Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

Such as Facundus, bishop of Hermian, in Africa, in the year 552, in his ninth book and last chapter written in defence of Theod. Mopsuest. &c. hath these words, "The sacrament of his body and blood, we call his body and blood: not that bread is properly his body, or the cup his blood; but that they contain in them the mystery of his body and blood."— Isidore, bishop of Sevil, says, "Panis, quem frangimus," &c. "The bread, which we break, is the body of Christ, who saith, I am the living bread.' But the wine is his blood, and that is it which is written, I am the true vine.' But bread, because it strengthens our body, therefore it is called the body of Christ; but wine, because it makes blood in our flesh, therefore it is reduced or referred to the blood of Christ. But these visible things, sanctified by the Holy Ghost, pass into the sacrament of the Divine body." Suidas in the word Ἐκκλησία; σῶμα ἑαυτοῦ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καλεῖ ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ διὰ ταύτης ἱερατεύει ὡς ἄνθρωπος· δέχεται δὲ τὰ προσφερόμενα ὡς Θεός· προσφέρει δὲ ἡ ἐκκλησία τὰ τοῦ σῶματος αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος σύμβολα, πᾶν τὸ φύραμα διὰ τῆς ἀπαρχῆς ἁγιάζουσα: “ Christ calls the church his body; and by her, as a man, he ministers: but as he is God, he receives what is offered. But the church offers the symbols of his body and blood, sanctifying the whole mass by the first fruits." Symbola,' i. e. 'Signa,' says the Latin version. The bread and wine are the signs' of his body and his blood. Σúμcoxa, onuɛła; so Suidas. Hesychius speaking of this mystery, affirms, "Quòd simul panis et caro est;"" It is both bread and flesh too."-Fulgentius saith, "Hic calix est Novum Testamentum," i. e. "Hic calix, quem vobis trado, Novum Testamentum significat:" "This cup is the New Testament, that is, it signifies it." Παρέδωκε γὰρ εἰκόνα τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος τοῖς μαθηταῖς, said Procopius of Gaza: "He gave to his disciples the image of his own body ;” σύμβολα ταῦτα καὶ οὐκ ἀλήθεια, said the scholiast upon Dionysius, the Areopagite; "These things are symbols, and not the truth, or verity:"-and he said it upon occasion of the same doctrine, which his author (whom he explicates) taught in that chapter; ἐπιτεθέντων τῷ Θείῳ θυσιαστηρίῳ τῶν σεβασμίων συμβόλων, δι ̓ ὧν ὁ Χριστὸς σημαίνεται καὶ μετέχεται, &c.

e Isidorus Hisp. lib. i. de offic. c. 18.

f Lib. xx. in Levit. c. 8.

6

[ocr errors]

In Gen. xlix.

In Eccles, hier. c. 3. Dionys. Eccles. hier. c. 3.

"The Divine symbols being placed upon the altar, by which Christ is signified and participated."-But this only I shall remark, that transubstantiation is so far from having been the primitive doctrine, that it was among catholics fiercely disputed in the time of Charles the Bald, about the year 880. Paschasius wrote for the substantial conversion; Rabanus maintained the contrary in his answer to Heribaldus, and in his writing to Abbot Egilo. There lived in the same time, in the court of Charles the emperor', a countryman of ours John Scot, called by some Johannes Erigena, who wrote a book against the substantial change in the sacrament; he lived also sometimes in England with king Alfred, and was surnamed the wise,' and was a martyr, saith Possevinus,and was in the Roman calendar; his day was the fourth of the ides of November, as is to be seen in the martyrology published at Antwerp, 1486. But when the controversy grew public and noted, Charles the Bald commanded Bertram or Ratran to write upon the question, being of the monastery of Corbey: he did so, and defended our doctrine against Paschasius: the book is extant, and may be read by him that desires it; but it is so entire and dogmatical against the substantial change, which was the new doctrine of Paschasius, that Turrian' gives this account of it, to cite Bertram, what is it else, but to say that Calvin's heresy is not new?" And the Belgic expurgatory Index" professeth to use it with the same equity, which it useth to other catholic writers, in whom they tolerate many errors and extenuate or excuse them, and sometimes by inventing some device they do deny it, and put some fit sense to them when they are opposed in disputation; and this they do, lest the heretics should talk that they forbid and burn books that make against them." You see the honesty of the men; and the justness of their proceedings; but the Spanish expurgatory Index forbids the book wholly, with a • penitus auferatur.'

I shall only add this, that, in the church of England, Bertram's doctrine prevailed longer; and, till Lanfranck's time, it was permitted to follow Bertram or Paschasius.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

And when Osbern wrote the lives of Odo, archbishop of Canterbury, Dunstan, and Elphege, by the command of Lanfranck, he says, that in Odo's time, some clergymen affirmed in the sacrament bread and wine to remain in substance, and to be Christ's body only in figure; and tells how the archbishop prayed, and blood dropped out of the host over the chalice, and so his clerks, which then assisted at mass, and were of another opinion, were convinced. This though he writes to please Lanfranck (who first gave authority to this opinion in England), and according to the opinion which then prevailed, yet it is an irrefragable testimony, that it was but a disputed article in Odo's time; no catholic doctrine, no article of faith, nor of a good while after: for however these clerks were fabulously reported to be changed at Odo's miracle, who could not convince them by the law and the prophets, by the gospels and epistles; yet his successor, he that was the fourth after him, I mean Elfrick, abbot of St. Albans ", and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, in his Saxon Homily, written above 600 years since, disputes the question, and determines in the words of Bertram only for a spiritual presence, not natural, or substantial. The book was printed at London by John Day, and with it a letter of Ælfrick to Wulfin, bishop of Schirburn, to the same purpose. His words are these: "That housel (that is, the blessed sacrament) is Christ's body, not bodily, but spiritually, not the body which he suffered in, but the body of which he spake, when he blessed the bread and wine to housel the night before his suffering, and said by the blessed bread, This is my body." And in a writing to the archbishop of York, he said, "The Lord halloweth daily, by the hand of the priest, bread to his body, and wine to his blood in spiritual mystery, as we read in books. And yet, notwithstanding that lively bread is not bodily so, nor the self same body that Christ suffered in.”— I end this with the words of the gloss upon the canon law; "Cœleste sacramentum, quod verè repræsentat Christi carnem, dicitur corpus Christi, sed impropriè; unde dicitur suo modo, scilicet, non rei veritate, sed significati mysterio;

[ocr errors]

" Capgrave calls him abbot of St. Albans. Malmesb. saith, he was of Malmesbury, A. D. 996.

• De Consecrat. d. 2. Hoc est. Lugduni. 1518.

ut sit sensus, vocatur Christi corpus, i. e. significatur;" "The heavenly sacrament, which truly represents the flesh of Christ, is called the body of Christ; but improperly; therefore, it is said (meaning in the canon taken out of St. Austin) after the manner, to wit, not in the truth of the thing, but in the mystery of that which is signified; so that the meaning is, it is called Christ body, that is, Christ's body is signified;" which the church of Rome well expresses in an ancient hymn:

Sub duabus speciebus

Signis tantùm et non rebus
Latent res eximiæ.

"Excellent things lie under the two species of bread and wine, which are only signs, not the things whereof they are signs."-But the Lateran council struck all dead; before which, "Transubstantiatio non fuit dogma fidei," said Scotus, "it was no article of faith ;"-and how can it be afterwards, since Christ is only the author and finisher of our faith, and therefore, all faith was delivered from the beginning, is a matter of highest danger and consideration. But yet this also I shall interpose, if it may do any service in the question, or help to remove a prejudice from our adversaries, who are borne up by the authority of that council; that the doctrine of transubstantiation was not determined by the great Lateran council. The word was first invented by Stephen, bishop of Augustodunum, about the year 1100, or a little after, in his book 'De Sacramento Altaris;' and the word did so please Pope Innocentius III., that he inserted it into one of the 70 canons, which he proposed to the Lateran council, A. D. 1215: which canons they heard read, but determined nothing concerning them, as Matthew Paris, Platina, and Nauclerus, witness. But they got reputation by being inserted by Gregory IX. into his Decretals,' which yet he did not in the name of the council, but of Innocentius to the council. But the first that ever published these canons under the name of the Lateran council, was Johannes Cochlæus, A. D. 1538. But the article was determined at Rome, 36 years after that council, by a general council of 54 prelates, and no more. And this was

[ocr errors]

the first authority or countenance it had; Stephen christened the article, and gave the name, and this congregation confirmed it.

SECTION XIII.

Of Adoration of the Sacrament.

WHEN a proposition goes no further than the head and the tongue, it can carry nothing with it but his own appendages, viz. to be right or to be wrong, and the man to be deceived or not deceived in his judgment: but when it hath influence upon practice, it puts on a new investiture, and is tolerable or intolerable, according as it leads to actions good or bad. Now, in all the questions of Christendom, nothing is of greater effect or more material event, than this. For since by the decree of the council of Trent, they are bound to exhibit to the sacrament the same worship, which they give to the true God, either this sacrament is Jesus Christ, or else they are very idolaters; I mean materially such, even while, in their purposes, they decline it. I will not quarrel with the words of the decree commanding to give Divine worship to the sacrament; which by the definition of their own schools, is an outward visible sign of an inward spiritual grace,' and so they worship the sign and the grace with the worship due to God: but that which I insist upon, is this: that if they be deceived in this difficult question, against which there lie such infinite presumptions and evidence of sense, and invincible reason, and grounds of Scripture,—and in which they are condemned by the primitive church, and by the common principles of all philosophy, and the nature of things,— and the analogy of the sacrament,- for which they had no warrant ever, till they made one of their own,-which themselves so little understand, that they know not how to explicate it, nor agree in their own meaning, nor cannot

a Sess. 13. c. 5.

Tantum ergo sacramentum adoremus cernui. Hymn. in Miss.

« ÖncekiDevam »