Doctrines and Practices of the Ancient Church Relating to the Eucharist, Chapter 9
CHAP. IX. The Ninth Difference. The Fathers differ from the Church of Rome, in their Belief of Chriſt's Preſence in the Euchariſt. The Church of Rome aſſerts the ſubſtantial Preſence of Chriſt's Natural Body there; but the Fathers deny it.
THe former is the Aſſertion of the Roman Church in the Trent Council, in which an Anathema is pronounced (g)Conc. Trid. Seſſ. 13. cap. 6. Can. 1.againſt ſuch as deny, That in the Holy Sacrament of the Euchariſt is contained truly, really, and Subſtantially the Body and Blood of Chriſt,—but ſhall ſay, That he is in it only as in a Sign, or Figure, or Virtue. And the Catechiſm ad Parochos (h)Part. 2. de Euchariſt. n. 25.ſays, That the True Body of our Lord Chriſt, the ſame that was born of the Virgin, and ſits in the Heavens at the Right-hand of the Father, is contained in this Sacrament.
I will now ſhew, that the Fathers advance ſuch Poſitions as plainly contradict this Doctrine.
1 Poſition. The Fathers ever ſince Chriſt's departure and Aſcenſion into Heaven, look upon his Body as abſent from Earth, tho' in another ſenſe he is ſtill preſent.
All thoſe Teſtimonies before produced under the Fifth Difference, concerning Bodies being commenſurate to Space, and not being in more places than one, and ſaying this of Chriſt's Body as well as of other Bodies, are a Proof of this Poſition; but beſides thoſe, I will here add ſome further direct Proofs of it.
S. Ambroſe thus (i)Com. in Luc. 24. Aſcende nobis, ut te ſequamur mentibus, quem oculis videre non poſſumus, &c. —Ergo non ſupra terram, nec in terra, nec ſecundùm carnem quaerere te debemus, ſi volumus invenire. Nunc enim ſecundùm carnem non novimus Chriſtum. — Maria quia quaerebat in terra, tangere non potuit; Stephanus tetigit, quia quaſivit in coelo. Stephanus inter Judaeos vidit abſentem.. Aſcend (ſpeaking to Chriſt) that we may follow thee with our Minds, whom we cannot ſee with our Eyes. S. Paul has taught us how we ſhould follow thee, and where we may find thee. Seek thoſe things that are above, where Chriſt ſits, &c.—Therefore we ought not to ſeek thee upon Earth, nor in the Earth, nor according to the Fleſh, if we would find thee. —Mary could not touch him, becauſe ſhe ſought him on Earth: Stephen touched him, becauſe he ſought him in Heaven. Stephen among the Jews ſaw him abſent.
S. Auſtin is ſo copious in this Argument, and his Teſtimonies ſo many, that a good Choice of them is only neceſſary. Thus he ſays (k)Serm. 140. de Tempore. Ideo Dominus noſter abſentavit ſe corpore ab omni Eccleſia, & aſcendit in coelum, ut fides aedificetur: ſi enim non noſti niſi quod vides, ubi eſt fides?. Therefore our Lord abſented himſelf from every Church, and aſcended into Heaven, that our Faith may be edified; for if thou knoweſt nothing but what thou ſeeſt, where is Faith?
Again (l)Serm. 60. de Verb. Dom. Semper quidem Divinitate nobiſcum eſt, ſed niſi corporaliter abiret à nobis, ſemper ejus corpus carnaliter videremus, & nunquam ſpiritualiter crederemus.. Chriſt is always with us by his Divinity; but unleſs he were corporally abſent from us, we ſhould always carndly ſee his Body, and ſhould never ſpiritually believe.
This is a clear Teſtimony, that Chriſt is abſent as to his Natural Body; and that if it were not ſo, he would be viſible to us ſtill.
Again (m)Tract. 50. in Joannem. Loquebatur de praeſentia corporis ſui: nam ſecundùm Majeſtatem ſuam, ſecundùm Providentiam, ſecundùm ineffabilem & inviſibilem Gratiam, impletur quod ab eo dictum eſt, Ecce ego vobiſcum omnibus diebus, &c. Secundùm carnem vero quam aſſumpſit, ſecundùm id quod de Virgine natus eſt, &c. non ſemper habebitis me vobiſcum., expounding thoſe words, The Poor ye have always with you, but me ye have not always; He ſpake this, ſays he, concerning the Preſence of his Body: For according to his Majeſty, according to his Providence, according to his unſpeakable and inviſible Grace, that is fulfilled which he ſaid, Behold I am always with you, &c. But according to the Fleſh which he aſſumed, according to what was born of the Virgin, &c. (directly contrary to the Trent Catechiſm) ye ſhall not have me always with you.
And in another place (n)Serm. 120. de diverſis. Secundùm praeſentiam pulchritudinis & divinitatis ſuae ſemper cum patre eſt; ſecundùm praeſentiam corporalem jam ſupra coelos ad dextram patris eſt; ſecundùm praeſentiam vero fidei in omnibus Chriſtianis eſt.. According to the beautiful Preſence of his Divinity, he is always with the Father; according to his corporal Preſence he is now above the Heavens, at the right hand of the Father (he forgot to add, and in the Holy Sacrament) but according to the Preſence of Faith, ſo he is in all Chriſtians.
What can be more plain than another Saying of his (o)Serm. 74. de diverſis. Credimus in eum jam ſedentem ad dextram patris; ſed tamen quamdiu ſumus in corpore peregrinamur ab co; nec cum dubitantibus, vel negantibus & dicentibus, Ʋbi eſt Deus tuus, valemus oftendere.? We believe on him who ſits now at the right hand of the Father; but yet whilſt we are in the Body, we are abſent as in a ſtrange Country from him; nor can we ſhew him to thoſe that doubt, to thoſe that deny him, and ſay, Where is thy God?
If S. Auſtin had believed, as the Roman Church do's, the Corporal Preſence of Chriſt in the Euchariſt, he could have pointed to him upon the Altar, if any had asked, Where is thy God?
Cyril of Alexandria (p)In Joan. 9.5. foreign.ſays, Tho' Chriſt be abſent from the World as to his Fleſh, yet he is preſent to thoſe that are in him, and to the whole Univerſe, by his Divine and Ineffable Nature; neither is he abſent from any Creature, nor diſtant from any, but is every where preſent to all, and fills the whole Univerſe.
And elſewhere (q)In Joan. 17.12., ſpeaking of the Diſciples, who thought it a great loſs to them, that being taken up to Heaven, he would now be abſent according to his Fleſh; he ſays, They ought not only to have reſpected and looked to his Fleſhly Preſence, foreignbut to have underſtood, that tho' he was ſeparated from their Society according to the Fleſh, nor could be ſeen by their bodily Eyes, yet that he was preſent and aſſiſtant always by the Power of his Divinity.
Fulgentius (r)Ad Traſimund. l. 2. c. 17. Unus idemque ſecundùm humanam ſubſtantiam, abſens coelo cùm eſſet in terra, & derelinquens terram cum aſcendiſſet in coelum. Secundùm Divinam vero immenſamque ſubſtantiam nec coelum dimittens, cùm de coelo deſcendir, nec terram deſerens cùm ad coelum aſcendit.. One and the ſame (Chriſt) according to his Humane Subſtance, was abſent from Heaven when he was upon Earth, and left Earth when he aſcended up to Heaven; but according to his Divine and Immenſe Subſtance, neither left Heaven when he deſcended from Heaven, nor forſook Earth when he aſcended into Heaven.
Again (s)Id. ibid. c. 18. Quomodo corporaliter aſcendit in coelum, & in ſuis fidelibus praedicatur effe in terra, ſi non eſt in illo divinitatis immenſitas quae coelum implere poſſit & terram?. How did he corporally aſcend into Heaven, and yet is ſaid to be in the Faithful on Earth, unleſs the Immenſity of the Divinity be in him, which can fill Heaven and Earth? Yes, a Romaniſt would have told him of another way, That even his Body could be preſent in Heaven and Earth, after the manner of a Spirit.
Vigilius Tapſ. (t)Contr. Eutych. l. 1. Hoc crat ire ad patrem & recedere à nobis, auferre de mundo naturam quam ſuſceperat à nobis. —Nam vide miraculum, vide utriuſque proprietatis myſterium, Dei filius ſecundùm humanitutem ſuam receſſit à nobis, ſecundùm divinitatem ſuam ait nobis, Ecce vobiſcum ſum omniòus diebus, &c.—Quos reliquit & à quibus deceſſit humanitate ſua, non reliquit nec deſeruit divinitate ſua.. This was to go to the Father and recede from us, to take from the World the Nature that he had taken from us.— For ſee the Miracle, ſee the Myſtery of both (Natures) distinct (not a Word of the Myſtery of a Body being in more places than one); The Son of God according to his Humanity departed from us; according to his Divinity he ſays to us, Behold I am with you always, &c.—Thoſe whom he left and departed from by his Humanity, he did not leave nor forſake by his Divinity.
Again (u)Id. ibid. l. 4. Quando in terra fuit, non erat utique in coelo, & nunc quia in coelo eſt non eſt utique in terra, &c.—Quia verbum ubique eſt, caro autem ejus ubique non eſt, apparet unum eundemque Chriſtum utriuſque eſſe naturae, & eſſe quidem ubique ſecundùm naturam divinitatis ſuae, & loco contineri ſecundùm naturam humanitatis ſuae. —Haec eſt Fides & Confeſſio Catholica, quam Apoſtoli tradiderunt, Martyres roborarunt, & Fideles nunc uſque cuſtodiunt.. When Chriſt was on Earth, he was not in Heaven; and now becauſe he is in Heaven, he ſurely is not on Earth, &c.— Becauſe the Word is every where, but his Fleſh is not every where, it appears plainly, that one and the ſame Chriſt is of both Natures, and that he is every where according to the Nature of his Divinity, and contained in a Place according to the Nature of his Humanity (which would be a bad Argument, if his Body were in Heaven and in the Euchariſt at the ſame time). And then he concludes, This is the Catholick Faith and Confeſſion, which the Apoſtles delivered, the Martyrs confirmed, and the Faithful now ſtill keep and preſerve.
Leo Magn. (x)Serm. 2. de Aſcenſ. Dom. Chriſtus coram. Diſcipulis elevatus in coelum, corporalis praeſentiae modum fecit.. Chriſt being raiſed up to Heaven in ſight of his Diſciples, he put an end to his bodily Preſence. (So he explains it, that he was to remain at the Right-hand of his Father, till he ſhould come again to judge the Quick and Dead.)
Bede (y)Com. in Marc. 13. Chriſtus ad Patrem poſt reſurrectionem victor aſcendens, Eccleſiam corporaliter reliquit, quam tamen nunquam divinae praeſidio praeſentiae deſtituit, manens in illa omnibus diebus uſque ad conſummationem ſeculi.. Chriſt aſcending after his Reſurrection into Heaven as a Conqueror, left the Church as to his bodily Preſence, which yet he never left deſtitute of the ſecurity of his Divine Preſence, remaining in the Church always to the end of the World.
This may abundantly ſuffice to prove the Firſt Poſition.
2 Poſition. The Fathers diſtinguiſh the Preſence of Chriſt's Body from the Sacrament of it, which they make to be a Memorial and Pledge of Chriſt, as gone away and abſent.
S. Chryſoſtome (z)In 1 Cor. 11.29., expounding thoſe words, He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment; and asking how that Table, which is the Cauſe of ſo many good things, foreignand flows with Life, ſhould be made Cordemnation to any, reſolves it thus; That this happens not from its own Nature, foreignbut from the Purpoſe of him that approaches this Table. For, ſays he, as Chriſt's Preſence, which brought thoſe great and unſpeakable Bleſſings to us, did condemn thoſe the more that did not receive it; ſo alſo the Myſteries-make way for greater Puniſhments to theſe that unworhily partake of them. A remarkable Teſtimony, becauſe we ſee he diſtinguiſhes the Preſence of Chriſt, from the Sacrament of it; compares the one with the other, and becauſe of the Relation that the Myſteries have to Chriſt, and that both are intended to convey great Bleſſings, therefore they both, when unworthily treated, occaſion greater Puniſhments.
S. Auſtin (a)Contr. Fauſt. l. 20. c. 21. Hujus ſacrificii caro & ſanguis ante adventum Chriſti per victimas ſimilitudinum promittebatur, in paſſione Chriſti per ipſam veritatem reddebatur, poſt aſcenſum Chriſti per Sacramentum memoriae celebratur.. The Fleſh and Blood of this Sacrifice, before Chriſt's coming, was promiſed by Victims of Reſemblance, in the Paſſion of Chriſt it was exhibited in the Truth it ſelf; after Chriſt's Aſcenſion it is celebrated by the Sacrament of Remembrance. Where you ſee, the Sacrament of Remembrance is oppoſed to the Exhibition of the Truth.
Author Comm. in Epiſtolas Pauli (inter Hieronymi Opera) (b)In 1 Cor. 11. Hoc eſt, benedicens etiam paſſurus, ultimam nobis commemorationem five memoriam dereliquit. Quemadmodum ſi quis peregrè proficiſcens, aliquod pignus ei quem diligit derelinquat, ut quotieſcunque illud viderit, poſſit ejus beneficia & amicitias memorari; quod ille ſi perfecte dilexit, ſine ingenti deſiderio non poſſit videre, vel fletu., upon thoſe words, He took Bread, and after he had given thanks, he brake it: That is, ſays he, bleſſing us even when he was about to ſuffer, he left his laſt Memorial with us. Juſt as if one travelling into another Country, ſhould leave a Pledge with him whom he loved, that whenſoever he look'd upon it, he might call to mind his Favours and Friendſhip; which ſuch a Perſon, if he perfectly lov'd him, could not behold without a great paſſion or weeping.
It will be very hard to reconcile this Pledge of Abſence with ſuch a conſtant Preſence of his Body as the Church of Rome teaches, even there where we are required to look upon that Pledge, and remember our abſent Friend. Sedulius has the ſame Expoſition of the Place, almoſt in the ſame words.
Primaſius alſo confirms it (c)In 1 Cor. 11., upon thoſe words, The ſame night that our Lord was betrayed, he took Bread. He left, ſays he, Ultimam nobis commemorationem reliquit.—Salvator Deus exemplum dedit, ut quotieſcunque hoc facimus, in mente habeamus, quod Chriſtus pro nobis omnibus mortuus eſt. Ideo nobis dicitur Corpus Chriſti, ut cùm hoc recordati fuerimus, non ſimus ingrati gratiae ejus: quemadmodum ſi quis moriens relinquat ei quem diligit aliquod pignus, quod ille poſt mortem ejus, quandocunque viderit, nunquid poteſt lacrymas continere, ſi eum perfectè dilexerit?, upon thoſe words, The ſame night that our Lord was betrayed, he took Bread. He left, ſays he, to us his laſt Memorial.— God our Saviour gave us an Example, that as often as we do this, we may call to mind that Chriſt has died for us all. Therefore we call it Chriſt's Body, that when we remember this, we may not be unthankful for his Grace. As if one that was a dying ſhould leave ſome Pledge to one whom he loved, which he, after his death, when ever he look'd upon, could not contain his Tears, if he perfectly loved him.
Bede (d)In Proverb. lib. 1. c. 3. Sicut in medio Paradiſi, lignum vitae poſitum teſtatur Moſes, ita per Sapientiam Dei, viz. Chriſti, vivificatur Eccleſia, cujus & nunc Sacramentis carnis & ſanguinis pignus vitae accipit, & in futuro praeſenti beatificabitur aſpectu.has alſo given us the ſame Account. As, ſays he, Moſes witneſſes that the Tree of Life was placed in the midſt of Paradiſe, ſo by the Wiſdom of God, to wit, of Chriſt, the Church has Life given it, in whoſe Sacraments of his Fleſh and Blood ſhe now receives the Pledge of Life, and hereafter ſhall be made happy in a preſent Sight of him. Where you ſee he diſtinguiſhes this Pledge from his preſent Aſpect hereafter.
Gaudentius (e)In Exod. tract. 2. Vere illud eſt haereditarium munus Teſtamenti ejus novi, quodquod nobis ea nocte qua tradebatur crucifigendus, tanquam pignus ſuae praeſentiae dereliquit Hoc illud eſt viaticum noſtri itineris, quo in hac via vitae alimur ac nutrimur, donec ad ipſum pergamus de hoc ſeculo recedentes.calls the Euchariſt that hereditary Gift of his New Teſtament, which on the night that he was delivered to be crucified, he left with us as a Pledge of his Preſence. This is the Previſion of our Journey, by which we are fed and nouriſhed in this way of Life, till removing from this World, we go to him.
Still we ſee it is a Pledge of Abſence.
3 Poſition. Whatſoever Preſence of Chriſt the Fathers ſpeak of in the Euchariſt, they acknowledge the ſame in Baptiſm, and in as full Expreſſions. So that if we will follow the Fathers, we may as well aſſert a Subſtantial Preſence of Chriſt's Body in Baptiſm, as in the Euchariſt. But this on all hands is denied.
Gaudentius (f)Tract. 2. in Exod. in fine. —Quem Sacramentis ſuis ineſſe credimus.in the Place laſt cited, ſpeaking of our Lord Jeſus, ſays, We believe him to be in his Sacraments. He had ſpoke of both Sacraments before, and his words may well be underſtood of both. I am ſure other Fathers give their full conſent to it.
S. Baſil (g)De Baptiſm. lib. 1. cap. 2. foreign.ſpeaking of the Excellency of Chriſt's Baptiſm, and the ſupereminent Glory of it, ſays, That Chriſt the Son of God has determined it, That one greater than the Temple, and greater than Solomon is here.
So Gr. Nazianzen (h)Orat. 40. foreign.. Behold, one greater than the Temple is here, to them that perfectly conſider.
S. Ambroſe (i)Apol. David. c. 12. Chriſte, in tuis te invenio Sacramentis., ſpeaking of Baptiſm, ſays, O Chriſt, I find thee in thy Sacraments.
And again (k)De his qui initiant. c. 2. Crede illic eſſe Divinitatis praeſentiam.. Believe that there is the Preſence of the Divinity.
So afterwards (l)Ibid. cap. 5. Crede adeſſe Dominum Jeſum invocatum precibus Sacerdotum.. Believe that the Lord Jeſus is preſent, being invoked by the Prayers of the Prieſts.
S. Auſtin (m)In Joan. tract. 50. Habes Chriſtum in praeſenti per fidem, in praeſenti per ſignum Chriſti, in praeſenti per baptiſmatis Sacramentum, in praeſenti per altaris cibum & potum., upon thoſe words, The poor ye have always with you, but me ye have not always; diſcourſes thus concerning having Chriſt now. Now thou haſt Chriſt by Faith, now thou haſt him by the Sign of Chriſt, now by the Sacrament of Baptiſm, now by the Meat and Drink of the Altar.
Here you ſee he makes no difference of having Chriſt at preſent theſe ſeveral ways he mentions.
S. Chryſoſtome (n)Hom. 51. in Matth. Lat. Graec. Savil. Hom. 50. pag. 322. foreign, &c.. As when thou art baptized, it is not he (viz. the Prieſt) that baptizes thee, but it is God that holds thy Head by his inviſible Power, and neither Angel, nor Archangel, nor any other, dare approach and touch thee, &c.
The ſame Father *Id. Epiſt. ad Coloſ. Hom. 6. foreign.thus ſpeaks of one to be baptized, Thou ſhalt preſently embrace our Lord himſelf, be mingled with his Body, be incorporated into that Body which is ſeated above, whither the Devil cannot approach.
So the Author of the Commentaries upon S. Mark (o)Inter Opera Chryſoſt. Hom. 14. Vos qui accepturi eſtis Baptiſmum, primum tenete pedes Salvatoris, lavate lachrymis, crine tergite, &c.ſpeaks to thoſe that are to be baptized, as if Chriſt were preſent. You that are to receive Baptiſm, firſt lay faſt hold on the Feet of your Saviour, waſh them with your Tears, wipe them with your Hair, &c.
Marcus the Hermite (p)De Baptiſm. foreign.ſpeaking of a baptized Perſon, ſays, Upon his Baptiſm he has Chriſt lying hid in him.
S. Chryſoſtome again (q)In Gal. 3. v. 27. foreign.. If Chriſt be the Son of God, and thou haſt put him on (viz. in Baptiſm) having the Son in thy ſelf, and being made like to him, thou art brought into one Kindred and Nature.
Again elſewhere (r)In Epheſ. 5. v. 30. foreign., ſpeaking of Chriſt's partaking of our Fleſh and Blood, he ſays, He communicated with us, not we with him: How then are we of his Fleſh and of his Bones? He means this; That as he was begotten by the Holy Ghost without the concurrence of Man, ſo are we regenerate in Baptiſm. —foreign.— As therefore the Son of God was of our Nature, ſo are we alſo of his Subſtance; and as he had us in himſelf, ſo alſo we have him in our ſelves. And all this is by Baptiſm.
Cyril of Alexandr. (s)Tom. 6. in Collectan. foreign.ſays of the Soul, That it is conjoined perfectly to Chriſt by holy Baptiſm. And tho' every one knows that Union ſuppoſes Preſence and Nearneſs, yet this is never made an Argument that Chriſt is preſent corporally in Baptiſm. No more can ſuch like Phraſes, uſed by him concerning the Euchariſt, be urged as a Proof of it.
S. Hilary (t)Lib. 8. de Trinit. Nos verè Verbum cibo Dominico ſumimus, quomodo non naturaliter manere in nobis exiſtimandus eſt? &c.—Nos ſub Myſterio verè carnem corporis ſui ſumimus, & per hoc unum erimus, quia Pater in illo eſt & ille in nobis.— Ut cùm ille in Patre per naturam Divinitatis eſſet, nos contra in eo per corporalem Nativitatem, & ille rurſum in nobis per Sacramentorum ineſſe myſterium crederetur.ſpeaks many things of our real Union with Chriſt in the Sacrament of the Euchariſt. We truly receive the Word in the Lord's Food; how is he not then to be thought naturally to dwell in us?—We under the Myſtery do truly take the Fleſh of his Body, and thereby ſhall be one, becauſe the Father is in him, and be in us.—So that ſince he was in the Father by the Nature of the Divinity, we on the contrary in him by Corporal Nativity, and he might be believed again to be in us by the Myſtery of the Sacraments.
But then it is obſervable, that he do's not ſay theſe great things only of the Euchariſt, that by partaking of it we have a natural Union with Chriſt; but he ſays we have the ſame by Faith, by Regeneration, and by Baptiſm (u)Ibid. Quomodo non naturalem in his intelligis unitatem, qui per naturam unius fidei unum ſunt?—Ceſſat in his aſſenſûs unitas, qui unum ſunt in ejuſdem regeneratione naturae.—Quid hic animorum concordia faciet cum per id unum ſint, quod uno Chriſto per naturam unius Baptiſmi induantur?. How doſt thou not underſtand a natural Unity in thoſe, who are one by the nature of one Faith? — Again, The Unity of Conſent has no place in thoſe, who are one in the Regeneration of the ſame Nature.—Again, What ſhould Agreement of Wills do here, when they are one by this, that they are cloathed with one Chriſt, by the Nature of one Baptiſm?
I'le add but one Teſtimony more, out of Fulgentius (x)De Bapt. Aethiop. cap. ult. Nec cuiquam aliquatenus ambigendum eſt, tunc unumquemque fidelium corporis ſanguiniſque Dominici participem fieri quando in Baptiſmate membrum Chriſti efficitur.; but it is very home. Neither need any one at all doubt, that then every Believer is made Partaker of our Lord's Body and Blood, when he is made a Member of Chriſt in Baptiſm.
And yet even this do's not infer a Subſtantial Preſence of Chriſt in Baptiſm.
To make this Poſition ſtill more full and cogent, let me add, That the Fathers ſo ſpeak of the Waters of Baptiſm, as if they were turned into Blood, and we dyed in that Blood, and baptized in Blood; and yet all theſe neither prove the Preſence of Chriſt's natural Body, nor Tranſubſtantiation there.
To name a few Teſtimonies.
S. Jerom (y)In Eſa. 1. Baptizemini in ſanguine meo per lavacrum regenerationis.upon thoſe words, Waſh ye, make ye clean, ſays, Be ye baptized in my Blood by the Laver of Regeneration.
Again (z)Baptizatus eſt in ſanguine agni quem legebat. In Eſa. 43.he ſays of the Eunuch, He was baptized in the Blood of the Lamb whom he read of in the Prophet.
So S. Auſtin (a)In Joan. tract. 11. Unde rubet Baptiſmus, niſi ſanguine Chriſti conſecratus?. Whence comes Baptiſm to be red, but becauſe it is conſecrated with Chriſt's Blood?
Proſper (b)De Promiſſ part. 2. Baptiſmo ſanguine Chriſti tinguntur.. They are dyed in the Blood of Chriſt in Baptiſm.
S. Chryſoſtome (c)Catech. ad illuminand. foreign.ſpeaking to thoſe that were to receive Baptiſm. You ſhall be cloathed with the Purple Garment dyed in the Lord's Blood.
Julius Firmicus (d)De Error. Prof. Relig. c. 28. Quaere fontes ingenuos, quaere puros liquores, ut illic te poſt multas maculas cum Spiritu S. Chriſti ſanguis incandidet.. Seek for the Noble Fountains, enquire for the pure Waters, that there, after thy many Stains, the Blood of Chriſt with the Holy Spirit may make thee White.
Caeſarius (e)Hom. 5. Paſchal. Ingreditur anima vitales undas, velut rubras ſanguine Chriſti conſecratas., or the Author of the Paſchal Homily. The Soul enters the Waters of Life, that are red as it were, being conſecrated by the Blood of Chriſt.
Iſidore of Sevil (f)In Exod. c. 19. Quid Mare rubrum, niſi Baptiſmum Chriſti ſanguine conſecratum?. What is the Red Sea, but Baptiſm conſecrated by the Blood of Chriſt?
And again (g)De vocat. Gent. c. 23. Verus Iſrael ingreditur Mare rubrum, baptiſmum ſcilicet Chriſti cruore ſignatum.. The true Iſrael enters the Red Sea, to wit, Baptiſm, ſigned with the Blood of Chriſt.
And Primaſius (h)In 1 Cor. 10. Mare rubrum ſignificat Baptiſmum Chriſti ſanguine decoratum.. The Red Sea ſignifies Baptiſm, graced with the Blood of Chriſt.
4. Poſition. The Fathers ſo conſider the Preſence of Chriſt's Body in the Euchariſt, as can no way agree to the Preſence of his natural and glorified Body there.
The Fathers (as I have before proved, ſee Chap. 7. Obſerv. 4. Reaſon 2.) look upon the Bread and Wine in the Euchariſt as the Repreſentative Body of Chriſt; and thus Chriſt's Body is indeed preſent by that which is its Proxy or Pledge: But this Preſence in a proper ſenſe is Abſence, and does ſuppoſe it.
I ſhall therefore here only inſiſt upon one Conſideration of Chriſt's Body there, which can only agree to his Repreſentative Body, but not to the Natural and Glorified Body of Chriſt. Viz.
The Preſence of Chriſt's Body in the Euchariſt, which the Fathers ſpeak of, is of his Body as crucified, and ſlain, and dead. Now this cannot agree to his Natural Body, which, by our Adverſaries Confeſſion is impaſſible and invulnerable now it is glorified, and cannot admit any ſeparation of Parts, which Crucifixion do's ſuppoſe, nor die any more. It is plain by the words of Inſtitution, that the Body of Chriſt there ſpoken of, is his broken Body, ſuch as Crucifixon cauſed, and his Blood is conſidered as ſhed and poured out of his Veins, and ſeparated from his Body, which our Adverſaries that ſpeak of his Preſence in the Sacrament do not believe.
But the Fathers did believe this, and ſay ſo; for which at the preſent, in ſtead of all, I need cite only S. Chryſoſtome (i)Hom. 21. in Act. foreign., whoſe Phraſe for the Euchariſt is, While this Death is perfected, this tremendous Sacrifice, theſe ineffable Myſteries.
Again (k)Homil. de Prodit. Judae. foreign.. Chriſt lies before us ſlain.
In another place (l)In Epiſt. ad Epheſ. Hom. 3. foreign.. While the Sacrifice is brought forth, and Chriſt the Lord's Sheep is ſlain.
And elſewhere (m)Ad. Popul. Antioch. hom. 15.—foreign.. What doſt thou, O Man? Thou ſwearest upon the Holy Table, and there thou killeſt thy Brother, where Chriſt lies ſlain.
Again (n)Lib. 3. de Sacerdotio. foreign, &c.he expreſſes it thus rhetorically: When thou ſeeſt the Lord ſlain and lying, and the Prieſt ſtanding by the Sacrifice and praying, and all the People purple-dyed in that precious Blood, &c.
Again in another place (o)In Coemeter. appel. foreign, &c., ſpeaking of the Prieſt ſtanding before the Holy Table, &c. he adds, When thou ſeeſt the Sheep (viz. Chriſt). ſlain and divided, &c.
So alſo elſewhere (p)De Poenit. in Encoen. foreign, &c. foreign;. O wonderful! The Myſtical Table being prepared, the Lamb of God ſlain for thee, &c. his Blood emptied into the Cup out of his immaculate Side, for thy Purification, doſt thou not fear?
This ſlaying and dividing the Body of Chriſt, this emptying the Blood out of his Veins, he ſpeaks of, cannot be underſtood of any thing, but of his Repreſentative Body.
Neither can another Saying of his have any other ſenſe (q)Hom. 51. in Matth. foreign—foreign.; where telling us how Chriſt has given us leave to be filled with his holy Fleſh, he adds, He has propoſed himſelf before us ſlain. So that if we eat his Fleſh, it muſt be his dead Body; for ſo he is ſet before us to be eaten: But that's impoſſible.
But all this is eaſily underſtood in our way, or rather as he himſelf has explained it, when he ſays (r)Hom. 83. in Matth. foreign., The Myſtery is the Paſſion and Croſs of Chriſt.
With which agrees that of S. Austin (s)In Pſal. 21. Coenam ſuam dedit, paſſionem ſuam dedit.. He gave his Supper, he gave his Paſſion.
Or, as he ſays in another place (t)Super Evang. lib. 2. qu. 38. —Tamen paſſiones Domini in Sacramentis corporis & ſanguinis ejus ſuavitate lambunt devotiſſimâ., comparing the Gentiles to thoſe Dogs that lick'd Lazarus's Sores; Yet, ſays he, they lick the Paſſions of our Lord in the Sacraments of his Body and Blood with a devout Sweetneſs.
The Reader will meet with further Teſtimonies to this purpoſe afterwards, under the Head of Eating Christ's Body and drinking his Blood, which, according to the Fathers, is to be done myſtically and ſpiritually (conſidered as ſlain), and therefore his Preſence muſt be ſuch too: For his Body is preſent juſt as it is eaten.
The Sum of all is this, That according to the Fathers, Chriſt is conſidered in the Sacrament as dead and ſlain, and therefore can be only preſent there typically and by repreſentation: For ſo Card. Perron himſelf confeſſes (u)De locis Auguſtin. cap. 3. Sacramentum non eſt realiter corpus Chriſti in actuali occiſi, mortui & inanimati ſtatu conſtitutum, nec eâ ratione illud continet, ſed eatenus tantum repraeſentat, &c., The Sacrament is not really the Body of Chriſt, put in the actual state of one ſlain, dead, and without Life; nor do's it contain it ſo, but in that reſpect do's only repreſent it.
5 Poſition. That according to the Fathers, the Preſence of Chriſt's Body to us now, is a Preſence to our Faith and Minds, a Preſence of Union, of Efficacy and Grace.
This is S. Auſtin's conſtant Doctrine. I have cited a place out of him before, where reckoning up the ſeveral Preſences of Chriſt (x)Serm. 120. de diverſis., the Preſence of his Divinity, ſo he is with his Father; his Corporal Preſence, ſo, he ſays, —Secundùm praeſentiam corporalem jam ſupra coelos ad dextram patris eſt.he is now above the Heavens, at the Right Hand of the Father; and he knows but one more, —Secundùm vero praeſentiam fidei in omnibus Chriſtianis eſt., which is the Preſence of Faith, by which he is in all Christians.
Thus alſo elſewhere (y)Serm. 12. de diverſis. In coelo quidem Chriſtus eſt, ſed etiam in corde credentium.. Chriſt is in Heaven, but he is alſo in the Hearts of Believers.
And again (z)In Evang. Joan. tract. 50. — Audeant & teneant. Reſpondet, Quem tenebo? abſentem? Quomodo in coelum manum mittam, ut ibi ſedentem teneam? Fidem mitte, & tenuiſti: parentes tui tenuerunt carnem, tu tene corde, quoniam Chriſtus abſens etiam praeſens eſt, niſi praeſens eſſet à nobis teneri non poſſet, &c. —Corpus enim ſuum intulit coelo, majeſtatem non abſtulit mundo., exhorting the Jews to hear and take hold on Chriſt, he brings one in asking, Whom ſhall I lay hold of? one that is abſent? &c. He anſwers, Send forth thy Faith, and thou haſt hold of him. Thy Fathers laid hold of him in his Fleſh, do thou hold him in thy Heart, becauſe Chriſt who is abſent, is alſo preſent; for if he were not preſent, he could not be held by us. But ſtill all is to be done by Faith, for the Reaſon he gives; He brought his Body into Heaven, but his Majeſty (i. e. his Divinity) was not withdrawn from the World.
And afterwards (a)Ibid. propè finem. Secundùm praeſentiam majeſtatis ſemper habemus Chriſtum: ſecundùm praeſentiam carnis rectè dictum eſt diſcipulis, Me autem non ſemper habebitis. Habuit illum Eccleſia ſecundùm praeſentiam carnis paucis diebus: modo fide tenet, oculis non videt.. According to the Preſence of his Majeſty, we always have Chriſt; according to the Preſence of his Fleſh, it was rightly ſaid to his Diſciples, Me ye have not always. The Church had him a few days according to his Fleſhly Preſence; now it holds him by Faith, and ſees him not.
So again (b)In Ev. Joan. tract. 106. Non rectè intelliguntur—niſi hi quos in ſe credentes ſervare jam coeperat praeſentia corporali, & quos relicturus fuerat abſentia corporali, ut eos cum patre ſervaret praeſentia ſpiritali., ſpeaking of thoſe whom he kept when he was with them, he ſays, Theſe Words can be rightly underſtood of none but thoſe who believing on him, were begun to be kept by him by his Corporal Preſence, and whom he was about to leave by his Bodily Abſence, that he might keep them, together with his Father, by his Spiritual Preſence.
Laſtly, S. Auſtin ſays (c)Expoſ. in Epiſt. Joan. tract. 1. Dominus conſolans nos qui ipſum jam in coelo ſedentem manu contrectare non poſſumus, ſed fide contingere, ait illi, Quia vidiſti & credidiſti, beati qui non viderunt & credunt., Our Lord comforting us, who now that he ſits in Heaven cannot handle him, but only touch him by Faith, ſays to Thomas, Becauſe thou haſt ſeen, thou haſt believed; bleſſed are they that have not ſeen and believe.
S. Cyril of Alexandria agrees perfectly with this Doctrine (d)In Joan. 13.33. foreign, &c., and knows no other Preſence of Chriſt now, but what is Spiritual and Divine, ſince he aſcended to the Father, and left the World. For they that judge aright, and are of a confirmed Faith, must be perſuaded, that tho' Chriſt he abſent from us in the Fleſh, having undertaken a long Journey to God and the Father, that yet he compaſſes all things by his Divine Power, and is preſent to them that love him, &c.
And again (e)Ibid. in v. 36. foreign.. It ſeemed to them intolerable, to be ſeparated from Chriſt, tho' he was always preſent with them by the Power and Efficacy of the Spirit.
Elſewhere (f)In Joan. 14.27. foreign.he lays it down as a Rule, That Christ's Spirit dwelling in the Saints, ſupplies the Preſence and Power of Christ in his abſence.
And many more Places I might name out of him.
Their Senſe is well expreſt in that ſhort Saying of the Author under S. Cyprian's (g)De Ʋnct. Chryſmat. Ineſt veritas ſigno, & Spiritus Sacramento.Name, which I'le again repeat. Truth is in the Sign, and the Spirit in the Sacrament.
S. Ambroſe (h)De Spir. Sanct. l. 1. c. 10. propè finem.knows of no other Preſence of Chriſt now, but what makes the Father to be preſent with him too, and that is the Preſence of the Spirit and of Grace. His Words are very remarkable. The Spirit then ſo comes, Sic ergo venit Spiritus, quemadmodum venit Pater: dixit enim Filius, Ego & Pater veniemus & manſionem apud eum faciemus. Nunquid corporaliter Pater venit? Sic ergo Spiritus venit, in quo cum venit, & Patris & Filii plena praeſentia eſt.— Paulò poſt, Probavimus igitur unam praeſentiam eſſe, unam gratiam eſſe, Patris, Filii, & Spiritus Sancti, quae tam coeleſtis & divina eſt, ut pro ea gratias agat Patri Filius, &c.as the Father comes: For the Son ſaid, I and my Father will come, and make our abode with him. What? do's the Father come corporally? (And the ſame may be ask'd too of the Son, by what follows.) The Spirit ſo comes, as that in him when he comes is the full Preſence of the Father and the Son.— A little after, We have therefore proved, that there is one Preſence, and that there is one Grace (which explains what the Preſence is) of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which is ſo Celestial and Divine, that the Son gives thanks to the Father for it, &c.
Bede (i)Hom. aeſt. de temp. feria 6. Paſch.obſerving how many times Chriſt appeared to his Diſciples after his Reſurrection, ſays, Hac ergo frequentia corporalis ſuae manifeſtationis oſtendere voſuit Dominus, ut diximus, in omni loco, ſe bonorum deſideriis divinitùs eſſe praeſentem. Apparuit namque ad monumentum lugentibus, aderit & nobis abſentiae ejus recordatione ſalubriter contriſtatis. Apparuit in fractione panis his, qui ſe peregrinum eſſe putantes ad hoſpitium vocaverunt, aderit & nobis cùm peregrinis & pauperibus quaecunque poſſumus bona libenter impendimus. Aderit & nobis in fractione panis, cùm Sacramenta corporis ejus, videlicet panis vivi, caſta & ſimplici conſcientia ſumimus.He deſigned to ſhew by theſe frequent Appearances, that he would be ſpiritually or divinely preſent in all Places at the Deſire of the Faithful. He appear'd to the Women that wept at the Sepulcher; he will be likewiſe preſent with us, when we grieve at the remembrance of his abſence. He appear'd, whilst they broke Bread, to thoſe who, taking him for a Stranger, gave him entertainment; he will be likewiſe with us whilst we liberally receive the Poor and Strangers: He will be likewiſe with us in the Fraction of Bread, when we receive the Sacraments of his Body, which is the Living Bread, with a pure and chaste Heart.
All this ſpeaks only the Preſence of his Divinity, and no other.
For, as Alcuinus (k)In Joan. lib. 6. cap. 35. Et idem ipſe Chriſtus & homo & Deus. Ergo ibat per id quod homo erat, & manebat per id quod Deus erat. Ibat per id quod in uno loco erat, & manebat per id quod ubique Deus erat.ſays, The ſame Christ who is Man, is likewiſe God; he left them as to his Manhood, but remained with them as to his Godhead. He went away, with reference to that, by which he is but in one place, (N. B.) yet tarried with them by his Divinity, which is every where.
All Liturgies, when the Euchariſt is celebrated, call aloud, foreign, Surſum corda, Lift up your Hearts. The meaning of which we are told by S. Austin (l)De bono Perſev. l. 2. c. 13. Quod ergo in Sacramentis fidelium dicitur, ut ſurſum corda habeamus ad Dominum, munus eſt Domini—ut aſcendat & quae ſurſum ſunt ſapiat, ubi Chriſtus eſt in dextra Dei ſedens, non quae ſuper terram, &c.. What therefore is ſaid in the Sacraments of the Faithful, that we ſhould lift up our Hearts to the Lord, it is a Gift of the Lord. And he explains it, That by the Divine Aid the Soul is helped to aſcend, and ſet its Affections upon things above, where Christ is ſitting at God's right Hand, and not upon things on the Earth.
S. Jerom's Words (m)Ad Hedybiam qu. 2. Aſcendamus cum Domino coenaculum magnum ſtratum & mundatum, & accipiamus ab eo ſurſum calicem N. Teſtamenti, ibique cum eo Paſcha celebrantes inebriemur ab eo vino ſobrietatis.are very emphatical. Let us, with our Lord, aſcend the great upper Room prepared and made clean, and receive from him above the Cup of the New Testament, and there celebrating the Paſſover with him, be inebriated by him with the Wine of Sobriety.
All you ſee is above, and our Preſence too with him there.
S. Chryſostome (n)Hom. 24. in 1 Cor. 10.ſpeaking how we ought to approach to the tremendous Sacrifice with Concord and ardent Charity, ſays, From thence we become Eagles, and ſo fly to Heaven it ſelf: For, where the Carcaſe is, thither will the Eagles come. foreign.—foreign.He calls his Body the Carcaſe, becauſe of his Death; and he calls them Eagles, ſhewing, that he who comes to this Body ought to be ſublime, and have nothing common with Earth, nor be drawn downward and creep, but continually fly upward, and look to the Sun of Righteouſneſs, and to have the Eye of his Mind quick-ſighted: For this is a Table for Eagles, not for Jackdaws.
Gr. Nazianzen (o)Orat. 28. contr. Maxim.ſpeaking of his Adverſaries, ſays, Will they drive me from the Altars? I know another Altar, foreignwhoſe Types the things now ſeen are, upon which no Ax has been lift up, no Iron Tool or other Inſtrument has been heard; but is wholly a Work of the Mind, foreign.—and an Aſcent by Contemplation. Before this will I preſent my ſelf, on this will I offer acceptable things, Sacrifice, foreignOblation, and Holocauſts, ſo much more excellent than the things now offered, as Truth excels a Shadow.
If Chriſt's Body were corporally preſent, it is not conceivable, what better Oblation than that we could preſent, no more than of what other Oblation this ſhould be only a Type and Shadow.
Oecumenius (p)In Heb. 10. v. 22. foreign.upon thoſe words, Let us draw near with a true heart, in full aſſurance of Faith, ſays thus: Seeing there remains nothing viſible, neither the Temple, that is Heaven, nor the High Prieſt, that is Chriſt, nor the Sacrifice, that is his Body; it remains that we have need of Faith.
I ſhewed before, that the Fathers never make Chriſt's Body inviſible, but only from its diſtance and abſence: And ſo it muſt be underſtood here, that he and his Body, the Prieſt and the Sacrifice are inviſible, being both in Heaven, at that diſtance which makes Heaven it ſelf and its Inhabitants inviſible to us; and therefore he recommends Faith, which can only make them preſent to us.
Author imperfecti Operis in Matthaeum (q)Hom. 11. Si ergo vaſa ſanctificata, ad privatos uſus transferre ſic periculoſum eſt, in quibus non eſt verum corpus Chriſti, ſed myſterium corporis ejus continetur; quanto magis vaſa corporis noſtri, quae ſibi Deus ad habitaculum praeparavit, non debemus locum dare Diabolo agendi in eis quod vult., (among the Works of Chryſoſtome in Latin) has this Saying: If therefore it be ſo dangerous a thing, to turn the Sanctified Veſſels to private Uſes, in which is not the true Body of Chriſt, but only the Myſtery of his Body is contained therein; how much more as to the Veſſels of our Body, which God has prepared for himſelf to dwell in, we ought not to give place to the Devil to act in them what he pleaſes.
One may truſt an Adverſary as to his Opinion of what makes againſt him; Theſe Words were look'd upon as ſo conſiderable an Objection, that an Attempt to corrupt them was practiſed long ago. The Learned Archbiſhop Uſher (in the Preface of his Anſwer to the Jeſuit's Challenge) has obſerv'd, That thoſe words [in quibus non eſt verum corpus Chriſti, ſed myſterium corporis ejus continetur] were left out wholly, in an Edition at Antwerp, 1537. and at Paris, 1543. and in another at Paris, apud Audoenum Parvum, 1557. Dr. James (in his Corruption of True Fathers, p. 53.) ſays, Thoſe words are found in all the ancient Copies at Oxford, as Archbiſhop Uſher ſays they were extant in the ancienter Editions, as in 1487. And I my ſelf have ſeen one Paris Edition, even in the Year 1536. (apud Claud. Chevallonium) where thoſe words are extant. So that I conclude, That the Antwerp Edition firſt mentioned (apud Joan. Steelfium, 1537.) was the firſt that made the Alteration. But then I further obſerve, That in the large Paris Edition in Latin of S. Chryſoſtome, 1588. which I have by me, thoſe words are inferted indeed in the Text, but incloſed within two Brakets, with this Note in the Margin, [Haec in quibuſdam exemplaribus deſunt,] which is very fine work, when they themſelves had omitted them in the forenamed Prints.
They have plaid the ſame Prank with the ſame Author, in another of his Homilies, (viz. Hom. 19.) whoſe Words were not favourable to the Real Preſence of Chriſt's Body in the Euchariſt. The words are theſe.
Perhaps thou wilt object, Sed forte dices, quomodo dicere illum poſſum, non eſſe Chriſtianum, quem video Chriſtum confitentem, altare habentem, Sacrificium panis & vini offerentem, baptizantem, &c.How can I ſay that he is not a Chriſtian, whom I ſee confeſſing Chriſt, having an Altar, offering the Sacrifice of Bread and Wine, baptizing, &c.
In the Paris Edition apud Audoenum Parvum, An. 1557. as Dr. James Notes, thoſe words, [Sacrificium panis & vini] are changed into theſe, [Sacrificium corporis & ſanguinis Chriſti.] The Paris Edition of 1588. (before mentioned) tho' it had more Conſcience than to inſert this Change into the Text, yet ſo far complied with the Cheat, as to put in the Margin [aliàs, Sacrificium corporis & ſanguinis Chriſti.]
If this Trade had gone on ſucceſsfully, they might have had in time a Conſent of Fathers on their ſide; but it can never be without it.
I will conclude this Particular with one Obſervation more, of what the Reader may find at large diſcourſed of, in a late Learned Diſſertation of Monſieur Allix (r)Diſſert. de Sanguine D. N. Jeſu Chriſti ad Epiſt. 146. S. Auguſtini. Utrum nunc corpus Domini oſſa & ſanguinem habeat., upon occaſion of an Epiſtle of S. Auſtin to Conſentius, who enquired of him, Whether now the Body of Chriſt has Bones and Blood? The very reading of that 146th Epiſtle of S. Auſtin, wherein he plainly, in his Anſwer to that Queſtion, betrays his doubting of it, as well as in other of his Works; his diſtinguiſhing betwixt Chriſt's having a true Body after his Reſurrection, and his having Fleſh and Blood; the Teſtimonies there of other of the Ancients, eſpecially of Origen and his Followers, that ſeem plainly to make both the glorified Body of Chriſt, and alſo of Believers, to be of another Compoſition than that of proper Fleſh and Blood; theſe, I ſay, are a Demonſtration, that the Ancient Fathers did not believe any Preſence of true Fleſh and Blood to be now in the Euchariſt.
Neither do I think the Anſwer given to this Diſſertation by Monſieur Boileau, Dean of Sens (s)Diſquiſit. Theolog. de Sangu. Corporis Chriſti poſt reſurrectionem., to be a ſatisfactory one in this Particular. For tho' I ſhould grant (which yet I ſee not ſufficiently cleared by him) that generally the Fathers, and S. Auſtin alſo, did believe, that Chriſt had a Body, after the Reſurrection, of the ſame Subſtance, tho' differing in Qualities, from what he had before; yet there are Three things that he has by no means ſaid any thing material to, in his Anſwer.
1. That he has given no Account of S. Auſtin's ſtudious declining to determine any thing in particular about the Blood of Chriſt, when he had never ſo fair an occaſion to do it; but waves this always, even where he ſeems, as he do's in his Retractations, to determine for his having palpable Fleſh and Bones.
2. Why S. Auſtin ſhould ever at all doubt or heſitate about this Matter of Chriſt's Blood after his Reſurrection, is unconceivable, if he, with the reſt of the Fathers, had ſuch a conſtant Belief of its Preſence in the Euchariſt, as the Romaniſts affirm.
3. That tho' the Fathers uſe the Argument of the Euchariſt to prove the Truth of Chriſt's Body, yet none ever urged Origen or his Followers with an Argument from thence, to confute their Opinions, differing from the pretended common Sentiments about the Body and Blood of Chriſt, by what lay ſo plainly before them, of his Body and Blood being in the Euchariſt, if they had believed it. But I refer the Reader to Monſieur Allix his Diſſertation, before-named, wherein he may find abundant Satisfaction in theſe Matters; and alſo will ſee how ſadly the Romaniſts are put to it, to anſwer the Difficulties about the Blood of Chriſt, which they pretend to ſhew in ſo many Churches, and is produced in ſuch Quantities, that may well cauſe a new Doubt, Whether if his Reſurrection-Body have any Blood in it, we muſt not ſuppoſe it to be of a new Creation, ſince what was in his Body when he died, cannot ſuffice to furniſh more Blood, if ſo much, as their Vials and Glaſſes are filled withal.