." Articles of the Church of England. Art. xxv. " If any man shall say, that the sacraments of the new law were not all instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, or that they are more or fewer in number than seven: namely, baptism, confirmation, the eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders, and matrimony ; or, that any of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament, let him be accursed." Council of Trent, of the Sacraments. Canon i. NATURE AND DESIGN. 5 Now, in contemplating this most important subject, there are three points upon which our conviction must be ascertained, before we can be able fully to appreciate the nature and value of a sacrament. First, it seems to be required, that ftny sacred rite or ceremony which is neces- sary for the constitution of a member of the church, should have for its authority, no other than the divine Founder of that church.* Se- condly it must be allowed, that that which is appointed as a universal law, should be univer- sally applicable. Thirdly it must be allowed, that there should be a specific object in the ap- pointment. Now, trying the seven sacraments of the Roman church by these tests, five of them will immediately fall to the ground; marriage and ordination, by the second rule, because they are not universally applicable, there being no command in the word of God that all should enter the state of marriage, and it being impossible that all should enter the state of holy orders : penance is set aside, either by the first rule, or by the third taking it as an outward mortification of the body, it is no- * " The only author of a sacrament is God; first, because he is the only author of the promise and covenant of grace, and whosesoever part it is to promise and give the grace, his part it is to seal it. Secondly, God is the only author of the word, therefore, of the sacraments, which are the visible word. Thirdly, the sacraments are a part of divine worship, and di- vine worship can only be instituted by God." Turretin, Instit. Theol. Elenct. Locus decimus nonus. 6 NATURE AND DESIGN. where commanded ; taking it as a general mor- tification of the soul, there is no specific object ; repentance being a general emotjon of the mind, and no more a sacrament than hope, faith, humility, or any other Christian duty arising from spiritual emotions : confirmation and ex- treme unction are set aside by the first rule, because never appointed by the divine Author of our religion, confirmation being an aposto- lic ordinance appointed after the death of Christ, and extreme unction being only a partial and temporary institution mentioned in an acci- dental manner by one of the apostles.* These five being put aside, we are brought to the * To shew the ground upon which extreme unction is ac- counted a sacrament in the Roman church, while it is disre- garded even as a religious ceremony by the Anglican church, we cannot do better than refer to the Council of Trent, which speaks as follows: "Op THE SACRAMENT OF EXTREME UNCTION. " This Holy Unction of the sick, was instituted by our Lord Christ, truly and properly a sacrament of the New Testament, as is implied indeed by St. Mark, but commanded and pro- mulgated to the faithful by James the Apostle, and brother of the Lord," &c. And the first canon upon this point, stands as follows: " If any man shall say that extreme unction is not truly or properly a sacrament instituted by our Lord, and promulgated by the blessed Apostle James, but only a rite received from the fathers, let him be accursed." And the passage in St. Mark, above referred to, is found in chap. vi. ver. 13, where there is not the slightest hint of any institution of a general sacrament, but only an account of the bodily healing, miraculously effected by NATURE AND DESIGN. 7 remaining two ; and these we are prepared to shew to be perfect in the three points or rules above laid down : First, appointed by Jesus Christ, the divine Founder of our church ; Secondly, universally applicable ; and Thirdly, having a specific object : and therefore, while we reject the others, we agree with the church of Rome in considering them necessary to sal- vation : These we consider as the command- ments of our Lord, and therefore, the only and the necessary method by which a man is con- stituted a member of the church of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven. The two sacraments then of the church of England, are baptism and the Supper of the Lord ; baptism, the initiatory rite by which a man is first admitted into Christ's church, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the twelve apostles, in which they had used the common Jewish ceremony of anointing. The passage in St. James, is in chap. v. ver. 14, where again the allusion is made to the healing of the body, not the soul, and no notion can be traced of any inward and spiritual grace. To these passages they may add 1 John v. 16, but in all, the very texts brought forward are the best refutation of the whole doctrine. In all the instances of anointing the sick, the miraculous cure was effected, and the sick arose in recovered bodily health ; whereas, the Romanists never administer their so called sacrament of extreme unction to any but those at the point of death, and who they think, at the time of administering, will not recover* See, upon this subject, Macknight on 1 John v. 16. 8 NATURE AND DESIGN. of the Holy Ghost ; and the Lord's Supper, by which a man, having been previously ad- mitted, continues himself a member of the church, by representing from time to time, upon cer- tain conditions, and in a certain specified manner, his adherence to that faith which he com- menced at his baptism. They are called sacra- ments* from the resemblance which they bear to the oath of the Roman soldier, by which oath, fidelity was promised on the part of the soldier to his general. In the like manner, in baptism, fidelity to God is promised on the part of the person baptized, and in the Lords Supper, on the part of the communicant. The latter of these two sacraments is the one to which our attention is at present more par- ticuarly called, because, baptism being the way of admittance into the church, and being in general performed in infancy, there never arises * Augustin says, that they are called sacraments, " because they are signs pertaining to sacred things." The schoolmen say, that a sacrament is "the visible form of an invisible grace." The Council of Trent says, "a sacrament is a thing subject to the senses, which has the force, not only of signify- ing a grace, but also of producing it." St. Paul's definition is, " the sign and seal of the righteousness of faith." Rom. iv. 2. Therefore, upon the whole, we may say that sacraments are signs and seals, sacred, visible, and divinely instituted, for the sake of signifying, and sealing to our consciences, the promises of saving grace in Christ, and in turn, for the sake of testifying our faith, and affection, and obedience towards God." Turretin. NATURE AND DESIGN. any question upon the necessity of its obser- vance: but in the case of the Lord's Supper, too many think themselves at liberty to reject or observe it according to their own pleasure. They have already become members of the church by baptism ; but the question is, whether they will continue members of the church ? and though, unfortunately, many thousands of per- sons never consider any other sacrament, than that of baptism, at all necessary to their being Christians ; yet, that individual opinion proves nothing, when set against the authority of the church ; and the church, positively and with- out hesitation, affirms, upon the command of Christ, that the observance of one sacrament is as necessary to salvation as the other. Our baptismal covenant is to be renewed, from time to time, in the further covenant of the Lord's Supper. We must re-register our names in the book of life. Both 'sacraments are necessary to salvation, not one without the other, but both. A man would be surprised to have the title of Christian denied him, because, having arrived at mature age, he has never partaken of the Lord's Supper ; but surely (I put it strongly, but, I think, truly) that man who de- liberately says, " I will never participate in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper," does, in fact, withdraw himself from the church of Christ does, in fact, rescind the covenant made at his baptism, and can with no better reason call 10 NATURE AND DESIGN. himself a member of the church of Christ, than he who has never been baptized. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper is gene- rally denominated by Christians, " the Sacra- ment." Emphatically so, as being the only one that requires repetition, and the only one upon which any discussion, as just now explained, can arise. It is called " the Lords Supper" or " Eucharist" Eucharist, from a Greek word, signifying, " giving thanks," which word is found in all the accounts oT the institution contained in the scripture ; and "Lord's Supper," obviously from its being instituted at the last supper of which our blessed Lord partook with his disci- ples.* Three of the evangelists, together with the apostle St. Paul, have given a direct account of this sacred ordinance. In that which stands as the first gospel in our bible, St. Matthew, the words are these : " Now when even was come, * The names of this holy sacrament annexed according to date, are thus given by Waterland : A.D. 33. Breaking of bread, Acts ii. 42. 46. Acts xx. 7. 57. Communion, 1 Cor. x. 16. 57. Lord's Supper. 1 Cor. xi. 20. 96. Oblation, Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus. 104. Sacrament, Tertullian, Cyprian. 107. Eucharist, Ignatius, Justin Martyr. 150. Sacrifice, Justin Martyr, Cyprian. 150. Commemoration, Justin Martyr, Origen, Eusebius. 249. Passover, Origen, Hilary, Jerome. 385. Mass, Ambrose, &c. Waterland 's Review, Cap. I. NATURE AND DESIGN. 11 he sat down with the twelve And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to his disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."* The next account is in St. Mark, as follows : " And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it, and he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many."+ The account of St. Luke, which is next in order, runs thus : " And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you : This do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new tes- tament in my blood, which is shed for you ;"J where it is to be observed that he makes this remarkable addition to the accounts of St. Matthew and St. Mark : " This do in remem- brance of me." Next, the apostle St. Paul gives nearly the same account as St. Luke : " The Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread : and when he had given * Matt. xxvi. 20. 2328. t Mark xiv. 22. Luke xxii.19. NATURE AND DESIGN. thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat : this is my body, which is broken for you : this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood : this do ye as oft as ye drink it, in remem- brance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come."* Where, in addition to what had before been said by St. Luke, the apostle adds the remarkable intimation, that the insti- tution of the Eucharist was to be the means of keeping up the remembrance of Jesus Christ, " until he come" that is, until the end of the world ; and that therefore it was a perpetual and never-ceasing symbol, to be borne by the faithful ; one by which they might display their faith, one by which the merits of Christ's death might be from time to time vividly set forth, and represented to the world. Our attention has no doubt been directed to one particular circumstance in this collation of the accounts the silence of the evangelist St. John. This evangelist nowhere formally records the institution : the beloved apostle, who was with his master continually, as his most chosen friend and beloved companion, fails to give any detailed account of this dying command of his Lord. This omission may seem remark- * 1 Cor. xi. 23, and following verses. NATURE AND DESIGN. 13 able ; but upon a little examination, the difficulty is soon cleared up. In order to do this, let us first take St. Matthew's account of those circum- stances which were previous, and those which were subsequent, to the institution of the Eucha- rist, and then compare them with the same cir- cumstances as related by St. John. We shall thus perceive more closely what St. John omits, and where he coincides with the relation of his brother evangelists.* In the twenty-first chapter of St. Matthew, we find our Saviour entering into Jerusalem upon an ass, and casting out the buyers and sellers from the temple. The intervening chap- ters between the twenty-first and twenty-sixth are occupied by various parables and prophe- cies. In the twenty-sixth chapter two days before the Passover, we find Jesus in con- versation with his disciples, and the woman pouring the alabaster box of ointment upon his head. Then in the seventeenth verse, on the first day of the feast of unleavened bread, we find the disciples asking our Lord where they should prepare the feast of the passover. In the twentieth verse we find him sitting down to meat with the twelve, proclaiming to Judas his knowledge of the treachery meditated against him, and then immediately after, instituting the Eucharist. The accounts given by St. Mark and * See the Harmony at the end of this chapter. 14 NATURE AND DESIGN. St. Luke of the same period of time, namely, between the entry of Christ into Jerusalem, and the institution of the Eucharist, differ but little ; St. Luke only mentioning, in addition, the con- tention of the disciples as to which should be the greatest.* Now, therefore, turning to St. John let us look for his account of the same period of time. In the twelfth chapter we shall find the public entry into Jerusalem, and in the thir- teenth chapter we shall find the following des- cription : " Now before the feast of the Pas- sover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him." Now this expression, " supper being ended" cannot mean the whole of the paschal supper, because we find our Saviour, in a few verses subsequent, adverting to the sop by which the betrayer was distinguished, and this sop must have been given during the supper. The whole of the supper then was not ended. The truth is, that the paschal supper was obser- ved in two parts, first the eating of unleavened bread and bitter herbs, which was called the antepast, or preparation, and then the actual eating of the paschal lamb. Therefore the ex- * Luke xxii. 24. NATURE AND DESIGN. 15 pression of St. John, " supper being ended" must mean the antepast, or first part of the paschal supper. After which, as the evangelist continues at the fourth verse, " He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments ; and took a towel and girded himself. After that he poureth water into a basin, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded." Now here again, this circum- stance of washing his disciple's feet is not related at all by the other evangelists, and if we com- pare it with St. Luke, it may seem to agree with another circumstance in which he (St. Luke) stands alone in recording, namely, the contention of the disciples as to one being greater than ano- ther. Only supposing that St. Luke placed the circumstance of the contention after the antepast instead of the whole supper, and we shall then have a very consistent arrangement. And we may do so with great propriety, because we should hardly conceive it possible that the disciples should have this contention after so solemn an institution as the Eucharist, an institution of peace, equality, and humility, and, even setting that aside, that they should even do so, after the manifest rebuke conveyed, by the washing of their feet, by their own Mas- ter and Lord. Keeping, however, St. John in view after the washing of the feet, and the conversation which arose in consequence of it, between our Saviour and Peter, which is con- 16 NATURE AND DESIGN. tained between the 4th and 17th verses, the paschal lamb (the remaining part of the sup- per, which was yet unfinished) was then brought in. Then arises the conversation between Peter, John, and Jesus,* by which Judas is marked out as the betrayer of his Lord, and after this we find no further notice taken of the paschal supper. From the 14th to the 17th chapters, inclusive, the whole subject is occupied in conversations between Jesus and his disciples, prayers for their comfort, and assurances of his love. In the 18th chapter Jesus is betrayed, then arraigned, condemned, and crucified. So that we see, from this short summary, that no mention whatever is made by St. John of the Eucharist. The supper itself is described even more minutely, and with greater circum- stance than by the other evangelists, many con- versations are given which were not related in the other gospels, and yet not one word of that ceremony, which was the last, and almost dying command, of our blessed Lord. Now how shall we account for this ? We shall account for it by two observations : First, St. John wrote his gospel many years after the establishment of Christianity. It is probable that his gospel was not published until the year 97, nearly thirty years after the destruction of Jerusalem. Considering the number of years in which the * Verse 23. NATURE AND DESIGN. 17 Christian religion had been in existence, and knowing, as we do, from other parts of sacred scripture, that the Lord's Supper was then a regular and established custom, it would seem quite unnecessary that St. John should enter into any historical account of an institution, of which there were already four historical accounts published and known among Christians. I say four, because the account given by St. Paul, we must always remember, was antecedent to the time of St. John. The Eucharist was at that time daily celebrated in the Christian church. Every Christian knew what it was. The three previous gospels had amply explained its nature and its history, and therefore St. John naturally enough passes it over, as he does many other points which are given by his brother evangelists, as a thing well known and understood. Secondly, though St. John does not mention the institu- tion in any direct manner, yet he describes a very remarkable conversation, in which our Saviour makes allusion to it, just as it might be supposed that a person would make allusion to an institu- tion in daily use. In the sixth chapter, Jesus is described as saying to the Jews, "I am the living bread which came down from Heaven : if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever : and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."* And again, * John vi. 51. B 18 NATURE AND DESIGN. " Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life ; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread that came down from Heaven, not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth of this bread shall live for ever."* Now what can be more apposite and decided than the whole of this passage ? It is related with no comment or explanation, but as a thing well known to the Christians for whom the evangelist was writing; the flesh of Christ representing the bread, and the blood being signified by the wine in the Eucharist, and the eating and drinking of that flesh and blood causing mankind, through faith, to dwell in Christ, and Christ in them. I take, therefore, the four gospels, and the Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, as furnish- ing together the great evidence of our Sacrament of the Eucharist, and the sum of the whole amounts shortly to this : Our Saviour knowing * John vi. 53 58. This expression is borrowed in our present service of the communion. See the prayer before the consecra- tion, "That we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us." NATURE AND DESIGN. 19 that he was about to be betrayed into the hands of the Jews, and foreseeing that he was about to suffer upon the cross an ignominious death, by which death the sins of mankind were to be remitted and forgiven, determined, before that event should take place, to leave among his disciples some ordinance or ceremony com- memorative both of the death which he died, and of the benefits procured by that death. He had told his disciples that his body should be broken, and his blood poured out upon the cross ; he therefore took bread, and brake it, and wine, and poured it out. Lastly, he commanded his followers perpetually and unceasingly to ob- serve this ordinance, even unto the end of the world the breaking of bread as a memorial of his broken body, the pouring out of wine as a remembrance of his blood shed upon the cross. He signified to them, by mentioning the words, " My blood of the new testament? that this eating and drinking the bread and wine was the sign of a new covenant between God and man, and that therefore from the time of his approaching death, the old covenant of the Jews would be at an end. The seal of the old covenant was, the " blood of bulls and goats ;" but, as St. Paul says, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, " It was not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sin ; " therefore, saith Christ, a " body " shall be prepared as a sacrifice a human body and that sacrifice shall be, once for all, continuous 20 NATURE AND DESIGN. and everlasting ; and the blood of the new sacri- fice shall be the seal of this new covenant. The blood of Jesus, commemorated and represented in the Eucharist, shall be the sign of t^e new covenant between a reconciled God and his par- doned creatures. What, then, is the sacrament of the Eucharist ? It is this a symbolical commemoration, insti- tuted by Christ himself, of the sacrifice of his death. It is, moreover, a federal act between God and man an act by which man signifies to God his faith and obedience, and God signifies and promises to man inward and spiritual grace ; and therefore it is, as expressed in the articles of our church, " A badge or token of a Christian man's profession, and not only that, but a certain sure witness, and effectual sign of grace, and God's good will towards us ; and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in Him." There is an intermixture of four distinct notions a covenant, a sacrifice, a feast, and an act of commemoration. Neither one or the other, by themselves, could hold good ; but the whole four united together define the sacra- ment. The notion of performing a sacrifice, and upon that sacrifice instituting a feast, and by that feast ratifying a covenant ; and the whole ceremony, thus constituting an act of memorial, has existed from the earliest ages.* The greatest * See Gen. xxvi. 31. The covenant made between Abime- NATURE AND DESIGN. 21 and most remarkable instance is the Passover. The sacrifice of the lamb, the eating of the lamb, which constitutes the feast, the covenant thereby ratified between the Israelites and God, and the memorial thereby established of the deliverance from Egypt. And here it is that the great dis- tinction arises between the Roman and the Anglican church. The Roman church makes the Eucharist a sacrifice. They affirm that the body of Jesus is again offered up to God by the hands of the priest ;* but we affirm that it is only lech and Isaac. See also Exod. xxxiv. 15, and 1 Samuel i. 24, where Hannah, according to her vow, offers her child Samuel unto the Lord, and it is said, "And they slew a bullock and brought the child to Eli." To these instances from scripture, the classical reader will readily add abundant testimony from heathen writers ; particularly he will remem- ber, Homer, Book i. 455, and iii. 290, and in fact, every ancient author abounds in similar testimony. So that Cud- worth, in his treatise, says of paganism, that it is "nothing but Judaism degenerate." For a more full enquiry into the above very interesting par- ticulars, see Cudicorth. * That I may not appear to exaggerate the errors of the church of Rome, I quote from the Council of Trent, the three first canons of the sacrifice of the mass. "CANON I. "If any man shall say, that there is not offered to God in the mass, a true and proper sacrifice ; or, if he shall say, that that which is offered, is nothing else than that Christ is given us to eat; let him be accursed." " CANON II. " If any man shall say, that in the words ' Do this in remem- brance of me : ' Christ did not appoint the apostles to be priests, 22 NATURE AND DESIGN. a feast upon a sacrifice, that Jesus has been once offered that he never can be offered again, but that we, after the custom of a sacrifice, pre- sent unto God bread and wine before his altar ; and that upon that bread and wine so offered, we make a feast, recording the original and real sacrifice. Thus it is that St. Paul, when desirous to warn the Corinthian converts from presenting themselves at the idolatrous feasts of heathens, or from eating meat which had been offered to idols, expressly institutes a comparison between the Lord's Supper, as a sacrificial feast, and the idolatrous sacrificial feasts of the heathens. He says : " The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ ? The bread which we break, is it not the commu- nion of the body of Christ ? Behold Israel after the flesh ; are not they which eat of the sacri- fices partakers of the altar ? "* And then, after- wards " Ye cannot drink of the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils ; ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and the table of devils." Where or did not ordain that they and other priests should offer his body and blood ; let him be accursed." "CANON III. " If any man shall say, that the sacrifice of the mass is only one of praise and thanksgiving, or a bare commemoration of the sacrifice which was made upon the cross, but not propitia- tory ; or that it profits him alone who receives it, and ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punish- ments, satisfactions, and other necessities; let him be accursed." * 1 Cor. x. 16. 18. NATURE AND DESIGN. 23 the argument evidently is this : You must not, in the heathen sacrifice, partake of the feast which they celebrate ; because, by so doing, you would be as much partakers, and in communion with their false worship of demons, as you are by par- taking of the cup and of the bread in the Eucharist, in communion with the blood and the body of Christ, for they both are sacrificial feasts. While, then, we must be cautious how we fall into any notion derogatory to the dignity of this sacrament, by supposing it a mere act of com- memoration, or a mere renewal of a former pledge between ourselves and God, we must at the same time be equally cautious lest we ima- gine any renewal of the once offered sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The sacrifice has been made once for all. We record it in the bread and wine offered. Upon this we make a feast of joy and thanksgiving, renew our promises to God, and God renews his promises to us ; and the altar, and the priest, and the oblation, are symbolical and commemorative of the glorious privileges which Jesus purchased for us at the price of his own sufferings and death. Lastly, as an explanation of the nature and design of the Eucharist, a very curious ana- logy may be traced between the passover of the Jews, and that which may very justly be called the passover of the Christians. At the time our Saviour instituted the Eucharist, the 24 NATURE AND DESIGN. Mosaic dispensation was at its close. The Holy of Holies was about to be thrown open, and man was about to be reconciled to God by the sacrifice of his only Son. The long series of prophecies were now about to be accomplished : the types, the figures, the offerings and sacri- fices of the Levitical law were at an end. The lamb slain at the passover merely prefigured the crucifixion of the Lamb of God ; the blood sprinkled on the door-post and lintel merely prefigured the blood to be sprinkled on the hearts of men by the piercing of the soldier's spear ; and, inasmuch as God thought fit to shadow forth these things to mankind, before they took place, so it seems natural that he should institute ordinances in commemoration of them, after they had taken place. What the passover was to the Jews, the Eucharist is to us : St. Paul expressly says, " Christ our passover is sacrificed for us, therefore let us keep the feast, not with the old leaven, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." But the similarity is the more curious, the more closely we examine. For a due parti- cipation in the passover, the previous rite of circumcision was demanded as essential : " No stranger was to partake thereof." For a due participation in the Eucharist, the previous sacrament of baptism is deemed essential. In the paschal supper, the master of the family NATURE AND DESIGN. 25 began the feast with a cup of wine, which he solemnly blest. So our Saviour, before the institution of the Eucharist, at the com- mencement of the feast, as we read in St. Luke, " took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this and divide it among yourselves." In the passover, some of the younger persons of the family, generally a child, stood forth and asked the reason of the feast ; and to answer this question, the master of the family detailed the history of the destroying angel passing over the children of the Israelites. So, in just accordance with this, is the expression of Jesus in St. Paul, " For by this do ye shew forth the Lord's death till he come." In the passover the master of the feast rose up and washed his hands; Jesus rose up and girded himself, and washed his disciples' feet. In the passover, the lamb being tasted, the feast was concluded by a cup of wine, which was called the cup of blessing, because, they sanctified it, and gave thanks for it by bless- ing; God. So also Christ, when he took the O ' sacramental cup, gave thanks and pronounced a blessing over it. Still more, as he who wilfully refused to keep the passover, " bore his own sin" and was " cut off from Israel," so surely we may imply that he who neg- lects the Eucharist in the Christian dispen- sation, renounces all the benefits which are derived from the Saviour's death, and shall, 26 NATURE AND DESIGN. in the same way, bear his own sins* And lastly, as the passover was commanded to be kept in force until the coming of the Saviour to bring the glad tidings of the gospel, so is the Eucharist to remain in force, untiL the second and final coming of the Saviour to judge the world. At the passover, the Eucharist was appointed. Then did the real lamb take place of the typical lamb; the deliverance from sin stood in the place of the deliverance from Egypt; the promises of heaven in the place of the promises of Canaan. Let us dwell on these things, let us acknow- ledge in this sacrifice as distinctly marked by the finger of God, the shadows of the future ; as we can distinctly trace the certainty of the past. The destroying angel passed over the houses of the children of Israel, when he saw their door- posts marked by the blood of the slain lamb. We also have a lamb ; we have a destroying angel, and we have a sign by which that destroying angel may be induced to pass us by. Only let us have our hearts sprinkled by the blood of Jesus, only let us, as a sign of that blood, betake ourselves to his altar in * If the reader is desirous of pursuing this analogy with the accuracy it deserves, he is requested carefully to read the 12th chapter of the book of Exodus ; and if anything of a more learned enquiry should be wished, see Cud worth's Treatise, Adam Clarke's Discourse, Waterland, and Lightfoot ; all which authors are easy of access. NATURE AND DESIGN. 27 faith and obedience. The Israelites might have said, " Why should not God save us, though we omit this outward sign ? Inward belief is better." So they who imagine that they have this inward faith, may be tempted to despise the outward sign. But the sign is the very thing that God requires. It is the sprinkling of blood that the destroying angel now, as well as then, looks for, and the sign of faith to Christians is " THE EUCHARIST." It is the sign of the covenant between them and God. Chris- tians are, as it were, in Egypt, in bondage to death, in the wages of sin and if they will go forth, if they will be redeemed, if while the work of death is going on among the first-born of the Egyptians, they are willing to escape, if they desire to look onwards from this miserable scene of bondage to the land of promise, a land flowing with milk and honey then must they slay their lamb, sprinkle the door-post with his blood, eat of the flesh, yea, even with bitter herbs and unleavened bread the bitter herbs of repentance, the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth ; they must have their loins girded, their shoes on their feet, their staves in their hand, as men ready for their journey. "It is the Lord's Eucharist." By that sign the crucified Jesus are they as Christians known ; by the bread and wine, that is, the body and blood of Jesus, are they " separated from sinners, and come out from 28 NATURE AND DESIGN. among them." These, and these only, are their passports out of the house of bondage ; these, and these only, are the tokens of their cove- nant with God ; these, and these only, will be the signs of their hope, their obedience, their faith in short their Christianity when death, the destroying angel of the Lord Jehovah, shall pass over their dwellings in the day of his visitation. HARMONY OF THE FOUR GOSPELS, ST. PAUL'S FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, RELATING TO THE EUCHARIST. 30 HARMONY OF THE FOUR GOSPELS, AND ST. PAUL'S FIRST ST. MATTHEW. ST. MARK. xxvi. 1720. xiv. 1217. Now the first day of the And the first day of un- feast of unleavened bread leavened bread, when the disciples came to Je- they killed the passover, sus, saying unto him, his disciples said unto Where wilt thou that we him, Where wilt thou THE PREPARATIONS prepare for thee to eat that we go and prepare, the passover ? that thou mayest eat the And he said, Go into passover ? FOR THE the city to such a man, And he sendeth forth and say unto him, The two of his disciples, and Master saith, My time saith unto them, Go ye PASSOVER, is at hand ; I will keep into the city, and there AND THE the passover at thy house with my disciples. And the disciples did shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of wa- ter : follow him. as Jesus had appointed And wheresoever he COMMENCEMENT them ; and they made ready the passover. Now when the even shall go in, say ye to the good man of the house, The Master saith, Where OF THE was come, he sat down is the guest-chamber, with the twelve. where I shall eat the passover with my disci- ANTEPAST ; ples? And he will show you a large upper room fur- OR, FIRST PART OF nished and prepared : there make ready for us. PASCHAL SUPPER. And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them : and they made ready the passover. And in the evening he cometh with the twelve. THE ANTEPAST, UNTIL ITS CONCLUSION. 31 EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, RELATING TO THE EUCHARIST. ST. LUKE. ST. JOHN. ST. PAUL. xxii. 7 14. xiii. 1. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and r ohn, saying, Go and >repare us the passover, hat we may eat And they said unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare ? And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet Now before the feast of you, bearing a pitcher of water: follow him into the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was the house where he en- come that he should de- tereth in. part out of this world And ye shall say unto the good man of the unto the Father, having loved his own which house, The Master saith were in the world, he unto thee, Where is the loved them unto the end. uest- chamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples ? And he shall show you a large upper room fur- nished : there make ready. And they went and found as he had said un- to them : and they made ready the passover. And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. xxii. 15. And he said unto them, With desire I have de- sired to eat this passover with you before I suffer : For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and di- vide it among yourselves: xiii. 2. For I say unto you, I And supper being ended will not drink of the fruit (the devil having now of the vine, until the put into the heart of kingdom of God shall Judas Iscariot, Simon's come. son, to betray him,) 32 HARMONY OF THE FOUR GOSPELS, AND ST. PAUL'S FIRST CONTENTION OF THE APOSTLES, AND THE REBUKE OF JESUS, BY WASHING THEIR FEET. ST. MATTHEW. ST. MARK. 33 EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, RELATING TO THE EUCHARIST. ST. LUKE. xxii. 2430. And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be ac- counted the greatest. And he said unto them, The kings of the Gen- tiles exercise lordship over them ; and they that exercise authority upon them are called bene- factors. But ye shall not be so : but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger ; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth ? is not he that sitteth at meat ? but I am among you as he that serveth. Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations : And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me ; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. ST. JOHN. xiii.4 16. He riseth from supper, and laid aside his gar- ments j and took a towel, and girded himself : After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disci- ples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded. Then cometh he to Simon Peter : and Peter said unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet ? Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest notnowjbutthou shalt know hereafter. Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast nopart with me. Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head. Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needethnot save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit : and ye are clean, but not all. For he knew who should betray him: therefore said he, Ye are not all clean. So after he had wash- ed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you? Ye call me Master and Lord : and ye say well ; for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed yourfeet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord ; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. ST. PAUL. 34 HARMONY OF THE FOUR GOSPELS, AND ST. PAUL'S FIRST ST. MATTHEW. ST. MARK. xxvi. 2125. xiv. 1821. THE LAMB BROUGHT IN And as they did eat, he And as they sat and did said, Verily I say unto eat, Jesus said, Verily I THE SECOND PART OF you, that one of you shall betray me. say unto you, One of you which eateth with me And they were exceed- shall betray me. PASSOVER. ing sorrowful, and began And they began to be every one of them to say sorrowful, and to say un- unto him, Lord, is it I ? to him one by one, Is it And he answered and I? and another said, Is said, He that dippeth his it I? THE hand with me in the dish, And he answered and the same shall betray me. said unto them, It is one The Son of man goeth, of the twelve, that dip- PROPHECY as it is written of him : peth with me in the dish. but woe unto that man The Son of man indeed OF THE BETRAYAL OF by whom the Son of man is betrayed ! it had been goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that good for that man if he man by whom the Son of JESUS had not been born. man is betrayed! good Then Judas, which be- were it for that man if BY trayed him, answered and he had never been born. said, Master, is it I ? He JUDAS ISCARIOT. said unto him, Thou hast said. xxvi. 2630. And, as they were xiv. 2226. And as they did eat, eating, Jesus took bread, Jesus took bread, and and blessed it, and brake blessed, and brake it, and it, and gave it to the dis- gave to them, and said, ciples, and said, Take, Take, eat; this is my eat; this is my body. body. And he took the cup, And he took the cup ; and gave thanks, and and when he had given gave it to them, saying, thanks, he gave it to INSTITUTION OF THE Drink ye all of it ; For this is my blood of them : and they all drank of it. the new testament, which And he said unto them, EUCHARIST. is shed for many for the This is my blood of the remission of sins. new testament, which is But I say unto you, I shed for many. will not drink henceforth Verily I say unto you, of this fruit of the vine, I will drink no more of until that day when I the fruit of the vine, un- drink it new with you in til that day that I drink my Father's kingdom. it new in the kingdom of God. And when they had And when they had sung an hymn, they sung an hymn, they went went out into the mount out into the mount of of Olives. Olives. 35 EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, RELATING TO THE EUCHARIST. ST. LUKE. ST. JOHN. ST. PAUL. xiii. 21. 26. 1 Cor. xi. 23. Verily, verily, I say unto you, That one of you shall betray me. Then the disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spake. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved. Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake. He then lying on Jesus' breast, saith unto him, Lord, who is it ? Jesus answered, He it is to whom I shall give a sop when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. xxii. 1920. 1 Cor. xL 2326. And he took bread, and took bread: gave thanks, and brake And when he had given it, and gave unto them, thanks, he brake it, and saying, this is my body said, Take, eat : this is which is given for you : my body, which is bro- ken for you : this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, this do in remembrance of me. when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood : this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remem- brance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new tes- tament in my blood, which is shed for you. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. c 2 CHAPTER II. HlvSTORY: FROM ITS FIRST APPOINTMENT TO THE CLOSE OF THE SIXTH CENTURY. 1 COR. xi. 26. For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death TILL HE COME. WE have now seen the nature and design of the institution of the Eucharist, and the particular circumstances which attended its appointment. From this we are naturally led to consider the reception which it met with throughout the world, and to see how mankind, having received this solemn charge from their Saviour, followed it up in their religious practice. For this purpose we shall endeavour to ascertain first, how it flou- rished in its primitive simplicity in the apostolic times : then, how it gradually became corrupted, under the papal dominion, by the doctrine of transubstantiation, and various other errors of the Roman church ; and lastly, we shall trace it FIRST CENTURY. 37 onwards to the reviving light of the reformation, when it was restored by the fathers of our church to its present form and ritual : THE FIRST CENTURY. Our Saviour instituted the Eucharist, as we have already seen, in the city of Jerusalem, on the last evening of his life. In the city of Jeru- salem, therefore, we should expect to hear of its first celebration. Turning to the Acts of the Apostles, we shall accordingly find the first mention of this sacrament on the day of Pente- cost, ten days after the ascension of our Lord. We do not find any lengthened or studied account; we do not find it even asserted that it was the first time at which it had been observed. It is described quite as an accidental and casual circumstance, as though it had been a thing well known among Christians, and therefore not needing any lengthened or elaborate detail. Three thousand souls had been added to the church by the eloquent sermon of St. Peter. This was the infant church of Christ, three thousand faithful and devoted followers of a crucified God: and in describing the general manners of these three thousand, their habits of devotion, and their way of life, St. Luke speaks thus : " And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." And again, 38 HISTORY. shortly afterwards : " And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart."* This breaking of bread can have no possible reference to anything except the Eucharist. It is the general way in which the apostles mention it, and is universally allowed to refer to that institution. The next mention which is made of it is in the twentieth chapter of the Acts and seventh verse: " And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow." Here the apostle seems to assert that it was the custom of those times to celebrate this " breaking of bread," on the first day of every week. He does not say that the disciples came together to break bread, as on a special occasion, but " when" the disciples came together, inferring evidently that it was their weekly custom so to do. The time to which St. Luke refers in this passage is about the year 56, and the time at which the book of the Acts was finished was the year 64. Therefore we have from this passage an evi- dence of the weekly celebration of the Lord's Supper for nearly thirty years after the cruci- fixion. In corroboration of this, let us now turn to St. Paul. St. Paul wrote his first * Acts. ii. 42. 46. FIRST CENTURY. 39 epistle to the Corinthians in the year 56. In the eleventh chapter of that epistle he says, " When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper ;" and then he proceeds to describe certain er- rors of which the church of Corinth had been guilty, in their manner of its celebration. In the tenth chapter of the same epistle, he says : " Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils ; ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils." From these two passages, we see, that the Lord's Supper was an established ordinance of the church of Corinth, and as he does not address them as at all peculiar in having this ordinance, we may reasonably infer that not only the church of Corinth, but that all the churches founded by the apostles, possessed at that time a regular established celebration of this sacrament. Then, advancing further to the gospel of St. John, who alludes to this sacrament as a thing well known and under- stood : " Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life."* And again, " Ex- cept ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you."t And considering that St. John's gospel was published the last of all the scriptures, and quite at the close of the first century, we * John vi. 54. f John vi. 53. 40 HISTORY. have, it must be allowed, a clear and con- clusive proof of a continued observance of the Lord's Supper, on the part of the apostolic churches, for at least one hundred years. The peculiar forms and ceremonies which accompanied the ordinance during these pri- mitive times we have no opportunity of see- ing. It was most likely little more than meeting together, collecting alms, breaking bread, and eating, pouring out wine, and drink- ing, in the name and memory of Jesus. At any rate if there had been anything peculiar, anything in the ceremonial part of the sacra- ment, vital to its existence, St. Paul, when commenting on the faults of the Corinthians, would surely have taken the opportunity of mentioning it. From the charges which he has delivered, we may infer, that simplicity, regularity, and devotion, formed the basis of its celebration, and that as long as they pre- served the end and object of their Redeemer's command, " This do in remembrance of me," they were not scrupulous or contentious upon the outward forms, provided only those out- ward forms were observed in decency and in order. THE SECOND CENTURY. After the close of the first century, we can of course have no further evidence from scrip- ture ; our evidence from this period will de- SECOND CENTURY. 41 pend upon the apostolical and primitive fathers of the church, and such profane historians as may mention the subject from time to time. At the commencement of the second cen- tury, or perhaps quite at the close of the first, Ignatius,* bishop of Antioch, in an epistle which he wrote to the Ephesians, exhorts them to be diligent in assembling together to cele- brate the Eucharist. " Hasten therefore," he says, " to meet together frequently at the Eucharist for the glory of God, for when you are continually met together, the powers of Satan are destroyed, and his fiery darts which were meant for sin turn back harmless ; your concord and unanimity of faith is his destruction, and those who are joined together in faith are his annoyance ; for nothing is better than peace in Christ, in which every warfare is rendered vain, both of things of the air, and things of the earth, for our resist- ing is " not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."! A little after Ignatius, Pliny the younger, a Roman magistrate, pro-consul of Bithynia, * IGNATIUS, one of the apostolic Fathers, educated under the apostles John and Peter. He suffered martyrdom about the year 107, being devoured by wild beasts, by the order of the Emperor Trajan. f Ignatius, Epist. ad Ephes. 42 HISTORY. examined some Christian converts on the sub- ject of their faith and way of life. His at- tention was directed to them, by their meet- ing together early in the morning before the light of day. These are the words which he uses in a letter to the Emperor Trajan : " They affirmed that the whole sum of that sect, or error, lay in this, that they were wont upon a set solemn day to meet together before sun- rise, and to sing among themselves a hymn to Christ as God, and to oblige themselves by a sacrament not to commit any wicked- ness, but to abstain from theft, robbery, adul- tery ; to keep faith, and to restore any pledge entrusted to them; and after that, they retired, and met again at a common meal, in which was nothing extraordinary or criminal."* In the same century, about the year 150, Justin Martyr f gives the following description : " Prayers being finished, we greet one another with mutual embraces ; then bread, and a cup of water, mixed with wine,^ is offered to him who presides over the brethren ; when he has * Plin. Lib. x. Ep. 97. f JUSTIN MARTYR, the second, in point of chronology, of the primitive fathers, excepting the apostolical. A. D. 140. He studied the philosophy principally of the Platonic school, until converted to Christianity, and suffered martyrdom in the reign of Marcus Antoninus. | The Church of England differs on this point from the primitive usage, which unquestionably was to mix water with the wine in the celebration of the Eucharist. The council of SECOND CENTURY. 43 received them, he gives praise and glory to the Father of all, in the name of the Son and Holy Ghost, and pursues at some length the Eucharistia, or giving of thanks, because God has thought us worthy of such gifts : when he has finished these prayers and giv- Trent decrees, " that the priests are to mix water with the wine, both because it is believed that Christ did so, and also because from his side water came out with the blood ; which sacrament is had in remembrance by this mixture." Would that the council of Trent had been in every point as correct as they are in this ; for beyond question it must have been a cup of water and wine that our Lord consecrated, that being the cus- tom of the Jewish passover ; for this see Justin Martyr as above, Irenseus, and Clemens Alexandrinus ; and even the church of England, though she has at present given up this usage, yet orginally her practice agreed with the Church of Rome. See Liturgy of King Edward VI. Turretin defends our present practice, and quotes Matt. xxvi. 29, " I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine," arguing that there is no mention of the water in the divine com- mand, confessing, however, that " water was mixed with wine by the ancients, because the use of pure wine was rare among the eastern nations;" and Bingham says, that the Armenians conse- crated only in wine, and that it was reckoned an error in them by Theophylact, and condemned by the council of Trullo. Yet, after all, as there is no express command for this in the institution, notwithstanding this general consent of the ancient church, it is commonly determined by modern divines, as well of the Roman as Protestant persuasion, that it is not essential to the sacrament itself, as the reader that is curious may find demonstrated in Vossius, in his dissertation upon the subject. See Vossius. Thes. Theol. p. 494. Bingham. Ecc. Antiq. Book xv. Sec. 7. 44 HISTORY. ing of thanks, all the people say, in joyful assent, t Amen.' When the president has performed this giving of thanks, and the peo- ple have assented to them by their prayers, those persons who are called deacons and ministers, distribute the bread, and wine mixed with water, over which the thanks have been given, to every one present, and they then carry it to the absent. This food is called by us 'the Eucharist,' and no one is allowed to par- take of it, but he who believes our doctrine to be true, and has been washed in the bath (of baptism) for the remission of sins and re- generation, and who lives as Christ has com- manded."* And then afterwards he goes on thus : " For the apostles, in the commentaries written by them, which are called gospels, have handed down that Jesus made the institution in this manner : when he had given thanks, he received the bread, and said, ' Do this in remembrance of me ; this is my body ;' and in the same man- ner when he had received the cup, he said, * This is my blood.' We indeed call these things mutually to memory, and in all the oblations which we offer, we praise, with bless- ing, the Creator of all, through his Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit; and on that day which is Sunday, all who live in towns, or in the country, meet together, and the com- mentaries of the apostles, or the writings of * Justin Martyr, Apol. 2, p. 97 and 98. SECOND CENTURY. 45 the prophets, as the time permits, are read. Then, when the reader has finished, the pre- sident delivers an oration, in which he instructs the people, and encourages them to imitate things so delightful. After this we all rise up in common, and pour forth our prayers, and when the prayers are over, bread is brought forward, and wine mixed with water ; and a distribution and communion is made to every one present of these elements, over which the thanks have been given, and they are sent to the absent by the deacons. They also who are rich and are willing, each according to his own will, contributes as seems good to him, and the collection is deposited in the hands of the president : from this source he affords assistance to orphans and widows, and those who, on account of disease or any other cause, are in want, or in prison ; or, to sum up all in one word, the president is the guardian of all indigent persons." Nothing can possibly be more full, or more satisfactory, than this account of the Lord's Supper, as it was observed about the middle of the second century ; nothing also can be more similar to our own method of celebra- ting it at present, making reasonable allowance for the change of time and manners. But we have still further references : Irenseus,* * IRENJEUS, A.D. 178, a disciple of Polycarp, and Polycarp a disciple of St. John, so that we have in him a direct apos- 46 HISTORY. in the middle of the second century, in describing the Eucharist, writes as follows : " We offer unto him (God) his own gifts, thereby declaring the communication and truth both of flesh and spirit ; for as the bread which is of the earth is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two parts, the one earthly, the other heavenly, so all our bodies receiving the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, whilst they live in hopes of a resurrection ; but we offer these things to him not as if he stood in need of them, but as giving him thanks for his gifts, and sanctifying the creature." So also Cle- ment of Alexandria.* " The blood of the Lord is twofold. For in one sense it is fleshly, by which we are freed from corruption, in the other spiritual, by which we are anointed ; and this it is to drink the blood of Christ, to partake of the purifica- tion of the Lord ; and the mixture of these, that is, of the drink and of the word, is called the Eucharist, an admirable and beautiful grace of which those who partake in faith, are made holy in body and soul." And the same author again, " Christ blessed the wine, and said, ' Take it, and drink : this is my blood,' the holy stream of the church the Word poured forth for the remission of sins." tolical communication. Bishop of Lyons, in France, suffered martyrdom, A.D. 202. * CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, A.D. 194, originally a hea- then philosopher, afterwards presbyter of Alexandria. THIRD CENTURY. 47 THE THIRD CENTURY. Here we find Tertullian* about the year 220, thus speaking : " Every one offers a small alms monthly, or when he will, or as he can, for no one is compelled, but he makes a voluntary oblation. It is not expended in feasting, drinking, and abusive excesses, but in feeding and burying the poor, in providing for orphans and aged people, and such as suffer shipwreck or languish in the mines, or in banishment, or in prison. Only one part of it is spent upon a sober feast of charity, where the poor has a right to feed as well as the rich." t And to shew that as yet no change from the simple doctrine of our Redeemer was at all ventured upon, he says, in another place, " The bread being re- ceived and distributed to his disciples, he made it his body by saying, * This is my body,' that is, * The figure of my body.' "J Again, Origen,|| in the year 230, thus asserts : " We eat the bread that was offered to the * TERTULLIAN, towards the end of the second century and commencement of the third ; originally a heathen, but when converted to Christianity is not known. f Tertull. Apol. c. 39. J Contr. Marc. lib. iv. | ORIGEN, born at Alexandria, a pupil of Clement, before mentioned, a catechist of Alexandria, and afterwards Presbyter, one of the most illustrious of the fathers. Died at Tyre, A.D. 254. 48 HISTORY. Creator with prayer and thanksgiving for the gifts that he has bestowed upon us, which bread is made a holy body by prayer, sanctifying those that use it with a pious mind."* In another place, commenting on the words " Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man," he says, " It is not the matter of the bread, but the word which is spoken over it, which profits him that eats it worthily, and this, indeed, as a typical and symbolical body."f Again, commenting on the old testament, he goes out of his way to refer to the new tes- tament for the purpose of disproving any notion but that of simply and spiritually eating the sacred elements, and he says, " There is also in the new testament, the letter which kills him who does not spiritually understand it. For if you follow this command, ' Unless you eat my flesh, and drink my blood,' according to the letter, this letter kills ; but if you un- derstand it spiritually it does not kill, but there is a vivifying spirit in it." J Once more, in his commenting on the words, " Take, eat ; this is my body," || he says, "For God, the Word, did not call that visible bread which he held in his hands, his body; but the word in the * Origen contra Celsum lib. 8, p. 399. Origen Matt. xv. 11. J Levit. Horn. vii. II Matt, xxvi. 26. THIRD CENTURY. 49 mystery of which that bread was to be broken ; nor did he call that visible drink his blood ; but the word in the mystery of which that drink was to be poured forth." Another father of this century, St. Cyprian,* is equally conclusive as to the practice and opinions of the church : addressing a rich woman who had neglected to make an offering, he says, " You are rich and wealthy, and think that you celebrate the Lord's Supper, yet do not at all respect the corban. You come to the Lord's Supper without a sacrifice ; you take away a part of the sacrifice which the poor has offered.''! The same father, in his epistle to Csecilianus, speaks of mixing water with the wine,J; and mentions the reason for -which it was done : " We see, that in the water the people are represented, but in the wine the blood of Christ ; and when in the cup the water is mixed with wine, the people is made one with Christ ; and the believers and * ST. CYPRIAN. An African, born at Carthage, supposed to have been converted to Christianity, A.D. 246, and made bishop of Carthage, A.D. 248. Being commanded by the Emperor Valerian to offer sacrifice to the gods, which was the usual test of denying Christianity, St. Cyprian answered, " I will not." The pro-consul, by command of the Emperor, said, " It is decreed that Cyprian shall be beheaded." To which the excellent bishop replied, "God be praised:" he was then beheaded, A.D. 258. f Cyprian, de Oper, and Eleemos. \ See the note upon Justin Martyr, quoted at p. 42. D 50 HISTORY. He in whom they believe are joined and mixed ; so in the cup of the Lord, water alone can- not be offered, nor wine alone, for if any one should offer wine alone, the blood of Christ is without us ; but if water alone, the people are without Christ, but when each is mutually joined by a pouring together, and making one, then a spiritual and heavenly sacrifice is performed."* In another epistle the same father says, " When the Lord calls his body bread, which is made up of the union of many seeds, he indicates that the people are in union; and when he calls his blood wine, extracted from many bunches of grapes, and pressed into one, he signifies the flock joined together by the mixture of a multitude in union."! In the same epistle he again refers to it : " Like- wise it appears, that the blood of Christ is not offered if there is no wine in the cup, nor is the Lord's sacrifice celebrated with le- gitimate consecration, unless our offering and sacrifice answer to his passion : but how shall we drink the new wine of the creation of the vine with Christ, in the kingdom of his Father, if in the sacrifice of God the Father, and of Christ, we do not offer the wine, nor mix the cup of the Lord according to the Lord's tradition ?" * Cyprian, Ep. ad Cecil. t Cyprian. Ep. Carthag. THIRD CENTURY. 51 It is true indeed that there are one or two heretical opinions which prevailed about this time, which in some way detract from the unanimity of the Christian world, such as the following: the Hydroparastatse, or Aquarians,* who thought it wrong to use wine in the Eucharist, and, as their name imports, conse- crated water in its stead ; also the Marcosians,t who commenced at the latter part of the second century, taking their names from Marcus, a disciple of the Valentinian heresy ; Marcus was reported, amongst other infamous practices, to be expert in tricks of legerdemain and magic, and this he used to carry on, for the sake of acquiring notoriety, in the sacrament of the Eucharist. Irenseus says of him, " Pre- tending that he was giving thanks for the wine mixed in the chalice, and very much prolonging the words of his invocation, he made the wine appear of a purple or red colour, so that it might appear that Christ's blood was dropped into the chalice in consequence of his invocation." But with the exception of these and similar absurdities, which were ex- pressly called heretical, and therefore denote the general opinion of the church, we may safely say, that for the three first centuries the sacrament of the Eucharist was preserved * See Bingham Eccl. Antiq. Book xv. Sect. 7. f See Echard Eccl. Hist, and Mosheim. D2 52 HISTORY. in the pure and simple state, both in prac- tice and doctrine, in which our Lord ordained it. We have sufficient testimony from the fathers above quoted, that notwithstanding the violent persecutions which the Christians con- tinually suffered, and the many heresies which arose throughout the church on other points, still the sacrament of the Eucharist main- tained its ground, was considered as the Lord's ordinance, free from all superstitious ceremo- nies, the bread and wine signifying not being in reality, but signifying in a spiritual manner, the body and blood of the Saviour of the world. THE FOURTH CENTURY. We now come to a period most important in the history of the Church. At the com- mencement of this century, the Christian re- ligion not only was freed from the long suc- cession of persecutions, with which it had before been nearly overwhelmed, but it even became the religion of the state, and a Roman Emperor, one of the most powerful and politic that ever guided the sceptre of the imperial city, became first its advocate, and afterwards its professor. The first of these events may be dated at A.D. 313, the latter at A.D. 324. Its close was equally important, for though FOURTH CENTURY. 53 at first Christianity was only tolerated, and took but its share in the opinion of mankind ; in the reign of Theodosius, about the year 380, we find its advancement so rapid, and its hold on the people so secure, that by a royal edict the Christian religion was prescribed as the only true religion, the worship of idols forbidden, and the pagan temples of the Ro- man gods subverted and abolished. But though Christianity thus gained in political power and importance, it was beginning to lose in spirit- ual sincerity ; it was beginning to be divided by schisms and dissensions, upon points of mystery and faith, and the root of those per- versions of the gospel and of simplicity, was now planted, which was soon to grow up into papal domination, and temporal tyranny. " The rites and institutions by which the Greeks, Romans, and other nations, had for- merly testified their religious veneration for fictitious deities were now adopted, with some slight alterations, by Christian bishops. Hence it happened that in these times the religion of the Greeks and Romans differed very little in its external appearance from that of the Christians. They had both a most pompous and splendid ritual ; gorgeous robes, mitres, tiaras, wax tapers, crosiers, processions, lus- trations, images, gold and silver vases ; and many such circumstances of pageantry were equally to be seen in the heathen temples 54 HISTORY. and in the Christian churches."* In the midst of these dangers it was not likely that the sacrament of the Eucharist should altogether escape : we accordingly find many signs of approaching changes, and, though these changes were as yet hardly visible, still they point, with a very clear finger, to those great errors of the church of Rome which were afterwards to follow. " It appears by innumerable testi- monies, that the Lord's Supper was administered in some places two or three times in a week, in others on Sunday only, to all those who were assembled to worship God. It was also sometimes celebrated at the tombs of martyrs, and at funerals, which custom undoubtedly gave rise to the masses, that were afterwards performed in honour of the saints, and for the benefit of the dead. In many places the bread and wine were holden up to view before their distribution, that they might be seen by the people, and contemplated with religious respect ; and hence, not long after, the adoration of the symbols."! Many of the fathers have left us accounts of the forms used in this century. We have ex- press liturgies composed by St. Basil J and St. * Mosheim, vol. i. p. 351. f Mosheim, vol. i. p. 357. % BASIL, commonly called the Great, Bishop of Csesarea. Opposed to the Arians. Died, A.D. 379. FOURTH CENTURY. 55 Chrysostom,* in which the prayers and thanks- givings are given at length. St. Chrysostom's words are these : " We offer unto thee this rational and unbloody service, beseeching thee to send thy Holy Spirit upon us and these gifts. Make the bread the precious body of thy Christ, and that which is in the cup, the precious blood of thy Christ ; transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit, that they may be to the receivers for the washing of their souls, for pardon of sins, for the participation of the Holy Ghost, for obtaining the kingdom of heaven."! In addition to this, we have many allusions in St. Chrysostom's homilies. In commenting on the words, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ," he says, " We also, in offering the cup, recite the ineffable mercies and kindness of God, and all the good things we enjoy ; and so we offer it, and com- municate, giving him thanks for that he hath delivered mankind from error, that he hath made us near who were far off, that when we were without hope, and without God in the world, * CHRYSOSTOM, John, surnamed Chrysostom on account of his eloquence, (golden mouth,) Archbishop of Constantinople, A.D. 398. The empress Eudoxia having set up an image near the church, Chrysostom lifted up his voice against the abomi- nation. On account of this he suffered much persecution, was driven into exile, and died in his sixtieth year, the brightest ornament of the Christian church. t Chrys. Liturg. t. 4. p. 614. 56 HISTORY. he hath made us the brethren of Christ, and fel- low-heirs with him. For these, and all the like blessings, we give him thanks, and so come to his holy table."* And the Council of Antioch, which was held in the year 341, f gives as one of the canons, the following very strong remark upon the necessity of all persons communicating in the sacrament : " All such as come into the house of God, and hear the holy scriptures read, but do not communicate with the people in prayer, and refuse to partake of the Eucharist, (which is a disorderly practice,) ought to be cast out of the church." J From the above passages we sufficiently see that the sacrament of the Eucharist, as to essen- tial doctrines, still maintained its place in the * Chrys. Horn, in 1 Cor. p. 532. f Greg. Nyss. Orat. Catech. c. 37. \ Cone. Antioch. can. 2. In the church where St. Chrysostom presided, some per- sons happened to remain during the communion service, and yet would not communicate. Upon which Chrysostom ad- dressed them thus : "Are you unworthy of the sacrifice, and unfit to partake of it ? neither then are you worthy of the prayers. Do you not hear the herald proclaiming, 'All ye that are penitents withdraw !' All they that do not communi- cate are penitents." The people were divided into two classes. They were either fit to be communicants, and therefore were in duty bound so to do or they were unfit, and therefore penitents. Would that there were but these two classes in our church of England. See Bingham and Chrys. Horn, in Ephes. FOURTH CENTURY. 57 general body of the church. Many superstitious observances, might, no doubt, have been origi- nated in this century ; and we have one very remarkable writer, Cyril of Jerusalem,* who enters into some detail as to the ceremonies which seem to have been in use at that period. In what is called his Mystagogic Catechetical Discourses, he gives the following directions : " When the priest says, * Taste, and see how good the Lord is/ the persons receiving the bread are to open their hands, place the left on the right, keeping the fingers closely attached to each other, for fear of letting the smallest crumb fall ; and after eating, they are to bow down the head as in adoration, and then drink off the cup : while their lips are moist with the wine, they are to apply their hands to them, touch their foreheads, eyes, and ears, with their wet fingers, and finally, to render thanks to God for being permitted to partake of this holy communion."! * CYRIL OF JERUSALEM. Ordained presbyter, A.D. 344, and bishop, 350. Deposed three times from his see, but ulti- mately restored by the Council of Constantinople in 381, and died in the year 386. Waterland had so high an opinion of Cyril, that he says, " I do not know any one writer among the ancients who has given a fuller, or clearer, or in the main, juster, account of the holy Eucharist, than this the elder Cyril has done." Water- land's Review. See the observations given in a note at page 62, on the writ- ings of St. Ambrose. f Cyr. of Jerus. Myst. Cat. iv. & v. 58 HISTORY. And not only in ceremonies, but also in doc- trines, this author may seem to convey at first sight many questionable assertions. He certainly does explain, more strongly than any writer of his time, the nature of the sacramental elements ; for thus he speaks : " Consider them (the elements) not as mere bread and wine ; for by our Lord's express declaration, they are the body and blood of Christ ; and though your taste may suggest that they are bread and wine, yet let your faith keep you firm. Judge not of the thing by your taste, but, under a full persuasion of faith, be you undoubtedly assured that you are vouch- safed the body and blood of Christ."* Now these are certainly very strong expressions, and, coupled with the directions above cited, as to applying the wine to the ears, eyes, and so forth, we might be led to suppose that the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation was now com- mencing. But we must place passage against passage ; and, most fortunately, there is another very remarkable expression in the same author, which will immediately set us right ; for he says in the very same work, " We receive the Eucharist with all fulness of faith, as the body and blood of Christ, For under the type of bread you have his body given you, and under the type of wine you receive his blood, that so partaking of the body and blood of Christ, you * Cyr. of Jems. Myst. Cat. iv. & v. FOURTH CENTURY. 59 may become flesh of his flesh, and blood of his blood."* Here there is evidently nothing more than the spiritual communion intended ; and, therefore, it is but fair to infer, that in the former quotation, the expressions, though strong, are nothing more than that figurative and hyper- bolical way of speaking, which the fathers de- lighted to use. But whatever may have been the opinions of St. Cyril, we have abundant testimony from other quarters that the general body of the church still continued in the orthodox faith. In addition to the authors already cited, we have Eusebius,t who expressed himself as follows : " Christ himself gave to his disci- ples the symbols of a divine ceremony, com- manding them to make a representation of his body, for when he no longer wished us to give heed to bloody sacrifices, nor to those which were sanctioned in the law of Moses, in the slaying of different animals, he commanded us to use bread as a symbol of his own body, and thereby suitably signified the splendour and purity of this food." * Cyr. of Jerus. Myst. Cat. iv. t EUSEBIUS, born probably at Csesarea, and bishop of that see, A.D. 320. Origen excepted, he was the most learned and laborious of all the writers of antiquity, and in quantity surpassed even Origen. His ecclesiastical history is the work by which he is best known. Eusebius, lib. viii. Demonstr. Evang. 60 HISTORY. We have also Athanasius :* " For this reason he made mention of the ascent of the Son of man into heaven, that he might draw them away from an understanding which had reference to the body, and that they might learn that the flesh which he spake of, was food from heaven, and spiritual nou- rishment." Again, St. Chrysostom : " Before the bread is sanctified we call it bread, but the divine grace sanctifying it, through the mediation of the priest, it is freed from the appellation of bread, and is thought worthy of the name of the Lord's body, although the nature of bread has continued in zY."t We have Epiphanius, J who compares the water of baptism with the bread of the Eu- charist. For he says, " The virtue of the bread, and the efficacy of the water, receive their power from Christ, so that it is not the bread which becomes of virtue to us, but it is the virtue of the bread ; for the bread * ATHANASIUS, A. D. 326. This father is known principally for his defence against Arius ; he was cruelly persecuted by the Arians during the forty-six years of his episcopacy ; he was deposed no less than five times, but he at last died peaceably in the year 373. Athanasius, ii. 979. t Chrysost. ad Csesar, contr. Appollinarem. J EPIPHANIUS at first embraced the monastic life, and passed several years in the desert of Egypt ; A.D. 367, he was chosen bishop of Constantia ; he lived to the year 403. FOURTH CENTURY. 61 itself is food, but the virtue which is in it tends to the generation of life."* We have Gregory of Nyssa, f who explains and illus- trates his notion of the divine food by com- paring it with an altar, and with a priest; for he says, " This holy altar at which we stand is a common stone by nature, but when it is consecrated to the worship of God it is immaculate. The bread also is at the beginning common bread, but when the mystery has made it holy, it is the body of Christ, and is called so"\ And then he instances the man who as a layman is common, but when dedicated to God becomes holy, though not changed either in body or form. We have Ambrose, || who in discuss- ing the nature of sacraments, makes the fol- lowing question : " What is the word of Christ ? That by which all things were made. The Lord commanded and the heaven was made ; The Lord commanded and the earth was made; the Lord commanded and every creature was made. If, therefore, there is * Epiph. Anaceph. Heres. torn. ii. lib. iii. t GREGORY OF NYSSA, the younger brother of Basil the Great, A.D. 370 ; he was at the council of Constantinople, A.D. 394, and probably died soon after. J Gregory of Nyssa. In bapt. xi. orat. p. 802. \ AMBROSE, born A.D. 340, of -a consular family, was appointed bishop before he was baptized, was baptized Nov. 30, 374, and consecrated bishop of Milan a week after. 6'2 HISTORY. such a force in the word of the Lord Jesus, that those things began to be which were not, how much more is he the operating cause, that those things should be what they were and yet be changed into something else. Perhaps you say I do not see the form of wine. But it has the similitude" And though he certainly is very strong in some of his expressions, for instance, " Therefore you have learnt that from the bread is made the body of Christ, and that the wine and water is poured into the cup, but it is made blood by the consecration of the heavenly word," yet I think that he has no further meaning than is conveyed by our own doctrine of the church of England,* and that the change that * In the articles of 1552 it is indeed asserted, "A faithful man ought not either to believe, or openly confess, the real and bodily presence, as they term it, of Christ's flesh and blood in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper ;" but this was afterwards withdrawn, and it is now said, in order that we may not exclude the spiritual presence, "The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner," art. xxviii. And in our church catechism, to the ques- tion, " What is the inward part or thing signified ?" the answer is, " The body and blood of Christ which are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper." And so Jeremy Taylor, in his treatise on the real presence of Christ, lays down as his rule for the interpretation of the fathers, that we must consider such expressions as "the body and blood of Christ," or, " before consecration it is mere bread, but after con- secration it is the body of Christ ;" and so forth, to be used in no different sense from our Lord himself, " This is my body ;" and FOURTH CENTURY. 63 is wrought in the elements is only a spiritual change, not a material one. Such must be his meaning, because in other places he is perfectly decided upon this point ; for instance, " In eating and drinking the flesh and the blood, we signify the things which have been offered for us. You receive the sacrament in a similitude ; it is the figure of the body and blood of the Lord, and you drink the likeness of his precious blood/'* Last of all, we have Augustine :t in quoting the words of St. John, " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you,'* he comments thus, "It is a figure of speech, teaching us that we must communicate with the passion of our Lord, and that we must treasure him up kindly and usefully in the memory, because his flesh was crucified and wounded for us."+ And again, the Lord did not doubt to say, "this is my body," when so he says, " The church of England expresses this mystery frequently in the same form of words, and we are so certain that to eat Christ's body spiritually, is to eat him really ; that there is no other way for him to be eaten really, than by spritual manducation. See Jeremy Taylor, Real Presence of Christ, sect. xii. * Ambrose de sacr. lib. iv. c. 4. t AUGUSTINE, bishop of Hippo, A.D. 395. At first a Ma- nichsean, and a disbeliever in the scripture, but studying under Ambrose at Milan, was baptized in A.D. 387. He was the most eminent Latin father of the church. % August, de doctr. xi. John v.l. 64 HISTORY. he gave the sign of his body."* And again, " If the sacraments had not any likeness to those things of which they are the sacra- ments, they would not at all be sacraments. From the likeness, they receive the name of the things themselves ; as therefore, in a cer- tain way, the sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ, and the sacrament of the blood of Christ is the blood of Christ, so the sacrament of faith is faith." And again : " Understand what I have said spiritually; you are not about to eat this body which you see ; I have commended a sacrament to you, which, being spiritually understood, will give you life."t But we have no further need of testimony, here is witness upon witness, confessor upon confessor, that, throughout this century, the doctrines of the sacrament remained as our Lord intended. From so much being said, and by so many authors, it unquestionably may be inferred, that in some places hereti- cal notions had sprung up, and some of the absurdities, as detailed by Cyril of Jeru- salem in the passage quoted from him, may have prevailed but here, by this cloud of witnesses, we may thank God that sufficient care was taken in his Almighty councils to preserve the record of the primitive faith, * August. Ep. ad Adim. c. 12. t August. Ep. ad Bonifacium. FIFTH CENTURY. 65 and that the Eucharist, to the close of the fourth century, stands forth to the Christian world, pure and uncontaminate, in its lead- ing articles of doctrine and of practice. THE FIFTH CENTURY. Towards the middle of this century, the northern nations commenced their invasion of Italy, and towards the close of it the western empire was totally subdued, and the first barbarian king ascended the throne of the Caesars; the barbarian nations, who thus took possession of the imperial city, had already been converted to the doctrines of the Gospel, and therefore religion did not suffer any external diminution from this event, either in its numerical extent or its author- ity; the church, however, as regards its pastors and ministers, was sensibly declining from the simplicity of the Gospel which Jesus preached; " The vices of the clergy," says Mosheim, " were now carried to the most enormous excess, and all the writers of this century, whose probity render them worthy of credit, are unanimous in their accounts the luxury, arrogance, and voluptuousness of the sacerdotal order: but these opprobrious stains in their character would never have been en- dured, had not the greatest part of mankind been sunk in superstition and ignorance. E 66 HISTORY. Multitudes of people were in every country admitted, without examination or choice, into the body of the clergy, the greatest part of whom had no other view than the enjoy- ment of a lazy and inglorious repose."* As to doctrine, the sacred and venerable sim- plicity of primitive times was fast departing; superstition, the natural fruit of ignorance, grew apace, and difficulties, disputes, and schisms, mark the declining character of general Christ- ianity. The images of those who during their lives had been celebrated for sanctity, were now honoured with a particular worship, and the bones of martyrs, and the figure of the cross, were looked upon as objects of protection against danger, and as charms against the machinations of Satan. Another feature in the changing aspect of religion, is that of the institution of monastic orders ; the monks, who had formerly lived only for themselves, were now looked upon as a sacerdotal order, and took the first place, or at any rate a very eminent place, in the ranks of the clergy ; from this monastic system sprang forth every sort of superstition and austerity. The class or sect called Stylites or Pillar- men are of all the most extraordinary, per- sons who stood motionless upon the top of pillars, expressly raised for a trial of their * Mosheim, vol. ii. p. 26, 27, 28, 8vo. edit. FIFTH CENTURY. 67 patience, and there remaining for years and years amidst the admiration and applause of the stupid populace.* Amid this general depravation of morality, the clergy declining in virtue, the people sink- ing in ignorance, no wonder that the sacrament of the Eucharist should begin to be clouded over in the universal darkness which prevailed. Rites and ceremonies were multiplied with every possible ingenuity, and the pomp and out- ward splendour of the church increased in pro- portion to its inward corruption. The Agapse, or love-feasts, which had so intimate a con- nexion with the Eucharist, were now discon- tinued, and the Eucharist itself was looked upon as a superstitious act between the priest and God, rather than an act of devotion, or a communion between Christ and his church. Still, however, no outward or public act of the church had changed its nature ; no bull " The most extraordinary of these fanatics was Simeon, who is described as dwelling upon a column raised to the height of sixty feet from the ground : there he existed, through summer and winter, for thirty years, making his devotions by various inflexions of the body, sometimes with outstretched arms in the figure of the cross, sometimes bending down his head so as to reach the feet. And thus he thought to please God ! See Theod. Vita Patrum. book ix. Such practices and opinions may be justly brought forward to display the growing darkness which threatened the Christian world, and will diminish our surprise when we find other parts of Christian duty, such as the Eucharist, similarly perverted. 68 HISTORY. or edict of any bishop or council had spoken out upon the subject ; it was merely the gen- eral tone of depravity, ignorance, and supersti- tion, which as yet affected it : for this we have the testimony of the following writers : First, Theodoret,* in his dialogue between Eranistes the Eutychian,t and Orthodoxus, on the divine mysteries, the subject of the Eucharist is accidentally introduced.^ " Orth. The mystic symbols which are offered by the priest to God ; tell me of what are they the symbols? " Er. Of the body and blood of the Lord. " Orth. Of the body which is really so, or not really so ? " Er. Really so." And then afterwards : " Er. It happens, opportunely, that you are speaking of the divine mysteries ; for from this * THEODORET, born at Antioch, appointed bishop of Cyrus, a remote district of Syria, A.D. 423. He was principally cele- brated in taking the part of Nestorius against Cyril. He died about the year 457. f Eranistes in this dialogue is supposed to represent the opinions of heretics, and principally the followers of Eutyches, while Orthodoxus represents the catholic faith of the church. The heresy of Eutyches consisted in teaching that there was only one nature in Christ, that of the Incarnate Word. And in the dialogue above cited, Eranistes is contending that as in the sacrament the bread was changed into Christ's body, so in the ascension the humanity was turned into the divinity. + Theod. Dial. 2. t. 4. p. 85. FIFTH CENTURY. 69 very thing I will shew you that the body of the Lord is changed into another nature. Answer, therefore, my questions. What do you call the gift which is brought before the invocation of the priest ? " Orth. That which is made a nutriment from seeds. " Er. How do you call the other sign ? " Orth. A sort of draught. " Er. After the consecration, how do you call them? " Orth. The body of Christ and the blood of Christ. " Er. And do you believe that you are made partaker of the body and blood of Christ ? " Orth. I so believe. " Er. As therefore the symbols of the body and blood of our Lord are one thing before the consecration of the priest, but are changed after the consecration, and are another thing, so the body of the Lord after his assumption is changed into a divine substance. " Orth. You are caught in the net which you yourself have made. For the mystic signs do not recede from their nature after consecration, for they remain in their former substance, and figure, and form, and can be seen and touched as before ; but they are understood to be those things which they have been made, and are thought so, and are worshipped as the things which they are thought." 70 HISTORY, Now in this curious dialogue we are swayed backwards and forwards by the opposite assertions contained in it. It shews that a notion of some mysterious change, of worshipping the elements, and a communion something more than spiritual, prevailed abroad ; though at the same time, it appears to be the opinion of Theodoret himself, that there was only a spiritual and mystical addition to the elements, not a direct alteration. But he speaks again for himself in another of his dialogues : " Our Saviour would have O those who are partakers of the divine mys- teries not to mind the nature of the things they see, but by the change of names to believe that change. For he that called his own natural body wheat and bread, and gave it the name of a vine, he also honoured the visible symp- toms or elements with the name of his body and blood, not changing their nature, but adding grace to nature."* There is one more father in this century who gives his opinions on this subject, Gelasius.t In treating upon the two natures of Christ, he is led to speak of the nature of the sacraments as follows : " Certainly the sacrament which * Theod, Dial. torn. 4. p. 17. f GELASIUS, Bishop of Rome, A.D. 495. A strenuous op- poser of the Pelagians and Eutychians. The passage above cited is drawn forth as an argument in his writings against Eutyches. FIFTH CENTURY. 71 we receive of the body and blood of Christ is a divine thing, because by them we are made partakers of the divine nature ; and yet the substance and nature of bread and wine do not cease, but the image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries. It is, therefore, shewn as sufficiently evident to us, that we must so think in regard to our Lord Christ, as we pro- fess, celebrate, and receive, under his image, that as they (the bread and wine) pass into the di- vine substance, by the efficacy of the Holy Spirit, and yet their proper nature remains, so is the great mystery whose efficacy and virtue they represent."* Again, the error of communicating in one kind only, seems in this century to be first agitated ; for we find Gelasius in another place thus speaking : " Certain men, when they have received that part of the sacrament which is conveyed by the sacred body, abstain from the cup of the sacred blood, who without doubt, (since I know not by what superstition they are hindered,) ought either to receive the whole sacrament, or to be kept away altogether ; be- cause there cannot be a division of one and the same mystery without great sacrilege.''! Likewise upon the necessity of every person * Gelas. de duabus in Christo naturis. Bibl. Pair. v. 671. f Gratia. De Consecr. Dist. 2 Can. 12. 734 HISTORY. in the church communicating, the Council of Toledo, which was very early in the present century, thus directs : " Concerning those who enter the church, and are found never to com- municate, let them be admonished that if they do not communicate, they must submit to penance."* Such is the testimony for the fifth century. While it shews the continuance of the Eucha- rist as a Christian feast, at the same time it implies the doubts and false opinions of the rest of the Christian world. The necessity of arguing against transubstantiation, as in the case of Theodoret, implies that there had al- ready commenced a notion of the visible and real presence of Christ's body in the sacrament. Nevertheless, the most eminent men in the church, as we see by these quotations, remained as yet sound in the faith, even as Jesus him- self had delivered it. THE SIXTH CENTURY. The opening of the sixth century is not re- markable for any great change in religious opinion. It is occupied principally by the reign of the emperor Justinian in the east, while the western empire is divided between * Cone. Tolet. 1 Can. 13. SIXTH CENTURY. 73 the Exarchate of Ravenna, and the kingdom of the Lombards. The seat of dominion is transferred from the once proud city of Rome to Constantinople. The Italians groan under the joint pressure of famine, pestilence, and the tyranny of barbarous strangers ; while the bishop or pope of Rome is now silently acquiring more spiritual influence and greater temporal authority. The distress of the people compels them to lean upon any arm that may be ex- tended for their help, and they are content to obviate present emergences at the risk of fu- ture oppression. Thus it was, after many years of painful and vexatious misrule, when the pa- pal chair was filled by Gregory the First, a politic and ambitious prelate, the citizens of Rome gladly threw themselves upon his pro- tection, and established him in a much more extended temporal authority than any previous bishop had enjoyed. The words of a great historian, in relating this first approach to a temporal sovereignty, on the part of a Chris- tian minister, are as follow. They well describe the craft and the imposture to which the church had resorted, to maintain her former dignity : " Like Thebes, or Babylon, or Carthage, the name of Rome might have been erased from the earth, if the city had not been animated by a vital principle, which again restored her to honour and dominion. A vague tradition was embraced, that two Jewish teachers, a tent- 74 HISTORY. maker and a fisherman, had formerly been exe- cuted in the circus of Nero, and at the end of five hundred years, their genuine or fictitious relics were adored as the palladium of Chris- tian Rome. The pilgrims of the east and west resorted to the holy threshold, but the shrines of the apostles were guarded by miracles and invisible terrors ; and it was not without fear that the pious catholic approached the object of his worship." " But the power as well as virtue of the apostles resided with living energy in the breast of their successors, and the chair of St. Peter was filled, under the reign of Maurice, by the first and greatest of the name of Gregory."* The substance of which is, that when temporal dominion and temporal glory deserted the once-favoured city of Rome, the remembrance of those primitive ages, when the blood of Christian martyrs flowed through her streets, became a refreshing comfort to her mind. And the clergy, taking advantage of the depression under which the people laboured as to temporal things, directed them to look to spiritual things for consolation, and scrupled not for this purpose, to use any fraud or im- posture that might offer itself, to gain the at- tention of the populace. Thus their minds, taught to submit, to admire, and to reverence the superior sagacity of an ambitious clergy, * Gibbon, vol. viii. p. 161, 8vo. edit. SIXTH CENTURY. 75 they became an enslaved and bigoted people : they threw away the freedom -with which Christ had endued them, and made those who wielded against them the juggling tricks of pretended miracles for the sake of Christ's glory, not only their leaders in spiritual things, but also in temporal. We must be minute in watching this turn of affairs, because it is evi- dently from this period that the corruptions of the church of Rome, and involved in that, the corruptions of the Eucharist, took their rise. By the great acquisition of power which the church first obtained under the pontificate of Gregory the First, or the Great, as he is ge- nerally termed, first began the usurpation and the sovereignty of Papal Rome; and strange to say, the spiritual bishop was soon to be lost in the more dazzling character of the temporal prince. The bishops of Italy, and the neighbour- ing islands joined in acknowledging the pope's supremacy. All translations and episcopal promotions were managed by his authority. The popular election of bishops was discon tinued, or at least controlled by his inter- ference : forty monks were dispatched to our own country to propagate his opinions and to baptize the Anglo-Saxons in the faith of the Roman church, and while these things occupied him in his clerical capacity, with no less adroitness did he act in politics, 76 HISTORY. warding off', by constant mediation, the attacks of the Lombards, and while the enemy stood at the gates of the city of Rome, ready to conquer and destroy, the bishop, now armed with the affections of the people, ventured upon his own ground to negotiate peace and independence. Thus he seemed at once to establish himself by the splendour of his abilities, and the skill of his policy, without regard either to the Exarchate of Ravenna, or the emperor of the east, as the sole direc- tor both of the church and of the state. In the formation also and direction of the public liturgies, the same activity displayed itself. Hitherto the public worship of God had been observed by every nation in its own language.* The celebration of the Eu- * The church of Rome at the present day uses the Latin lan- guage as the language of her prayers, no matter what the lan- guage of the people may be ; but such was not always her custom. The fourth council of Lateran, A.D. 1415, canon ix. says, that " because in most parts there are within the same state or diocese people of different languages, having under one faith various rites and customs ; we distinctly charge that the bishops provide proper persons to celebrate the divine offi- ces and administer the sacraments according to the difference of languages, instructing them both by word and by exam- ple." The council of Trent, however, A.D. 1562, decrees directly the reverse : " Although the mass contains much instruction for the faithful people, yet it did not seem good to the fathers that it should be every where celebrated in the common tongue." They must reconcile this as they can. SIXTH CENTURY. 77 charist had been publicly observed with the plainness and simplicity with which its divine founder had appointed it. But simplicity did not suit the temper of the times. The people could not set value unless they saw mystery, and could not esteem a worship which was without ostentation. He accordingly presented to them an entirely new manner of adminis- tration, adorned it with many pompous forms, and sought to enliven the devotion which should attend it, by the power of novelty, and the charms of countless ceremonies. This new form of celebrating the Eucharist was called " The canon of the mass"* But notwithstanding the great influence of Gregory, it was not till some years had elapsed that it was adopted by all the Latin churches, and though it was the forerunner of danger- ous abuses, even yet, in itself it affected not the essence or the original substance of the institution, overloading it with cumbrous dis- play, rather than changing or destroying its foundations. We may allow that its great and essential forms bread and wine, to be * The reason of the name mass may not perhaps be under- stood. The Latin word is missa, and signifies no more than dismissal. The catechumens and that portion of the church which did not communicate, penitents, and others, were dis- missed by the deacon upon his saying the words, "Ite, missa est," and so it came to pass that the remaining part of the ser- vice, or communion, received the name of "missa," and in English, mass. 78 HISTORY. partaken by the faithful, as representing the body and blood of Christ were still main- tained ; but as in all cases of an ignorant or superstitious people, the eye was to be pleased more than the heart, and the imagina- tion rather than the intellect. That this was the general state of opinion, we may gather from the following writers : Fulgentius* " But in that sacrifice there is a giving of thanks, and a commemoration of the flesh of Christ, which he gave for us, and his blood which he shed for us."t And again, commenting on the words, " This cup is the new testament of my blood," he says, " That is, this cup which I give you, represents the new testament," &c. FacundusJ " Now the sacrament of adoption may be called adoption ; as we call the sacra- ment of his body and blood, which is in the consecrated cup, his body and blood ; not because the bread is properly his body, nor the cup his blood; but because they contain the mystery of his body and blood: whence our Saviour, when he blessed the bread and cup, and gave them to his disciples, called * FULGENTIUS, bishop of Ruspa, bom, A.D. 468, and appointed bishop, A.D. 504, was principally engaged against the Arians. t Ad Petrum. c. xix. | FACUNDUS, bishop of Hermiana, in Africa, A.D. 540. His principal work was, "The Defence of the Three Chapters," from which the above quotation is taken. SIXTH CENTURY. 79 them his body and blood." Where Bingham remarks, "It is plain, according to Facundus, that the bread and wine are not properly the body and blood of Christ, but properly bread and wine still, and only called his body and blood : as baptism and circumcision are called adoption, because they are the sacra- ments of adoption, and not the very thing which they represent."* Again, Ephrem,t bishop of Antioch, who wrote against the Eutychians: " No man that hath any reason, will say, that the nature of palpable and impalpable, visible and invisible, is the same ; for so the body of Christ, which is received by the faith- ful, does not depart from its own sensible substance, and yet it is united to a spiritual grace."! So Dionysius,|| the Areopagite, says, "These things (the sacred elements placed upon the * Book xv. c. v. s. iv. f EPHREM. After obtaining considerable secular eminence, Ephrem dedicated himself to the service of the church. During an earthquake which destroyed the city of Antioch, and in which the bishop, Euphrasius, had perished, Ephrem became so popular from his charitable exertions, that he was chosen his successor, A.D. 526. \ Ephrem ad Photium, cod. 229. \ DIONYSIUS. It is thought that the name of the Areopagite, does not rightly belong to this Dionysius, but whether or no, does not much matter, as the quotation above made, belongs to some author of the sixth century, and is equally applicable to our present purpose. 80 HISTORY. altar) are symbols, and not the truth or re- ality." So Hesychius,* speaking of the same mystery : " It is both bread and flesh too." And so Procopius,t of Gaza: " He gave to his disciples the image of his own body." To these authors, thus incidentally convey- ing the opinions of the church, we must add the council of Agde, which issued a decree, specifying certain times at which it was ne- cessary to communicate. " The laity who do not communicate on the day of our Lord's nativity, Easter and Whitsuntide, cannot be called Catholics, nor can be reckoned among Catholics." This was indeed a great deviation from the original custom of weekly com- munion, and it displays a great declension of religious feeling on the part of the people, that such an edict was necessary ; but we must be thankful that even thus much was retained we must be thankful that in spite of the forms and ceremonies and superstitious rites which Gregory introduced, still the sa- crament of the Eucharist in any way con- tinued its hold upon the church ; and when we have examined the authors above quoted, and at the same time take into consideration the lamentable state of ignorance and su- perstition into which the world was plunged, * HESYCHIUS, bishop of Jerusalem, supposed to have died about the year A.D. 600. f PBOCOPIUS, born at Gaza, a Sophist, A.D. 529. SIXTH CENTURY. 81 that it was " the blind leading the blind," that the public ministers and teachers of re- ligion were for the most part as ignorant as the people whom they were appointed to teach; that the worship of images and of saints, the fire of purgatory, the power of relics to heal the diseases of the body and of the mind, that these and similar absurdities generally prevailed the only wonder is that the Eucharist continued as it did ; that no further inroads than that of calling it " the mass" and adorning it with worldly cere- monies had been made on its apostolical simplicity. But in names and in externals, the seeds are very often sown of internal error ; and so in this case we shall not have long to wait, before the fruits of these superstitions will display themselves to the dishonour of God, and to the subversion, at least temporary subversion, of this holy sacrament. CHAPTER III HISTORY: FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE SEVENTH TO THE CLOSE OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 1 COR. xi. 26. For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death TILL HE COME. THE SEVENTH CENTURY. GREGORY the Great still governed Rome at the commencement of the seventh century, and his power and influence were still in- creasing : a rival, however, in a distant region, was now about to spring up ; a rival whose extraordinary genius, and more extraordinary religion, was soon to expel Christianity from her birth-place, and to dispute her dominion not only in the east, but in every nation of the civilized world. To understand the origin of this new religion, we must remember that the church of Christ, during the progress of SEVENTH CENTURY. 83 six centuries, had contracted many corruptions, and among the worst of those corruptions was the worship of images. How this prac- tice gradually arose it is difficult to ascertain, but it seems to have received its origin, strange as it may appear, at the precise moment when paganism was subverted, and Christianity became the dominant religion of the state. The natural passions of mankind, the infirm reason of the uneducated, and the prejudices of custom, seemed to demand in the converted heathen, something more tangible, something more visible to the senses, than the spiritual and immaterial God of the Christians ; and consequently, when idols were prohibited, and the worship of polytheism was discarded by law, mankind would still delight in the pos- session of some token or memorial of the re- ligion which they were taught to believe. Hence their delight in relics, in the bones of martyrs, in the representation, either by paint- ing or statue, of the apostles and primitive teachers of Christianity: and as God had himself descended upon earth in human form, and had been born of a human mother, nothing would delight the pious and devout Christian so much, as the possession of some me- mento of the Saviour and his Virgin Mother. The transition from love of the relic, to ado- ration, would be easy in an ignorant mind; and thus it might happen, that every saint 84 HISTORY. would have his image, and every martyr his picture, before which, either as mediators or as gods, the catholic would bow the body, or address his prayers. While, then, this de- praved and sensual notion of Christianity was daily making ground, Mahomet, or more pro- perly Mohammed, began to preach in Arabia the unity of God, and himself God's prophet. First, by an insidious policy, and then by the force of arms, he compelled his countrymen to believe his divine mission. The idolatry of Arabia disgusted and displeased him, he turned to the Christians, and there beheld an equal idolatry, the worship of images, and the apparent return to polytheism, in the notion of a Trinity in the Godhead. He might have been at first an enthusiast, but at any rate he made his enthusiasm subservient to his policy ; or he might have been a deep and subtle politician, while he disguised his po- licy in the dress of religious enthusiasm ; but be that as it may, the errors of the Chris- tians in their image worship, and their ab- surd dissensions on the subject of the Trinity, first opened the road to his advances, and made intelligible his watchword, " There is one God, and Mahomet is his prophet." And thus, while he taught the world to disbelieve one error, he made haste to propagate a greater ; and following it up with vigour, with subtilty, and with the force of arms, his religion, du- SEVENTH CENTURY. 85 ring the course of twelve centuries, embraced, and still continues to embrace, to a great extent, the Indian, the African, and the Turk. But how does our more immediate object become affected by this ? Nothing, perhaps, ever affected it so much as the doctrine of image worship. Nothing, perhaps, laid the foundation of the Romish notion of transubstantiation in a greater 'degree, than the carving of images, and the searching for relics as objects of love and worship. The canon of the mass was now cele- brated with greater splendour, in proportion as the doctrines of the church were more sensual. The elements of the Eucharist were held forth to the public view as objects of admiration, because the public had been taught to value religion by the external aids of crosses, statues, and pictures. The priests were adorned in their vestments with more costly decoration ; because, again, the people had been taught to gaze at, and admire, before they loved; and, like the savage, were caught by glitter and display, rather] than instructed and elevated by inward holiness and faith. The following anecdote from] the life of Gregory the Great, will display an approach to transubstantiation curiously answered: " A woman to whom he was about to give the Eucharist in the usual form of words, ' The] body of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve_j thy soul,' laughed at the form, and 86 HISTORY. being asked the reason for her so doing, said, it was because he called that the body of Christ which she knew to be bread, as she had made it with her own hands."* But the ex- pression, in this case, " The body of our Lord Jesus Christ," need not have rendered that answer necessary. It might merely have been used in the same spiritual sense in which we at the present day administer the sacred sym- bols : but be that as it may, it displays a general popular notion of some mysterious change. It shews that the thought of transub- stantiation was already rife among the people, though not yet embodied in words. Gregory himself could not have used it in any sense of transubstantiation, because we know from several passages in his writings, that his opinions were on the contrary side. However he might have destroyed the primitive simplicity of the Eucharist by his costly and pompous ceremonies, he yet, as to doctrine, maintained the orthodox faith. In one place he says: " Although the body should be conse- crated in many places, and innumerable days, yet there are not many bodies of Christ, nor many cups, but one body of Christ, and one cup," &c. : whereas the doctrine of transubstan- tiation would make each sacrifice, and each communion, a new body. * Greg. Vita, lib. ii. c. 41. SEVENTH CENTURY. 87 In addition to Gregory* we have two emi- nent writers in this century, who have ex- pressed opinions on this point, but unfor- tunately they are directly opposed to each other. The one is Isidore, the other Eli- gius. The former of these, Isidore,! is of the same opinion as Gregory, and writes as follows : The sacrifice of the Lord's Supper is received by the whole church fasting, for so it pleased the Holy Spirit, through the apostles, that in honour of so great a sacra- ment, the body of our Lord should enter the mouth of the Christian before other food. For the bread which we break is the body of Christ, who said, ' I am the living bread which came down from heaven ;' and the wine is his blood, as is written, 'I am the * The life of Gregory extended to the year A.D. 604, we may therefore include any testimony from his writings as belong- ing to the commencement of the seventh century. t ISIDORE was born at Seville in Spain, afterwards bishop of that see ; in A.D. 633, he presided at the fourth national council of Toledo. He died A.D. 636. J It seems to have been the custom of the church in primitive times to celebrate the Eucharist fasting, excepting on one day, which was the Thursday in Passion week. Bingham cites a great many authorities to shew this custom, but at the same time does not think that it was invariable. The council of Carthage decreed, that "the sacrament of the altar should not be received by any but the fasting, except on one annual day, called ' csena Domini.' See Bingham, book xv. c. vii. s. 8. and Hospinian Hist. Sacr. vol. i. p. 25. 88 HISTORY. true vine ;' but the bread, because it strengthens the body, is therefore called the body ; and the wine, because it makes blood in the flesh, is therefore referred to the blood of Christ. But these, while they are visible, yet being sanctified by the Holy Spirit, pass into the sacrament of the divine body."* Again, in another place, he says, " As the visible sub- stance of bread and wine nourish the out- ward man, so the word of Christ, who is the bread of life, refresheth the souls of the faithful, being received by faith." t Again, in the same writer, we find the assertion, that there are only two sacraments, " one baptism, the other the body and blood of Christ, which are called sacraments, for this reason, because, under the appearance of corporeal things, the divine virtue secretly works the force of a sacrament, whence, from their secret or sacred virtues, they are called sacraments."^ While, however, these passages testify clearly the orthodox faith, we have an extremely re- markable assertion in Eligius,|| in the year 650, of precisely a contrary tendency, one which boldly and openly asserts the doctrine of tran- * Isid. de Eccl. Off. lib. i. c. 18. t Isid. Orig. lib.vi. c. 19. % Ibid. | ELIGIUS, born near the city of Limoges, in France ; he for some time practised the trade of a goldsmith, afterwards bishop of Noyon. Died A. D. 659. EIGHTH CENTURY. 89 substantiation. " Know truly, and believe firmly, that as the flesh of Christ which he assumed in the womb of the Virgin is his true body, and was slain for our salvation, so the bread which he gave to his disciples, and which his priests daily consecrate in the 'church, is the true body of Christ. And there are not two bodies, the flesh which he assumed and the bread, but only one body, in so much as it is broken and eaten."* We should be glad indeed to adopt the rule given by Bishop Taylor, and to make full allowance for the figurative language of the times, but the peculiar force of the above expressions cannot easily be overcome. " As the flesh of Christ is his body, so the bread." It seems at once to reject all interference of explanation by any spiritual meaning. The popular superstition was already making its way to the guides and rulers of the people. THE EIGHTH CENTURY. We have already seen the rise of image worship in the church of Rome, and the con- sequent rise of the Mohammedan religion in Africa. We now have to trace another conse- quence of this absurd perversion of Christianity, * Eligius, Horn. xv. 90 HISTORY. no less than that of a totally new empire in the west, and the entire separation of the Roman pontiff from all intercourse with the eastern church. Leo, the Isaurian, emperor of the east, conceiving that the worship of senseless stocks and stones was more suitable to pagans than to Christians, exerted himself most vigor- ously to destroy it. He at once prohibited the setting up of any images or pictures in the churches, and ordered the destruction of those which had already been made objects of adoration. The immediate consequence was a civil war in all the Italian provinces. Pepin was now king of the Franks, Stephen the pope of Rome. The pope, fearful on the one hand that he should suffer from his adherence to image worship at the hands of Leo, and being at the same time pressed by the Lombards, who harassed his dominions in another quarter, made application to Pepin for assistance. Pepin, who was an usurper, and had dethroned his lawful sovereign Childeric, was glad at any price to obtain the countenance of the church. He therefore sent the required assistance to the pope, twice defeated the king of the Lombards, and established the Roman pontiff in all the dominions of the Exarchate of Ravenna. This grant of territory and dominion was further augmented and confirmed by Charlemagne, the son of Pepin ; and the pope, in return for these substantial gifts, was 'glad to confer the sanction EIGHTH CENTURY. 91 of the church on the establishment of the great western empire under Charlemagne. Such is as brief an account as can well be given of this great historical event. Charlemagne retaining under his empire the general supreme power, while he granted to the church of Rome a subordinate and separate jurisdiction over her especial and appointed territories ; while Leo, surnamed the Iconoclast, or image-breaker, set at defiance by the increased strength thus acquired, was compelled to give way ; and though in the east he succeeded in his wise and Christian endeavours to restore a purer worship, yet by so doing he brought about the great schism between the eastern and western churches, which led very shortly after to their final and complete separation. Thus, then, with regard to religion, we might naturally expect with this increase of power an increase of those abuses which had already com- menced. Mosheim* describes the effect which all this had upon the administration of the Eucharist as follows : " The administration of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, which was deemed the most solemn and important branch of divine worship, was now every where em- bellished, or rather deformed with a variety of senseless fopperies, which destroyed the beau- tiful simplicity of that affecting and salutary * Mosheim, vol. ii. p. 242. 92 HISTORY. institution." In addition to this, we find evident traces of the commencement of solitary masses. Solitary masses are those which are celebrated by the priest alone in behalf of souls detained in purgatory.* The cause of this innovation is easily discerned. The church was now become a church of the world. Temporal power and temporal riches were her delight. The wealthy and noble would gladly leave their wealth to men who had the power, by their prayers and their sacrifices, to obtain for them pardon for their sins and salvation for their souls. Hence, therefore, the doctrine of purgatory being once established, the masses for the dead would be encouraged by the clergy, while the wealth of the laity would be willingly received in return by * The reader will bear in mind that a mass is a sacrifice, and therefore that in the notion of a solitary mass, we must understand that the priest, without any reference to a com- munion, is supposed to offer the sacrifice of the Son of God, and he is supposed to offer that sacrifice in behalf of the souls of the dead. This error could never have arisen without the existence of the previous error that of purgatory. Gregory the Great, in the previous century, was most expressly a believer in purgatory. " We must believe that there is a pur- gatorial fire for certain light faults." Dialog, lib. 4. c. 39. Again, " After the death of the flesh, some are immersed in eternal punishments, others pass to life through the fire of purgation;" and the notion was, that the prayers of the faithful, and the masses of the priest, could expedite the deliverance of the soul from this purgatorial state. That this is still the doctrine of the Roman church, see the decree of the Council of Trent, session xxv. A.D. 1563. EIGHTH CENTURY. 93 those whose temporal glory was the highest point of their ambition. But how glaring, how strange a perversion ! The sacrament of the Eucharist, or thanksgiving, in which all are to communicate, performed by one man, and that without any reference to the living, or the com- memoration of Christ, but as a sacrifice for the souls of the absent and the dead. " This single custom," says Mosheim, " is sufficient to give us an idea of the superstition and dark- ness which sat brooding over the Christian church in this ignorant age, and renders it un- necessary to enter into a further detail of the absurd rites with which a designing priesthood continued to disfigure the religion of Jesus."* Three of the principal authors who flourished in this century are Bede,t John Damascenus,^ and Alcuinus.|| While they speak of the many * Mosheim, vol. ii. p. 244. t BEDE, born in England, A.D. 672. Was looked upon as the wonder and ornament of his age. In science, religion, grammar, and mathematics, considering the general darkness and ignorance of the times, his writings are certainly wonder- ful. He died A.D. 735. \ JOHN DAMASCENUS, called Chrysorrhoas, because of his eloquence. Native of Damascus ; was a great advocate for image worship, and incurred the hostility of Leo the Isaurian. Died in A.D. 750. || ALCUINUS, pupil of the Venerable Bede, and deacon of the church of York : afterwards the head of the monastery of Tours. Died, A.D. 804. A great patron and supporter of learning. 94 HISTORY. errors above alluded to, such as purgatory, relics, solitary masses, and the like, with no uncertain voice, yet they abound in passages concerning transubstantiation, which each party might quote with equal triumph. Alcuinus says, " Every thing that is offered in this obla- tion is a mystery, which ought to be received with purity of faith, but cannot be comprehended by the subtilty of reason ; for one thing is seen, another understood. That which is seen has a bodily appearance ; that which is understood has a spiritual fruit. Christ fills the altar, and proposes himself as food. He is slain, not killed ; he is eaten, not diminished ; he refreshes us, but does not decrease ; though eaten, he lives, because he is risen from the dead. O won- derful and ineffable ! O mystery of faith ! All eat of him, yet each eats the whole ; he is divided into parts, but the whole is in the parts ; he is eaten by the people, yet he remains entire ; he is wholly in heaven, yet he is wholly in the hearts of the faithful. He purges sins, his death makes alive, he strengthens the weak, he preserves the sound."* Now this may be under- stood spiritually, and may be claimed by one side as not favouring transubstantiation ; while in another place he speaks as strongly as any of the Roman church might desire in favour of transubstantiation ; for he says : " I, the least * Alcuin. Conf. Fid. fol. edition, p. 413 EIGHTH CENTURY. 95 of the faithful, do not at all doubt, but for my whole part believe, that the sacrament of divine and life-giving virtue is the true flesh of Christ, on which we feed, and his true blood of which we drink." Damascenus writes as follows : t( As the water of baptism is the laver of regeneration, so also the bread and wine, by the junction of divine grace, becomes the body and blood of Christ. As in baptism, because it is the cus- tom and habit of men to be washed with water, and anointed with oil, he has joined the grace of the Holy Ghost to the oil and water : in the same way, because it is the custom of men to eat bread and drink wine mixed with water, he has joined the divine grace to these, and has made them the body and blood, that we may enjoy those things which are beyond na- ture, by customary means, and things which are according to nature."* In this, there appears nothing beyond the usual notion of a spiritual change. But yet he seems to speak, in another place, as decidedly on the contrary side: " The bread and wine are not the figure of the body and blood of Christ, but his very body deified, because he himself said, ' This is my body ;' not the figure of my body, but ' my body.' "t How can we imagine two such passages as these to proceed from the same pen ? * Damasc. de Orthod. Fid. lib. iv. c. 14. t Ibid. 96 HISTORY. The third author, who was mentioned in Bede, commenting on Mark, he says, that " Christ gave the mysteries of his flesh and blood to be celebrated."* Again, " Christ did not exclude Judas from the holy supper, in which he delivered to his disciples the figure of his holy body and blood." t Again, on the words of John, "Behold the Lamb of God." " He daily taketh away the sins of the world, and washes us from our sins, when the re- membrance of his passion is, again made a sa- crifice on the altar, when the creatures of bread and wine are transferred by the ineffable sanc- tification of the Spirit, into the flesh and blood of Christ, and so his body and blood is slain and poured out, not by the hands of the faith- less to their own destruction, but is received by the mouth of the faithful to their sal- vation. J" Lastly, in Paul, the deacon, || who wrote the life of Gregory the Great, we find the fol- * Bede in Marc. lib. 3. c. 6. f Bede in Ps. 3. | Hospinian remarks on this passage, " From these words of Bede, we understand that the remembrance of the passion of our Lord is the sacrifice which is offered on the altar, for he says that it is offered in the creatures of bread and wine ; there- fore in this sacrifice the substance of bread and wine remain, but they are mystically called the body and blood, and received in sacred communion by the faithful." Hospin. Hist. Sacra, lib. iii. c. 7. I PAUL THE DEACON. He was deacon of Aquileia, historian and poet, A.D. 774. NINTH AND TENTH CENTURIES. 97 lowing assertion, than which nothing can be more decided: "The Creator foreknowing our infirmity, by that power by which he made all things of nothing, and made a body from the flesh of the virgin ; he by the operation of the Holy Ghost turns bread and wine, mixed with water, into his flesh, and blood, their own proper kind still remaining" This then will be sufficient testimony for the opinions of the eighth century. THE NINTH AND TENTH CENTURIES. Hitherto the sacrament of the Eucharist, in spite of the many additions and changes which, as we have seen, had been made from time to time in its form and celebration ; as far as the doctrines of the church were con- cerned, maintained its essential features. We have already seen the opinion of some few authors as decidedly tending to transubstan- tiation, and we have every reason to think that this opinion was general, though not ex- pressed openly by the church.* But image * In fact, the sentiments of Christians concerning the nature and manner of Christ's presence in the Eucharist, had been various and contradictory, but no council had determined either one way or the other. Both reason and folly had been left free ; nor had any imperious mode of faith suspended the exercise of the one, or restrained the extravagance of the other. See Mosheim, vol. ii. p. 306. 98 HISTORY. worship, purgatory, and masses for the dead, were now open doctrines of the church, and it therefore wanted but a little more to assert the corporeal and visible presence of Christ in the elements of the sacrament. Accord- ingly, in the ninth century, first arose the open and avowed doctrine that the bread and wine used by the authority of Christ, as emblems or representations of his body and blood, were after consecration no longer bread and wine, but by the word of prayer, commuted and transformed into the actual and material body and blood of our Saviour. If we consider a moment the state to which men's minds had been reduced, the darkness and stupidity into which they had, by successive inroads of a designing priesthood, been immersed, we shall not be so much surprised even at this. It was an easy transition from imagining a block of stone, or a mass of gold to be God, to imagining a lump of bread, and a cup full of wine, a human body, and human blood. If one were true, why not the other ? if one were to be worshipped, why not the other ? Pascha- sius Radbert, a monk, and afterwards abbot of Corbey, pretended to explain with precision, and determine with certainty, the doctrine of the church ; and for this purpose he composed a treatise on the subject, which he published in the year 831. " His doctrines amounted to the two following propositions : First, that after the NINTH AND TENTH CENTURIES. 99 consecration of the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper, nothing remained of these symbols but the outward figure, under which the body and blood of Christ were really and locally present ; and secondly, that the body of Christ, thus present in the Eucharist, was the same body that was born of the virgin, that suffered upon the cross, and was raised from the dead."* Consonant, however, as this doc- trine was to the ignorance of the times, it was not received without opposition. Charles the Bald, emperor of the Franks, ordered two of the most able men of the day, Ratram, or Bertram,! and Johannes Scotus,J to draw up a clear and rational account of the Eucharist, They did so, and they decidedly pointed out the error into which Radbert had fallen ; both maintained that the bread and wine were mere symbols, and that the body of Christ was not present in the Eucharist, except so far as under- * Mosheim, vol. ii. p. 306. f RATRAM, or BERTRAM, a monk of Corbey, A.D. 840 ; the same monastery of which Radbert was the head. Charles the Bald proposed two questions to him; 1st, "Whether the body of Christ was in the Eucharist?" 2dly, "Whether the body which was born, crucified, and ascended to heaven, was the same which was received by the faithful in the Eucharist ?" Upon these two questions Bertram's tract was written. t JOHANNES SCOTUS, a Scotchman, as his name implies, was a great favourite with Charles the Bald, after whose death he returned to England, and was placed at the head of the univer- sity of Oxford, by Alfred the Great. Died A.D. 886. 100 HISTORY. stood spiritually and emblematically. The writings of Scotus have perished in the ruins of time, but those of Bertram still remain. Having first quoted a passage from Augustine's epistle to Boniface, he thus proceeds : " Since there is one body of the Lord, in which he suf- fered once, and one blood, which was shed for the salvation of the world the sacraments have taken the names of those things, so that they are called the body and blood of Christ, on account of their similitude." And again : " Let your wisdom consider, most illustrious prince, that even if the sacred scripture^ape set aside, it is clearly proved by the words of the fathers that there is no small difference between the body which exists by mystery, and the body which suffered ; because the one is the proper body of the Saviour, nor in it is any figure ; but in the other, which exists in the .mystery, there is the figure, not only of the proper body of Christ, but also of the people who believe in him." And in another place he says, " We are taught by the Saviour, and also the apos- tle Paul, that that bread and that blood which is put upon the altar, is put there in the figure and memory of our Lord's death ; that what is done in the past, he may recall to memory by the present, so that being mind- ful of his passion, we are made through that partakers of his divine promise, by which we are freed from death ; knowing that when NINTH AND TENTH CENTURIES. 101 we shall come into the presence of Christ, we shall not need such instruments by which to be admonished of the things which his great kindness has done."* Nor did Bertram stand alone. Amalarius,f who lived very early in the ninth century, writes thus : " Sacraments ought to have the similitude of the things of which they are the sacraments ; wherefore the priest is like Christ, as the bread and wine are like the body of Christ."j; Again, the same writer says : " It is manifest that the mass is celebrated principally in remembrance of the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, in whose memory it is done." So also Rabanus Maurus : " As the material food externally nourishes the body, so the word of God in it nourishes and confirms the soul. The sacrament is one thing, the virtue of the sacrament another. The sacrament is received in the mouth, but the inner man is satiated by the virtue of the sacrament ; for the sacrament is reduced to the nourishment of the body ; but by the virtue of the sacra- ment, the dignity of eternal life is maintained." While, however, we range Amalarius and Ra- banus Maurus on the side of Bertram, we must * Bertram, on the body and blood of the Lord, t AMALARIUS, bishop of Mentz, A.D. 812. I De Eccles. Off. Prsef. \ RABANUS MAURUS, head of the monastery of Fulda, A.D. 847, and afterwards archbishop of Mayence. 102 HISTORY. place another author of this century as deci- dedly against him. Haymo,* bishop of Halber- stadt, writes thus : " So we believe and faith- fully confess, and hold that that substance, namely, bread and wine, is substantially changed into another substance, by the operation of a divine virtue, i. e., the nature of bread and wine into flesh and blood." And again : " The in- visible priest changes his visible creatures into the substance of his own flesh and blood by a secret power. In which body and blood of Christ, on account of the dread of those who receive it, the taste and form of bread and wine remain, but the nature and substance is alto- gether changed into the body and blood of Christ."! From these passages we clearly see the progress which the doctrine of tran- substantiation had already made, decidedly maintained by one party, but still as decidedly opposed by another party : and thus [the mat- ter remained for the ninth and tenth centuries. The doctrine openly canvassed, but no decision made. Radbert on one side, and Bertram on the other, being the avowed and selected cham- pions of each party, may fairly represent the opinions of the day. * HAYMO, pupil, together with Rabanus Maurus, of Alcuin, abbot of Hersfield, and afterwards bishop of Halberstadt, A.D. 853. t Haymo, on the body and blood of Christ. ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. 103 From this to the middle of the eleventh cen- tury, we hear little more of the controversy, the Christian world being occupied in the Crusades, and in the great schism between the Greek and Latin churches ; the power of the Roman church increasing, and the ignorance of the dark ages now fairly set in ; all authority in matters of faith left to the arbitrary decision of the pope ; and whether with or without evi- dence, for or against reason, the dictum of the priests, the faith of the people. THE ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. The question of Christ's real presence in the bread and wine of the Eucharist again occupies the serious attention of the church: the dispute of Radbert and Bertram is revived, and in the beginning of the century, Berenger,* archdeacon of Angers, a man highly renowned, both on account of his extensive learning and the sanc- tity of his life, stood forth against the prevailing opinion, and stoutly maintained the absurdity and impiety of Radbert's doctrine, t He took the side of Johannes Scotus and Bertram, and persevered with noble resolution in teaching that * BERENGER, born at Tours, in France, archdeacon of Angers, A.D. 1035 ; principally opposed to Lanfranc : died A.D. 1088. f Mosheim, vol. ii., p. 505. 104 HISTORY. the bread and wine of the Eucharist were not changed into the body and blood of our Saviour, but preserved their natural and essential quali- ties, and were no more than figures or external symbols of the body and blood of Christ. Thus he took a solitary position, and a dangerous one, as it soon turned out. Leo the Ninth, then pope, attacked this daring opposition to the popular doctrine with peculiar vehemence ; and in two councils, one at Rome, the other at Vercelli, condemned publicly the doctrine broached by Berenger, and committed to the flames the writings of Scotus, from which the doctrines emanated. Berenger himself was de- posed from his office, deprived of all his reve- nues, and threatened with every evil, tempo- ral and spiritual. For a considerable time, nothing could shake him ; he remained firm in his opinions during the pontificate of Leo. But no sooner was this prelate succeeded by Gregory VII., than new persecutions awaited him ; and at last he was so overpowered by the threats of his enemies, that though his reason was unconvinced, he yet publicly abjured his former opinions ; a confession was drawn up recanting his errors, and declaring, " that the bread and wine, after consecration, were not only a sacrament, but also the real body and blood of Jesus Christ ; and that this body and blood were handled by the priests, and con- sumed by the faithful, not merely in a sacra- ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. 105 mental sense, but in reality and truth, as other sensible objects are." To this he attached his signature ; and being the result of a deliberate council, assembled especially to discuss the point, we may take it as the first open decree of the church in favour of transubstantiation. Nothing can be expressed more clearly, or more free from all ambiguous terms " The body handled and eaten, not sacramentally , but as other sensible objects are" But this was not enough. Two other declarations were imposed upon him ; and at two other separate councils he was compelled again to make declaration of his faith. In the first, " That the bread de- posited upon the altar, became, after consecra- tion, the true body of Christ, which was born of the virgin, suffered on the cross, and now sits at the right hand of the Father ; and that the wine placed upon the altar, became, after consecration, the true blood which flowed from the side of Christ/'* Again, a third time : " That the bread and wine, by the mysterious influence of the holy prayer, and the words of our Redeemer, were substantially changed into the true, proper, and vivifying body and blood of Jesus Christ." This, however, it is but fair to say, that Berenger again retracted be- fore his death, and relapsed into his forme? opinions. * Mosheim, vol. ii., p. 508. 106 HISTORY. Whatever we may think of the vacillation of Berenger, these expressions, drawn up pub- licly by separate councils, as decrees of the church, and confessions of faith, plainly shew the decided terms upon which the church now rested her doctrine of transubstantiation. The year of these confessions is about 1079 ; and advancing from this, into the twelfth century, we find error upon error increasing : no sooner is one confirmed than another starts up no sooner is the real presence of Christ openly avowed by the councils of the church, than they commence the agitation of an en- tirely new question, the giving the cup to the laity. Hitherto the Eucharist had been re- ceived in both kinds by all who approached the steps of the altar : of this, there is abun- dant testimony in the ancient writings ; and even cardinal Bona, who was a strict Roman Catholic writer, confesses that such was the doctrine of the primitive church. " It is very certain," he says, " that anciently, all, both clergy and laity, men and women, received the holy mysteries in both kinds when they were present at the solemn celebration of them. But out of the time of sacrifice, and out of the church, it was customary always, and in all places, to communicate only in one kind. In the first part of the assertion all agree, both Catholics and sectaries; nor can any one deny it, that has the least knoivledge of ec- ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. 107 clesiastical affairs. For the faithful, always, and in all places, from the very first foun- dation of the church, till the twelfth century, were accustomed to communicate under the species of bread and wine; and in the begin- ning of that age, the use of the cup began, by little and little, to be laid aside, whilst many bishops interdicted the people the use of the cup, for fear of irreverence and effusion."* The fact is, then, that the former error of tran- substantiation is the source of the latter, de- nying the cup. As the opinion increased, that the elements in the Eucharist became by con- secration the real body and blood of Christ, it was natural that they should be considered with increased respect, and even adoration, by those who partook of them. In drinking the wine from the cup, it might happen that some would be spilled, or otherwise wasted, in handing it from person to person ; looking upon this as a matter of great profanation, the actual blood of Christ to be so misused by the negligence of man, the clergy would naturally devise means of avoiding it : this they did at first, by sucking the wine from the cup by means of quills, or straws, and after- wards by mingling the two elements together, sopping the bread in the wine, and thus com- municating in both kinds at once. " In England * Bona. Rer. Liturg. lib. 2. c. 18. 108 HISTORY. the custom of mingling the elements so far prevailed, that Arnulphus, bishop of Rochester, in the year 1120, wrote a letter in defence of it; where one Lambert proposes the question to him, why the Eucharist was administered at present after a different and almost con- trary manner, to that which was observed by Jesus Christ, because it was customary at that time to distribute an host steeped in wine to the communicants, whereas, Jesus Christ gave his body and blood separately ? To this, Arnul- phus answers, that this was one of those things which jnight be altered, and therefore, though anciently the two species of bread and wine were given separately, yet now they were given together, lest any ill acci- dents should happen in the distribution of the wine alone, and lest they should stick on the hairs of the beard, or the whiskers, or be spilt by the minister."* On the other hand, Hambertus, who wrote in the eleventh century, inveighed bitterly against the alter- ation, and endeavoured to re-establish the primitive custom; while again, pope Urban the Second, in the council of Clermont, " com- manded it to be so administered to the sick, (that is to say, the bread dipped in wine,) out of abundant caution, for fear the blood should at any time be spilt" The custom, there- * Bingham, bk. xv. c. 5. ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. 109 fore, seems to have depended upon the di- rection of each bishop, some commanding, some not permitting it ; now a council set-^ ling, now a council unsettling it ; until it finally ended by an order that the laity should be deprived altogether of the cup, This was afterwards confirmed by the coun-* cil of Constance, in the fifteenth century ; and while they thus put an end to the dispute whether the bread should be dipped in the wine, or whether each element should be given separately; they fell into a worse error, by totally changing the nature of the sacra^ ment, and curtailing it of one of those parts which our Lord himself had commanded. In addition to the authorities above quoted, we have full testimony of the progress of error and superstition from the following au^ thors. Lanfranc,* who writes thus: " In the appearance of bread and wine which we see, we honour invisible things, namely, the flesh and blood of Christ. Nor do we consider these two appearances from which is conse- crated the body of the Lord, in the same manner before consecration as we do after con- secration; for we confess, before consecration, * LANFRANC, born at Pavia, brought to England by William, Duke of Normandy, and made archbishop of Canterbury; principally celebrated for his writings against Berenger ; died A.D. 1089. 110 HISTORY. that it is bread and wine ; but while it is being consecrated it is converted into the flesh and blood of Christ."* Rupert, f who speaks not only of transubstantiation, but also of the sacrifice made at the altar : "In the bread and wine, is sacrificed the Son of God, in the truth of his flesh and blood."^ Anselm, who writes as follows: " Our senses tell us one thing, our faith another; for our sight persuades that it is only bread, but our faith that it is living and vivifying flesh ; our taste, that it is bread by the flavour ; our hearing, that it is bread by the sound when it is broken ; but our faith tells us that it is the perfect Lamb, received by the faithful." || Again, TheophylactH tells us : " The very body of the Lord is the bread which is sacrificed upon the altar, for Christ did not say, this is the figure of my body, but ' This is my body ;' but since we are infirm, and shudder to eat raw flesh, especially the flesh of men, so it appears bread, but is flesh,** Lastly, Alger,tt * On the Sacr. of Euch. f RUPERT, abbot of Duyts, near Cologne, A.D. 1111. \ Book vii. on Gosp. of St. John. ANSELM, pupil of Lanfranc, and his successor in the see of Canterbury, A.D. 1109. | In Heb. c. x. f THEOPHYLACT, archbishop of Acridia, A.D. 1077, * * In Cap. xxvi. Matt. ft ALGER, monk of Cluny, A.D. 1135, THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH CENTURIES. Ill who is equally, perhaps more decided than any of the former: " We must know, that although the water and wine is mixed at first mystically, yet, after consecration it is drunk as nothing else than blood." And again : " We adore the sacrament as a divine thing, and we address and speak to it as a ratio- nal thing, ' Lamb of God that takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us,' because, it is not what it seems, but because we believe that Christ is there, as he really is."* Can absurdity or blasphemy go beyond this? THE THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH CENTURIES. Little now remains before we arrive at the full climax of the papal perversion of our simple sacrament. We must remember that, in the great question of the real presence, though the church had very decidedly expressed her opinion, as we saw in the case of Berenger, and the confessions of faith to which he was compelled to subscribe ; still there was a great latitude allowed for private interpretation, as long as no public doctrine was maintained. " The church had not determined, by any positive decree, the sentiments that were to be embraced * On the Euch. lib. 1. c. 19. 112 HISTORY. in relation to this important matter. It was reserved for Innocent the Third, in the Lateran Council, in the year 12 L5, to put an end to the liberty which every Christian had hitherto enjoyed, and to decide in favour of the most monstrous and absurd doctrine that the phrenzy of superstition was capable of inventing."* This audacious pontiff pronounced the opinion, which is embraced this day in the church of Rome, to be the only true and orthodox account of the matter, and he had the honour of introducing the term transubstantiation, which was a term hitherto absolutely unknown. The words of the Council of Lateran, by which transubstantiation is decreed, run thus : " There is one universal church of the faithful, out of which no one can be saved, in which the same Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice, whose body and blood in the sacrament of the altar is truly contained under the figures of bread and wine ; the bread being transubstantiated into the body, and the wine into the blood, by the divine power." t The change of the bread and wine, under the hands of the priest, into the actual body and blood of Christ, thus became the fixed tenet of the Roman church ; and this being the case, the bread, or consecrated wafer, being God, it required but a few more steps * Mosheim, vol. iii. p. 217. t Counc. Lateran, A.D. 1215. THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH CENTURIES. 113 to proceed to the worship of that God, and so accordingly the host* was elevated before the gaze of the people. It became an object of worship, and solemn processions were made through the streets, carrying the deified bread to the sick or dying. After this decree of the Council of Lateran, there seem to be very few attempts to call in question during the thir- teenth century the doctrine of transubstantiation. There was indeed some little attempt on the part of John of Paris, towards the close of the thirteenth century, though it did not amount to any actual denial of Pope Innocent's deci- sion. In his writings upon the Eucharist, he taught that the body of Christ was associated with the bread, but that the bread was not transubstantiated ; on account of which he was forbidden to preach, and condemned as an he- retic. With this exception, there is hardly any person of repute who expressed an opinion on * The meaning of the word host is victim, from hostia, a Latin word ; and the use of the wafer, or host, instead of the common bread, arose, like the other errors of the church of Rome, from the superstition of the bodily presence of Christ. Hospinian says, " When they first began to make these little round pieces of bread, like the Roman denarius, little hosts, or mouthfuls, cannot certainly be known. Epiphanius, who lived about the time of the Nicene council, says, that the round pieces of bread were then in use ; others place it at the time of the Emperor Phocas, about the year 607 ; but it is certain that Gregory the Great is the first person who recorded it, about the year 590." Hospinian, Hist. Sacr. lib. iv. c. 6. H 114 HISTORY. the doctrines of the Eucharist. A tacit sub- mission seems to pervade all ranks of men to believe any absurdity which the pope might dictate : and so things continued during the thirteenth, and during the fourteenth centuries. In the midst of the general darkness which per- vaded the world, there broke out indeed from time to time certain faint lights, as harbingers of better things. The Waldenses, or Vaudois, a people dwelling in the valleys of Piedmont, were remarkable as a humble sect of Christians, independent of the authority of the pope, and worshipping God in purity and holiness. Among these and a few other scattered and despised flocks, the original simplicity of the gospel was still maintained, and the spark of true light kept alive, to kindle afterwards the bright and glorious flame of the reformation. In England, also, WicklifFe, the great originator of the re- formation, began to set himself against the power of the Roman church, and to canvass her doctrines, and to preach to the people the pure word of God. But these were solitary exceptions, single rays of light, in the midst of general darkness. Nothing as yet was able to withstand the universal dominion, both spi- ritual and temporal, which the church of Rome arrogated to herself. Kings and people, clergy and laity, all were equally slaves of the vicar of Christ all were equally bound in one vast and connected chain of ignorance, superstition, THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH CENTURIES. 115 and vice. These were the dark ages, aptly so denominated. No writers are found of any purity, or of any authority. All literature is dead- all discussion is silenced all freedom of opinion trampled and held down by the universal do- minion of the popish church. But we have come to the worst. We have come to the final consummation of that power, which God, no doubt for wise purposes, per- mitted to oppress the world for a time. We have seen the original purity, simplicity, and fidelity with which our primitive church for the first six centuries, observed the celebration of the Eucharist. We have then traced the gradual decline of this simplicity in the seventh and eighth centuries, by the doctrines of image worship, and by the addition of external cere- monies, suited to the increase of wealth and temporal power, which the church had acquired. We have then gone rapidly down ; rapidly as the lead that sounds the depths of the ocean, into the darkness of a sensual, depraved, and fanatic religion, no more like the pure and holy religion of Christ crucified, than darkness is to light. We have found the Eucharist, the sim- ple memorial of our Lord, " Do this in remem- brance of me," perverted into a splendid, out- ward, exciting display for the imagination, leaving the heart untouched. We have seen the bread and wine transubstantiated into the actual body and blood of Christ by the word of H2 116 HISTORY. the priest. We have seen the body and blood of Christ, so transubstantiated, set forth as an object of worship and adoration ; the host or victim thus sacrificed, offered to the gaze of the multitude, and the people bowing the knee in prayer to a deified piece of bread of their own creating. We have seen the simple bread, which was, by our Lord's example, to be broken, represented by a consecrated wafer made of paste. We have seen the wine, of which our Lord commanded all to drink, totally denied to the majority of his people. We have seen the very name, " The Lord's Sup- per," or " EUCHARIST," which the primitive teachers of Christianity gave to this holy sacra- ment, perverted and changed into that of "THE MASS ;" and this mass performed, not only as the communion or participation of the living in the benefits of Christ's death, but by the priest alone as a sacrifice for the benefit of the dead. We have seen the body and blood of Jesus, as sacrificed upon the cross once for all, under- going a new sacrifice in the hands of each indi- vidual priest, and the benefits of that sacrifice estimated and obtained, not by purity of heart, righteousness of intention, or liveliness of faith ; but frequently purchased and made bargain for, by the wages of sin, v and the mammon of unrighteousness. CHAPTER IV. HISTORY: FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OP THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 1 COR. xi. 26. For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death TILL HE COME. THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. THE great historical events which distinguished the fifteenth century, are the taking of Con- stantinople by the Turks, and the invention of the art of printing. By the fall of Constan- tinople the Christian church in the east was destroyed, at least so far destroyed as the union of the church with the state may be considered to demonstrate its political power. Christianity was expelled from the seat of her early years ; the bishops and pastors of the church were scattered and impoverished, and all further opposition to the opinions and doctrines of 118 HISTORY. the west was for ever abandoned. But this loss in political strength was more than com- pensated by the increase which was now be- ginning to be felt in moral and intellectual power. The great invention of printing seemed at once to promise the deliverance of mankind from those bonds of superstition and ignorance which it had been the delight of the church of Rome to extend. Information and knowledge were the only requisites which men needed, in order to fling away the superstitious trap- pings of popery, and to assert themselves once more the disciples of Jesus Christ. In England the followers of Wickliffe, in spite of all oppo- sition, were rapidly increasing, under the name of Wickliffites, or Lollards. In Bohemia, John Huss, an eminent professor in the university of Prague, endeavoured openly to withdraw the university from the jurisdiction of Rome, and recommended in public the doctrines and opinions of Wickliffe. His progress, however, was not propitious. His zeal and courage only ended, as far as himself was concerned, in his discomfiture and death : but the good was not entirely lost. The numerous followers who quickly sprung up to vindicate his memory may be said to be the seeds of that great reformation which was waiting its opportunity to take root and flourish. One of the doctrines of Huss and his followers was, that the cup in the sacrament of the FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 119 Eucharist was to be administered to all, laity as well as clergy ; and from this circumstance they were called Calixtines, from calix, a cup, or chalice. The very name thus appropriated betrays the general opinion of the church. It had been decidedly decreed in the twelfth cen- tury, by Pascal, that the cup was to be denied to the laity, but still some few churches, together with Huss, now ventured to violate this decree. The anger of the papal power was in no ordinary degree called forth. Huss and Jerome, of Prague, were summoned to be tried for heresy. Wickliffe, whose opinions they had adopted, though long since dead, was at the same time ar- rayed before the spiritual tribunal of Rome ; and at the great council of Constance, while Huss was condemned to be burned alive, the church pro- ceeded to their famous decree on the 14th June, 1415, which ordered, that the cup was to be entirely withdrawn from the laity, and the Eucha- rist to be administered in one kind only. This decree, though previously understood as the doctrine of the church, now, for the first time, received the force of law.* * It may not be amiss, in order to remind the reader of the uncharitable supremacy from which he is now by God's grace delivered, to give a few extracts from the council of Constance, on the points above referred to. I. Of Wickliff, A.D. 1415, Session viii. " Wherefore the procurator fiscal being urgent, and the edict having been set forth for hearing sentence on this day; this 120 HISTORY. But it was all in vain. The laws, decrees, councils, and anathemas of the papal power were daily decreasing in authority. The seed holy sytiod declares, defines, and gives judgment, that this same John WicklifFe was a notorious, pertinacious heretic, and that he died in heresy, and therefore anathematizes him, and condemns his memory. And it decrees and ordains, that his body and his bones, if they can be distinguished from other bodies and bones of the faithful, shall be dug up and cast out of the church's sepulture, according to the canonical and lawful decrees." II. Of communion in both kinds, Sess. xiii. ' ' Whereas in some parts of the world certain persons rashly presume to assert that Christian people ought to receive the holy sacrament of the Eucharist under both kinds of bread and wine this present holy general council of Constance declares, decrees, and determines, that although Christ institu- ted this venerable sacrament after supper in both kinds of bread and wine, YET NOTWITHSTANDING THIS,(!) the laudable authority of the sacred canons, and the approved authority of the church has observed that this sacrament ought not to be performed after supper, and in like manner that although in the primitive church this sacrament was received of the faithful in both kinds, yet for the avoiding any dangers and scandals, the custom has reasonably been introduced, that it be received by the ministers under both kinds, but by the laity under the kind of bread only." There are also decrees in this council, session xv. and xxi. against John Huss, and Jerome, of Prague, anathematizing and condemning them as heretics because they followed WicklifFe in denying the above doctrines. Can folly or impiety be greater ? Can want of charity and ignorant assumption be more conspicu- ous than in thus confessing the institution of our Lord, and yet " notwithstanding this," forbidding the communion in both kinds, and exhuming the bones of the dead who had asserted it. SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 121 had been sown, and the tree must needs grow up. The sixteenth century approached ; and while the power of Rome was slumbering in unsuspecting security, its supremacy, as far as overt acts went, not disputed its infallibility not questioned by a mere accident, as it were, there arose from an individual voice that defiance of its authority, which nations and kingdoms had not the daring to announce. A Dominican monk, of the name of Tetzel, in the year 1517, proclaimed, as was the custom of the time, a sale of indulgences, licenses as it were, for the remission of sins past, present, and to come. Martin Luther, a native of Eisleben, in Saxony, and a monk of the Augustinian order of Eremites, disgusted at the effrontery of this open assumption of divine power, and unable to repress his just indignation, publicly opposed both the doc- trine of indulgences and the power of the pope. This opposition on the part of a feeble and solitary monk, would have pro- bably ended in nothing, had it not been for the injudicious management of the contro- versy by those whom the pope appointed to decide it. From one article of doctrine, Luther proceeded to others, and assuming fresh courage as he advanced, the question which was originally a dispute between in- dividuals on church discipline, very quickly assumed the appearance of a national and 122 HISTORY. general dissension on the leading doctrines of Catholicism. The zeal of the monk was countenanced and aided by the general stream of opinion bursting forth in all directions. The matter of dispute became day by day more difficult of adjustment, until at length the pope being on the point of calling to his aid the last great exercise of his authority, excommunication, Luther, with great adroit- ness, evaded the blow, and voluntarily with- drew himself from that church, from whose communion he would otherwise have been forcibly expelled. Thus was the first great schism brought about, and thus was estab- lished that which is now generally called, from its original founder, the Lutheran church. The example of this great reformer was soon followed by other learned men. Princes and people swelled the ranks of the pope's opponents, until throughout the whole of Europe, but principally in Switzerland and Germany, arose so formidable a power, that it was no longer possible to check or to divert its progress. The five greatest names who appear as founders of the new churches, are Luther, Melancthon, Carlostadt, Zuingle, and Calvin ; Luther, as we have seen, the original leader in the reformation, Carlostadt, his colleague and companion, Melancthon, also the friend of Luther, and his successor in the govern- SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 123 merit of his church, Zuingle, the founder of the reformed church in Switzerland, and Calvin, the founder of the church of Geneva. From these five names we may date nearly all the doctrines, and nearly all the forms of church government, that are established in Europe ; men, though varying in character and disposition, yet all united by one bond of fraternal union in conferring on mankind the great blessings of knowledge and true religion ; all men of considerable learning, unwearied zeal, and indomitable courage. Still, however, being but men, and living in times of great peril and excitement, their charac- ters are not entirely free from question. We must not be surprised that, though they were united in the great and essential features of liberating the consciences of mankind from the tyranny of the church of Rome, there still might linger points of personal consid- eration in the breasts of each, and that although they agreed in their general prin- ciples, they should disagree in points of detail. It was impossible to be otherwise. The great point of infallibility in any one man as head of the church being given up, there remained no test by which unifor- mity of doctrine could be maintained. It was nothing but opinion against opinion ; and thus, unfortunately, it happened that no sooner did the greater portion of Europe 124 HISTORY. separate from the communion of the church of Rome, than there arose within itself, and between the great heads which guided the separation, an endless diversity of opinion. And more particularly did this diversity of opinion display itself in that point which it is our present object to investigate. The sacra- ment of the Eucharist would naturally form a material feature in the new doctrines of the reformers ; the great command of Christ stood before them, " This do in remembrance of me." How then was this remembrance to be carried into effect? with all the super- stition of the papal church, or in some more pure and more rational form ? The body and blood of Christ was to be received by the communicants. How was it to be received ? with the notion of a corporeal and visible presence of the Saviour, or as a spiritual sacrifice and an emblematic memorial of his death ? These were the great questions which they had to determine. The idolatrous wor- ship of the host was at once put aside by all. The refusal of the cup to the laity was at once put aside by all. On these points they were unanimous. But when they came to discuss the nature of Christ's presence ; when they came to analyze the manner in which the bread and wine became affected by the words of consecration : here, unfortu- nately, unanimity could no longer obtain. SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 125 Of the five leading reformers above men- tioned, Luther being the first to throw off the dominion, so seems to have remained the nearest to the superstition of the Romish church. He maintained that the body and blood of Christ were materially and visibly present in the consecrated elements of the Eucharist. He did not assert that any tran- substantiation took place in consequence of the consecration of the priest, but that the natural presence of Christ was joined, and con- nected with that of the bread and wine. This opinion was usually understood under the word consubstantiation,* was strictly main- * This doctrine of consubstantiation was by no means originated by Luther. We read of it in the first and second book of Guitmund, who flourished in the eleventh century. Hospinian gives the following account of its origin : " After the condemnation of the doctrines of Berenger, when it was not safe any longer, on account of the cruel tyranny of the Roman priests, openly to adhere to them, while many were not able altogether to disapprove and reject them, as agreeing with the word of God and the primitive church, yet they did not like openly to maintain them ; so they found out a mid- way between the two, and taught that the true bread and wine after consecration remained with the body and blood of the Lord." Guitmund expressly calls this Impanation. See Hospin. Hist. Sacr., second part, p. 6. fol. There was also another branch of this doctrine still more anomalous. " There were some who asserted that the bread was partly changed into the body, and partly remained as it was. They wished that that part of the bread which was to 126 HISTORY. tained by Luther himself until the day of his death ; and the Lutheran church, following in his doctrine, upheld it by their doctors and public confessions.* On the other hand, Zuingle, the head of the Swiss church, was distinctly of opinion that the bread and wine were nothing more than signs and symbols of the absent body and blood of Christ. As early as the year 1524, if not earlier, he asserted publicly, and taught this doctrine ; and it may be justly denominated the leading cause of the division between the Lutheran and reformed churches. It was in consequence of this, that when the Protestants gave in their public confession at Augsburg, there arose, in contradiction, the Tetrapolitan confession, i. e. the confession of four great towns, Strasburg, Constance, Mem- mingen, and Lindau, which adhered to the opinions of Zuingle, in distinction from Luther, on the presence of Christ in the Eucharist, The third of the reformers, Melancthon, who was the successor of Luther in the government of his church, was his successor also in opinion ; though, it must be confessed, in some degree be received by the good, should be changed by consecration into the body, but that that part which was to be received by the wicked should not be changed." Hosp. Hist. Sacr. lib. iv. Perceiving the absurdity in this case, they blindly fell into a greater absurdity, rather than discard the doctrine altogether. * See Hist. Conf. Augsb. by David Cheytrus. SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 127 modified. The character of Melancthon was that of excessive mildness and charity, de- sirous of union and concord ; and if it had been in his day possible to join all the Pro- testant churches under one rule of faith, by mutually conceding points of disputed ten- dency, and widening the enclosures of God's fold, his was undoubtedly the character to have achieved so great an object. He did, however, differ in some degree from his predecessor Luther, for we find in many extracts of his letters, which are collected by Hospinian,* that he looked upon the doctrine of con sub- stantiation as untrue, and even bearing the semblance of idolatry. But the mildness of his character was such that he did not con- sider it a matter of so great moment as to run the risk of sowing further dissensions among his Protestant brethren ; and, indeed, had he at all proceeded to enforce his indivi- dual opinion, so jealously attached were the principal directors of the church to every doc- trine of their founder, that he would only have incurred their enmity without advancing his own opinions. Even as it was, by his lenity and charitable indifference to many of those points which the Lutherans held dear, he incurred much odium, and many of his doctrines were censured and opposed by both parties. * Hospinian, Hist. Soc. vol. ii. 128 HISTORY. Next we come to Carlostadt. He at first was the friend and colleague of Luther, but soon separated from him on the same question of the Eucharist, agreeing entirely with the opi- nion of Zuingle that the bread and wine were to be understood as the mere signs and sym- bols of Christ's presence ; that the whole of the Sacrament was a commemoration of Christ's death, and not a celebration of his bodily pre- sence. In consequence of this opinion, he was banished from the territories of the Elec- tor of Saxony, and was separated from Luther. He retired to Switzerland, where he found the general opinion of men more consonant with his own. Sometime after- wards a reconciliation took place between the two reformers, but no alteration of opinion. Carlostadt remained throughout his life con- stant in denying the bodily presence of Christ, and the doctrine of consubstantia- tion. Lastly, we come to Calvin. He differed in some respects both from Luther and from Zuingle, but if anything, according to the account of Mosheim, he seemed rather in- clined to the opinions of Luther. " He ac- knowledged a real, though spiritual, pre- sence of Christ ; or, in other words, that true Christians who approached the holy ordi- nance with lively faith were united in a certain manner to the man Christ, and that SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 129 from this union the spiritual life derived new vigour in the soul, and was carried on, in a progressive motion, to a greater degree of purity and perfection," thus going higher than Zuingle and Carlostadt, but not ascend- ing so high as Luther denying the consub- stantiation, or bodily presence, of Luther, but maintaining something more than the mere symbol of Zuingle.* This point of difference was long a subject of discussion even in those churches where Zuingle's authority prevailed ; but at last, by * It would seem that the doctrine of our church approaches more nearly to Calvin than any other of the Continental reformers above-mentioned. We certainly hold nothing like consubstantiation, but we as certainly do maintain some thing very nearly allied to that presence of Christ which Calvin denotes. Witness our catechism : " What is the in- ward part or thing signified ? The body and blood of Christ, which are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful." There is, therefore, the presence of Christ, but, it would seem, that the presence depends, and the reception verily and indeed depends, not on the consecrating words of the priest who gives, but on the faith of him who receives. See the note on p. 62. Johnson, in his treatise entitled " The Unbloody Sacrifice," draws a close distinction between the opinions of Calvin and Luther, and says, " The church of England does not declare for any particular modus ; she says: 'verily and indeed,' but not ' how.' " " The bread and wine are the very body and blood, though not in substance, yet in spirit, power, and effect." See Johnson's Unbloody Sacrifice, and Altar Un- veiled, c. ii. s. 1. I 130 HISTORY. the perseverance and learning of Calvin, his opinion triumphed so far as to effect a union between most of the Swiss churches and that of Geneva. With the exception of Zurich and Bern, which remained for a long time constant to their founder's opinion, the re- maining churches gradually embraced the tenets of Calvin. This, then, was the state of opinion among those illustrious men who were the origina- tors and first promoters of our great Refor- mation. Unhappy it was for the church of Christ that they could not agree in interpret- ing the great institutions of our Lord in some one general form, so that it had not been necessary for Christians, jointly separating from the errors of the church of Rome, them- selves again to separate and subdivide that while they agreed in repudiating the mon- strous doctrines of transubstantiation and the elevation of the host, they could not avoid falling into the endless and useless frivolities of the schoolmen, in con substantiation, im- panation, and the other mystical questions of the day, so unfitted for the sacred simplicity of the gospel. But difference of opinion is the inseparable attribute of human things, and we must cheer- fully consider that, although the evils which arose from their disunion were certainly great, yet still the advantages which accrued SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 131 to the human race from that freedom of opi- nion which produced them are more than a sufficient compensation. Immediately that the dictum of one individual ceased to be the rule of faith by which the whole Christian world was to be guided ; immediately that the word of God was open for the study and interpre- tation of every church according to their own authority and power, and every man had the natural right of reading and examining the scriptures for himself, and by himself; imme- diately that these unquestionable blessings descended upon mankind, it was an evil which could not by any possibility be averted, that the very same privilege, which was a blessing well used, became an evil when misused by the injudicious or the ignorant when it became an exercise of critical skill, or scholastic disputation, the trial of political strength, or the watchword of a party. To all these evils, the principle of individual right to study God's word did unquestionably tend but then what are they in comparison with the evils from which we escaped, in comparison with the ignorance, superstition, and idolatry from which we were delivered, the tyrannical supremacy of monkish intoler- ance which, under God's grace, Protestant Europe no longer endures? But it is now time to leave the continental nations of Europe, and to turn to our own 132 HISTORY. country. We shall perceive how our present opinions on the sacrament of the Eucharist first arose, and have gradually been strength- ened in their present form. At the time that the five great reformers, whose names we have already mentioned, were commencing their great efforts against the Pope, our own country, under the reign of Henry VIII., still remained in the spi- ritual chains of the Roman church. Henry VIII., as is well known, obtained the title of " Defender of the Faith," in consequence of his defence of the Roman Catholic church, and particularly the seven sacraments against the opinions of Luther.* This at once shows the * Henry VIII. is supposed by some not to have been the author of the " Defence of the Seven Sacraments ;" but whether or no, as it bears his name, it may be assumed as a testimony of the extreme repugnance of the high places in England, in the reign of Henry, towards the novel doctrines of the reformation. In the oration made by Mr. John Clarke, the king's orator, in presenting a copy of the book to the pope, the vituperation heaped upon Luther is truly extraordinary : " Nor is it amiss to take notice in this place, of this horrid and furious monster (Luther), as also of his stings and poisons, whereby he intends to infect the whole world. But O, immortal God! what bitter language, what so hot and inflamed force of speaking can be invented, sufficient to declare the errors of that most filthy villain ?" and so forth. To this and such like language, the pope replied by the bull constituting the new title : "We, the true successors of St. Peter, whom Christ before his ascension left as his SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 133 natural tendency of that King to preserve the religion of his country in its ancient form, and we also know that, in the year 1511, he advanced still further in its defence. In that year, a treaty was concluded between Henry and Ferdinand of Arragon, to maintain the papal power against the encroachments of France ; and it was evident, from a variety of circumstances, that the opinions and policy of Henry, up to this period, were in decided opposition to the new religion. But private interest and the motives of the world fre- quently bring about, under God's providence, national blessings; and thus it was, when the king became desirous of his marriage with Katharine, and repeated attempts failed to obtain the necessary divorce from the pope, that he then began to give his attention to the Protestant discussion ; he became desirous of absolving himself from that spiritual alle- giance which it was no longer his personal in- terest to maintain. The spirit of Protestantism had long betrayed itself in England by various demonstrations. " From the days of Wick- liffe," says Bishop Burnet, " there were many vicar upon earth, and to whom he committed the care of his flock, presiding in this holy see, from which all dignity and titles have their source, we command all Christians that they name your Majesty by this title, and in their writings to your Majesty, after the word King, they immediately add, Defender of the Faith." Bull of pope Leo X. 134 HISTORY. that disliked most of the received doctrines, in several parts of the nation. The clergy were at that time very hateful to the people ; for as the pope did exact heavily on them, so they being oppressed, took all means pos- sible to make the people repay what the pope wrested from them. Wickliffe, being much encouraged and supported by the Duke of Lancaster and the Lord Piercy, the bishops would not proceed against him, till the Duke of Lancaster was put from the King, and then he was condemned at Oxford. Many opinions were charged upon him, but whether he held them or not, we know not, but by the testimony of his enemies, who writ of him with o so much passion that it discredits all they say. Yet he died in peace, though his body was afterwards burnt. He translated the Bible out of Latin into English, with a long preface before it, in which he reflected se- verely on the corruptions of the clergy, and con- demned the worshipping of saints and images, and denied the corporeal presence of Christ's body in the sacrament, and exhorted all people to the study of the scriptures." And again, he says : " As these did spread much in Ger- many, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, so their books came over into England, where there was much matter already prepared to be wrought on, not only by the pre- judices they had conceived against the cor- SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 135 rupt clergy, but by the opinions of the Lollards, which had been now in England, since the days of Wickliffe, for about 150 years ; be- tween which opinions and the doctrines of the reformers there was great affinity, and therefore, to give the better vent to the books that came out of Germany, many of them were translated into the English tongue, and were very much read and applauded."* This, therefore, being the state of the nation, the king had nothing further to do than to favour the doctrines and opinions which were already advancing among the people, and by that means he would constitute a religious authority independent of the pope, and more consonant to his own views. This he did, and following the advice of Cranmer, a man who appears to have been attached from his earliest years to the more liberal opinions of the Protestants, he appealed no longer to the pope, but to a council of the most learned men of his own universities. This happened in the year 1530, and the result was, that the majority gave their opinion in favour of the king's divorce. In the year 1534, (so rapidly had the principles of the reformation advanced,) an act of parliament was passed, entirely abrogating the supremacy of the pope within the dominions of the king of England; and shortly after, another act was passed, * Burnet, Hist. Ref. book ii. 136 HISTORY. pronouncing the king the supreme head of the church of England. This great event was not, however, brought about without much difficulty, nor without bloodshed. The cruelty of the clergy was excessive. Many accused of favouring the Protestants had been brought to the stake, among whom, Tindal, who had published a translation of the new testament, Bilney, and more particularly John Frith,* who seems to have been one of the first English reformers who preached against the corporeal presence of Christ in the Eucharist. This first denial of the Romish doctrine of the mass, is worthy of our notice. The substance of his arguments is given by bishop Burnet : " That Christ, in the sacrament, gave eternal life, but the receiving of the bare sacrament did not give * Bilney suffered martyrdom in the year 1527, Frith in the year 1533. Together with Frith, a young man, by name An- drew Hewet, was brought before the bishop of London, and being asked, " What he thought touching the Lord's Supper," answered, " Even as John Frith doth :" and then, being asked, " Dost thou not believe that it is really the body of Christ, born of the Virgin Mary ?" answered, "So do I not believe :" and for this these two martyrs perished together. Tindal, though an Englishman, did not suffer in England. Persecution followed him for the same heretical opinions out of England to the continent. He died near Antwerp in the year 1535. These are but samples of multitudes upon multitudes who perished for the Protestant faith ; whose principal error was, the denial of the bodily presence of Christ, and the other blas- phemous doctrines of the mass. See Fox, Burnet, &c. SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 137 eternal life, since many took it to their dam- nation ; therefore, Christ's presence there was only felt by faith : this being further proved by the fathers before Christ, who did eat the same spiritual food, and drink of the rock, which was Christ, according to St. Paul Since then, they and we communicate in the same thing, and it was certain that they did not eat Christ's flesh corporeally, but fed by faith on a Messias to come, as Christians do on a Messias already come ; therefore we now do only communicate by faith. He also in- sisted much on the signification of the word sacrament, from whence he concluded that the elements must be the mystical signs of Christ's body and blood, for if they were truly the flesh and blood of Christ, they should not be sacraments ; he concluded that the ends of the sacrament were these three : by a visible action to knit the society of Chris- tians together in one body, to be a means of conveying grace upon our due participating of them, and to be remembrances to stir up men to bless God for that unspeakable love which in the death of Christ appeared to mankind. To all these ends, the corporeal pre- sence of Christ availed nothing, they being sufficiently answered by a mystical presence ; yet he drew no other conclusion from these premises, but that the belief of the corporeal presence in the sacrament was no necessary 138 HISTORY. article of our faith. This either flowed from his not having yet arrived at a sure persua- sion in the matter, or that he chose in that modest style to encounter an opinion, of which the world was so fond, that to have opposed it in downright words would have given pre- judices against all that he could say."* In the year 1573, a book appeared, giving an account of the dispute maintained between Frith and Sir Thomas More. In this book Frith confirmed what he had before asserted. He proved from Scripture, " that after the consecration, the elements were still bread and wine, and were so called both by our Sa- viour and his apostles ; that our senses shew they are not changed in their natures, but that they are still subject to corruption, which can in no way be said of the body of Christ. He proved that the eating of Christ's flesh, in the sixth of John, cannot be applied to the sacrament, since the wicked receive it, who yet do not eat the flesh of Christ, otherwise they should have eter- nal life. He shewed, also, that the sacrament coming in the room of the Jewish paschal lamb, we must understand Christ's words, 'This is my body,' in the same sense in which it was said that the lamb was the Lord's passover. He confirmed this by many * Burnet, Hist. Ref. book ii. SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 139 passages from Tertullian, Ambrose, and many other fathers. He brought likewise several tes- timonies to shew that they knew nothing of the consequences that follow transubstantiation ; of a body being in more than one place at once ; or being in a place after the manner of a spirit, or of the worship to be given to the sacrament. From hence it may ap- pear upon what solid and weighty reasons they then began to shake the received opinion of transubstantiation, and with how much learning this controversy was managed by him who first undertook it."* In consequence of these opinions, and his faithful adherence to the doctrines of common sense, Frith was tried and condemned before the bishop of London. In the year 1534, he suffered martyrdom at the stake ; while these words stand in the register of his con- fession: " Frith thinketh and judgeth that the natural body of Christ is not in the sacra- ment of the altar, but in one place only at once." Such was the violence with which the new doctrines of Protestantism were assailed. The clergy naturally were averse to any innova- tion, and clung most closely to every doc- trine in which the church had trained them. But the opposition was not only on the * Burnet, Hist. Ref. book ii. 140 HISTORY. part of the clergy. The king had opposed the pope solely for political purposes, not for religious opinions, and therefore he also still continued to maintain all the leading articles of the Roman church. Having made himself conspicuous by his writings against Luther, he was loth after so short an interval to become his advocate, and we may very easily suppose that the freedom of opinion, and the tendency to call in question ancient ordinan- ces, which seemed the necessary fruits of the reformation, was anything but acceptable to so tyrannical a monarch as Henry. This was so much the case that had it not been for Cranmer, who became a great favourite with the king in consequence of his success- ful advice in the matter of the divorce, and had it not also been for Anne Boleyn, the new queen, both of whom were zealously in favour of the Protestants, it is very ques- tionable whether the reformers would have made any head against the superstition and tyrannical cruelty with which they were beset by the Romish clergy. And even as it was, the progress which Protestantism made was very faint and very gradual. We have seen one man (the first who dared to broach the doctrine in England) a martyr at the stake, for denying the bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist This was in the year 1534 Two years subsequently, the bishops, with SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 141 Cranmer, met together to consult on religi- ous subjects, and drew up certain articles of faith, and as this was the first attempt at composing any articles of faith, distinct- ively of the church of England, it is worth while to notice the opinion of the church on the controverted question of the Eucharist. The fourth article was as follows : " As touching the sacrament of the altar, people were to be instructed, that under the forms of bread and wine, there was truly and sub- stantially given the very same body of Christ that ivas born of the virgin Mary, and there- fore it was to be received with all reverence, every one duly examining himself according to the words of St. Paul." This article was signed by Cromwell, Cranmer, seventeen other bishops, forty abbots and priors, and fifty archdeacons and proctors. Thus we see, as far as the year 1536, very little advance had been made. In 1539, we find an act of parliament, in which are contained the following propositions, decreed as the law of the church : First, that in the sacrament of the altar, after the con- secration, there remained no substance of bread and wine, but under these forms, the natural body and blood of Christ were pre- sent: Secondly, that communion in both kinds was not necessary to salvation, but that both the flesh and blood of Christ were 142 HISTORY. together in each of the kinds : Fifthly, that the use of private masses ought to be con- tinued, which, as it was agreeable to God's law, so men received great benefit by them." Still not much advance. The next year, 1540, another commission was appointed, in which Cranmer proposed that the sacraments should be considered as two. But the popish party being as yet too strong, the former number, seven, was retained ; and in the explanation of the Eucharist, transubstantiation was again fully asserted, as also " the concomitancy of the blood with the flesh, so that communion in both kinds was not necessary ; and the use of hearing mass, though one did not com- municate, was also asserted."* Still not much advance. In 1546, we find persecution still raging against the Protestants. Shaxton, who was bishop of Salisbury, had asserted that Christ's body and blood were not in the sacrament, but that they were a sign and memorial of his body that was crucified for us. Upon this he was indicted and condemned to be burnt. This opinion, it is true, he after- wards recanted, and at the instance of the king, and bishops of London and Worcester, signed articles of faith, directly contradicting * Burnet. SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 143 his former assertion. Still, the indictment and prosecution displays the spirit of the time. In the same year, a woman of the name of Anne Askew, of good birth, and considerable education, suffered martyrdom. Information was given that she had spoken against the corporeal presence ; she was cited before the bishop of . London, and compelled to sign a recantation according to the bishop's dic- tation, stating, that " the natural body of Christ was present in the sacrament after the consecration, whether the priest were a good or ill man, and that whether it was presently consumed or reserved in the Pix,* it was the true body of Christ." But even this was not sufficient, she was carried to the tower, and laid upon the rack, for it appeared that she qualified her recantation, by subscribing to it the following words: "that as to the Lord's Supper she believed so much as Christ had said in it, and as much as from him the Catholic church did teach." For this, after suffering the torments of the rack under the very eyes, and some say the hands of the king's chancellor, (for it is asserted that he himself stretched the cords in order to ex- tract the desired confession,) she was carried to the stake at Smithfield, and there, to- * The Fix was a little box or chest, in which the consecrated host was preserved. 144 HISTORY. gether with three men, John Belenian, John Adams, and John Lassels, she was burned to death; their crime being, the denial of the corporeal presence of Christ in the sa- crament. Further, there is a curious letter of the king, in Latin, to the German ambas- sador upon the point of denying the cup to the laity. " Nor can we persuade ourselves that you do not believe, together with us, that under the likeness of bread there is substan- tially and really, the true and living body of Christ, and together with his body, his true blood ; otherwise we must confess that his body would be without blood, which it would be wicked to say, since that the flesh of Christ is not only living but the cause of life, and that under the likeness of wine, not only is there the true and living blood of Christ, but also together with the true blood, the living and true flesh of his body; and since this is the case, it necessarily follows that those who communicate in one kind, and only receive the body of Christ under the likeness of bread, are not depri- ved of the communion of the blood of Christ ; and that they who communicate in the likeness of wine, are not deprived of the communion of the blood of Christ.* And then he proceeds at considerable length to * Cott. libr. cleop. E. 5 Burnett's addenda. SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 145 shew, that the refusal of the cup to the laity is not at all unreasonable, but on the contrary, strictly in accordance with the command of Christ and his apostles. In the year 1547, Henry VIII. died, and under his successor, Edward, the reformation, in spite of the untoward oppositions just de- tailed, made onwards her sure and certain steps. The ancient error, alluded to in the king's letter, met with a signal refutation in the very first year of the young king's reign. An act was passed by which " the value of the holy sacrament, commonly called the sacrament of the altar, and in scripture the Supper of the Lord, was set forth, together with its first institution :" and after various other recitals, it was said : "It being more agreeable to Christ's first institution, and the practice of the church for five hundred years after Christ, that the sacrament should be given in both the kinds of bread and wine, rather than in one, kind only, therefore, it was enacted, that it should be commonly given in both kinds, except necessity did otherwise require it, and it being also more agreeable to the first institution, and the primitive practice, that the people should receive with the priest, than that the priest should receive alone ; therefore, the day before every sacrament, an exhortation was to be made to the people to prepare themselves for it, in which the benefits K 146 HISTORY. and danger of worthy and unworthy receiving, were to be expressed, and the priests were not, without a lawful cause, to deny it to any who humbly asked it"* The next year (1548), the whole of the offices in the church were examined and amended by a committee of nineteen bishops and six doctors. The office of the sacrament of the Eucharist held the prominent place in this examination. " But they did not at once mend every thing that required it, but left the office of the mass as it was, only adding to it that which made it a communion. It began first with an ex- hortation to be used the day before, which differs not much from that now used, only after the advice given concerning confession, it is added, that such as desire to make auri- cular f confession should not censure those * Burnet, part ii. book iii. See also Mants. Com. Pray. p. ii. t The doctrine of auricular confession, and absolution, con- sequent upon it, is evidently one of the most politic, as it is one of the most tyrannical of the doctrines of the Roman church. The church of England leaves the confession of one man to another, his spiritual adviser, to the good pleasure of each individual (see the rubric, at the service for the sick), desiring the priest to move the sick man to confess, but going no further ; whereas the church of Rome makes it compulsory. This notion was first originated by Hugo, A.D. 1130 : " I boldly say, that if any one approach the communion of the body and blood of the Lord before the absolution of the priest, he certainly eats and drinks damnation to himself." The fourth Lateran Council, A.D. 1215, implicitly enjoins auricular con- SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 147 who were satisfied with a general confession to God, and that those who used only confes- sion to God and to the church, should not be offended with those who used auricular confession to a priest but that all should keep the rule of charity, every man being sa- tisfied to follow his own conscience, and not judging another man in things not appointed by God. After the confession, absolution, and fession : " Let every faithful person, of both sexes, after he has come to years of discretion, make solitary confession of all his sins, at least once in the year, to his own priest, and study to the utmost to fulfil the penance enjoined him .... otherwise, let him while living be denied entrance into the church, and at death be deprived of Christian burial." It will be sufficient to add the canon of the council of Trent, following up the same doctrine: " If any shall deny that sacramental confession was instituted, and is necessary, for salvation, by divine right ; or shall say that the custom of confessing secretly to the priest alone, which the Catholic church has always observed from the beginning, and now observes, is repugnant to the institution and command of Christ, and is only of human invention let him be accursed." Council of Trent, Sacrament of Repentance, canon 6; and the 7th and 9th canons are equally strong. The evils which must of necessity arise from this forced auri- cular confession, and particularly in the manner of the exami- nation by which the priest is directed to inquire even into the secret thoughts of the sinner, are in every sense most revolting. Let the reader only consult "Dens' Theology" a book which has latterly, since popery has assumed a more open attempt once more to deceive the people of England with her ancient errors, attracted considerable notice. May God avert the evil devices of this enemy of true religion, through Jesus Christ our Lord. K2 148 HISTORY. the prayer beginning, " We do not presume," the sacrament was to be given in both kinds, first to the ministers then present, and then to all the people, with these words : " The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body unto everlasting life; and the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy soul unto ever- lasting life" The bread was to be such as had been formerly used, and every one of the breads so consecrated was to be broken into two or more pieces, and the people were to be taught that there was no difference in the quantity they received, whether it was small or great, but that in each of them they received the whole body of Christ. If the wine that was at first consecrated did not serve, the priest was to consecrate more, but all to be without any elevation. This office being thus finished, there was set forth a proclamation, reciting, that whereas the parliament had enacted that the communion should be given in both kinds to all the king's subjects, it was now ordered to be given in the form here set forth, and all were required to receive it with due reve- rence and Christian behaviour."* In this form one thing is observable : the words on giving the bread are, "preserve thy body," on giving the chalice, " preserve thy ' Buinet, Hist. Ref. part ii. book i. SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 149 soul." But Cranrner, being ready to change any thing for which he saw reason, subsequently made an alteration, so that in both it might be said, "preserve thy body and soul" The offertory was to be made by bread and wine mixed with water. In the consecration prayer, the following words were used : " With thy holy Spirit vouchsafe to bless and sanctify these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved Son." All eleva- tion was forbidden ; the bread was to be un- leavened, round, having no print upon it, and somewhat thicker than it was formerly. A litany was also used, consisting of many suf- frages, much the same as those at present in use, with one remarkable addition, considering the close approximation of the contending parties namely, " to be delivered from the tyranny of the bishop of Rome, and all his detestable enormities." And yet, with all these changes and im- provements, the doctrine of the real presence remained untouched. The only points gained were the communion in both kinds, and the cessation of private masses ; but in the year 1549, public discussions arose on this point also. There was no opinion for which the priests contended more ignorantly and eagerly, and that the people generally believed more blindly and firmly, than the doctrine of the 150 HISTORY real presence : various shades and modifications of the doctrine they might endure, such as those which the Lutheran and Swiss churches had already established but that all notions of that mysterious change which they had so long been taught to consider essential to the sacrament, should be entirely set aside, could not be made a matter of popular belief without much time, and infinite difficulty. But now, even upon this strong-hold of popish error, public disputations were held both at Oxford and Cambridge. Peter Martyr held a public dis- putation before the commissioners sent by the king, the bishops of Lincoln, and some others, in which these three propositions were canvassed : " 1. In the sacrament of thanksgiving there is no transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. " 2. The body or blood of Christ is not car- nally or corporeally in the bread and wine, nor, as others used to say, under the bread and wine. " L 3. The body and blood of Christ are united to the bread and wine sacramentally." This was at Oxford. At Cambridge, Ridley was sent down with different commissioners to dis- pute on the following heads : " 1. Transubstantiation cannot be proved by the plain and manifest words of scripture, nor can it be necessarily collected from it, nor yet SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 151 confirmed by the consent of the ancient fathers. " 2. In the Lord's Supper, there is none other oblation and sacrifice than of a re- membrance of Christ's death, and thanks- giving." Nor was it by word of mouth alone that these disputations were carried on. Cranmer wrote and published a collection of all the arguments against transubstantiation, while Gardiner took the contrary side. The sub- stance of Cranmer's arguments was as fol- lows : " Christ in the institution took bread and gave it. So that his words, ' This is my body? could only be meant of the bread ; now the bread could not be his body lite- rally. He himself also calls the cup the fruit of the vine. St. Paul calls it, the bread that we break, and the cup that we bless ; and speaking of it after it was blessed, calls it ' that bread and that cup' For the reason of that expression, l This is my body,' it was considered that the disciples to whom Christ spoke thus, were Jews, and that they, being accustomed to the Mosaical rites, must needs have understood his words in the same sense they did Moses' words concerning the paschal lamb, which is called ' The Lord's passover.' It was not so literally, for the Lord's pass- over was the angel's passing by the Israelites when he smote the first born of the Egyp- 152 HISTORY. tians. So the lamb was only the Lord's pass- over, as it was the memorial of it ; and thus Christ, substituting the Eucharist for the pas- chal lamb^ used such an expression, calling it his body, in the same manner of speaking as the lamb was called the Lord's passover. This was plain enough, for his disciples could not well understand him in any other sense than that to which they had been formerly accustomed. In the scripture many such figu- rative expressions occur frequently. In bap- tism, the other sacrament instituted by Christ, he is said to baptize * with the Holy Ghost and fire] and such as are baptized are said to '-put on Christ,' which were figurative ex- pressions ; as also in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, the cup is called the new testament in Christ's blood, which is an ex- pression full of figure. Further it was observed that that sacrament was instituted for a re- membrance of Christ, and of his death, which implied that he was to be absent at the time when he was to be remembered. Nor was it simply said, that the elements were his body and blood, but that they were his body broken, and his blood shed; that is, they were there as suffering on the cross, which as they could not be understood literally, (for Christ did institute this sacrament before he had suffered on the cross,) so now Christ must be present in the sacrament, not as glorified SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 153 in heaven, but as suffering on the cross. From those places where it is said that Christ is in heaven, and that he is to continue there, they argued that he was not to be any more upon earth ; and those words in the sixth of St. John, of * eating Christ's flesh and drinking his blood, they said were to be understood, not of the sacrament, (since many received the sacrament unworthily, and of them it cannot be said that they have eternal life in them,) but Christ there said of them that received him in the sense that was meant in that chapter, that all that did so eat his flesh had eternal life in them; therefore these words can only be understood figuratively of receiving him by faith, as him- self there explains it : and so in the end of that discourse, finding that some were startled at that way of expressing himself, he gave a key to the whole, when he said his words were ' spirit .and life,' and that the flesh profited nothing ; it was the spirit that quickened."* From this they went on to examine the ancient fathers, and deduced the gradual corruption of this doctrine in the dark ages down to the fourth council of Lateran by pope Innocent ; shewing that it had originated in the ignorance of mankind, and in the desire of the Roman church to arrogate power, and to mystify the simple rites of Christianity by the pomps and * See Burnet, part ii. book i. 154 HISTORY. pageantry which they introduced into its services. In the year 1550, the new opinions, by the help of free discussion, and the learned arguments above displayed by Cranmer and the other principal reformers, began to make considerable impression on the people. Rid- ley, bishop of London, made a visitation of his diocese, and issued many injunctions in regard to several superstitions of the mass still remaining " Such were washing their hands at the altar, holding up the bread, licking the chalice, blessing their eyes with the paten* or sudary, and many other relics of the mass." But that which was most new was, that there having been great contests about the form of the Lord's board, whether it should be made as an altar, or as a table, t * The paten was an open dish or plate, from the Latin patena, in which the host was reserved. The sudary was a small napkin, or handkerchief. t Bishop Andrewes says, "If we agree about the matter of sacrifice, there will be no difference about the altar, the 'holy Eucharist being considered as a sacrifice, (in the represen- tation of the breaking of the bread and the pouring of the cup,) the same is fitly called an altar, which again is as fitly called a table, the Eucharist being considered as a sacrament, which is nothing else than a distribution of the sacri- fice to the service of the receivers." And Mede says, " The seat or raised fabric appointed for the setting and celebration of this holy mystery, was, the holy table, or altar, for by both these names hath that sacred biere (as I may call SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 155 therefore since the form of a table was more like to turn the people from the superstition of the popish mass, and to the right use of the Lord's Supper, he exhorted the curates and church wardens to have it in the fashion of a table, decently covered, and to place it in such part of the quire or chancel as should be most meet, so that the ministers and communicants should be separated from the rest of the people ; and that they should put down all by altars." In the year 1551, several alterations were made in the liturgy, many more of the rites and ceremonies hitherto in use were abolished, namely, the use of oil in baptism, the unction of the sick, prayers for souls departed, both in the communion office, and in that for the burial of dead, the invoca- tion of the Holy Ghost, in the consecra- tion of the Eucharist, and the prayer of ob- lation: the rubric that ordered water to be mixed with wine, was omitted, with several other less material variations. The book in which these alterations appeared, was called, the second book of Edward Vlth, and is very nearly the same as that which we now use.* it) of the body and blood of Christ, been ever promis- cuously and indifferently called in the church." Mede on the name of altar, sect. i. * See Mants. Comm. Pr. p. iii. 156 HISTORY. In the year 1552 the most important point was the drawing up of the articles of the church, agreed upon by the bishops and other learned men, in a convocation held in Lon- don Of these articles, which were in number forty-two, the twenty-ninth, and thirtieth are as follow : ARTICLE XXIX. The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Chris- tians ought to have amongst them- selves one to another, but rather it is a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death, insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we break, is a partaking of the body of Christ, and likewise the cup of bless- ing is a partaking of the blood of Christ. Transubstantiation, or the change of the substance of bread and wine in the Supper of the Lord, can- not be proved by holy writ, but it is repugnant to the plain words of scrip * overthrow- ture,* and hath given occasion to many eth the na-