Page images
PDF
EPUB

Conformable to this pattern are the later Liturgies: particularly that which is called Basil's, according to the Alexandrian use, in Renaudot's edition ". And another, entitled Gregory's Liturgy. The same thing is observable in the Liturgies which go under the names of apostles or evangelists, collected by Fabricius: as St. James's P, St. Peter's 9, St. Matthew's, St. Mark's, and St. John's t. The Liturgy under the name of Chrysostom, published by Goar, has the like forms ". So also have the Oriental Liturgies in Renaudotius's Collection, volume the second, and the Latin ones published by Mabillon; of which it would be tedious here to speak more particularly; as it is also needless to trouble the reader with more references in a very clear point. Upon the whole, there appears to have been a general consent of the Christian churches all along as to the point of eucharistical remission of sins: which is proved, not only from the testimonies of single Fathers, but from the ancient standing discipline of the Church, and from the concurring language of all the ancient Liturgies now extant.

As to the judgment of the first Reformers abroad, it is well known to fall in with the same: or if any doubt should be, let Luther answer for the Lutherans, and for the Calvinists Calvin W.

[blocks in formation]

The judgment of our own Church will easily be proved to concur in the same article, from the known language of our Communion Office, and Homilies. In our public Service, we pray, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood.' The propositions couched under these words are several: 1. That our bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost. 2. That sin defileth them. 3. That the sacrifice of Christ, removing guilt, (other due circumstances supposed,) makes them clean. 4. That there is an application of that sacrifice made in the Eucharist. 5. That therefore such application ought to be prayed for. So much for the body. The like, with a little change, may be understood also of the soul: and the conclusion from both parts is that guilt is washed away in the Sacrament, duly administered, and duly received, both from body and soul; which in other words amounteth to this, that remission of sins is conferred by the Eucharist, to all worthy receivers.

In a thanksgiving prayer, of the same Service, we pray that we and all thy whole Church may obtain remission of sins,' beseeching the Divine Majesty, not to weigh our merits,' but to 'pardon our offences,' &c.; which words carry in them a manifest allusion to that remission of sins which is conceived ordinarily to pertain to this Sacrament, and is expected from it, as one of the benefits of it. But considering that all depends upon our being meet partakers, (whereof God only is the unerring Judge,) and that it becomes every communicant to think humbly of himself, leaning to the modest side; it is very proper to refer the whole to God's clemency, entreating him to accept of us as meet partakers, and thereupon to grant us the remission we came for. For though it is an undoubted truth, that the Eucharist confers

p. 950. Cp. Instit. lib. iv. c. 17. sect. 42.

Lambertus Danaeus cautiously words the doctrine thus: 'Coena

Domini . . . est applicatio semel a Christo factae peccatorum nostrorum remissionis.' Epist. ad Eccles. Gallican. 1498.

remission to the faithful communicant, yet it is right to leave the determination of our faithfulness to God the searcher of hearts, and in the meanwhile to beg forgiveness at his hands. Add to this, that were we ever so certain that we are actually pardoned upon receiving the Eucharist, yet as remission is a continued act, and always progressive, (which I before noted,) it can never be improper to go on with our petitions for it, any more than to make use of the Lord's Prayer every hour of our lives. It was so used anciently, just after plenary remission: and in like manner we now make use of it, immediately after our having received the Communion; without the least apprehension that such usage interferes at all with the principle which I have been maintaining, as indeed it does not. Nothing is more frequent in the ancient Liturgies, than to ask forgiveness immediately after receiving, though the doctrine of present remission is fully expressed and inculcated in the same Liturgies y.

[ocr errors]

Enough hath been said to shew, that our Communion Office supposes remission of sins to be conferred in the Eucharist. The same thing is directly and clearly asserted in our Homilies. As to the number of Sacraments, if they should be considered according to the exact signification of a Sacrament, namely, for visible signs expressly commanded in the New Testament, whereunto is annexed the promise of free forgiveness of sins, and of our holiness, and joining in

Jerome's remark upon this case, when Baptism and the Eucharist went together, and perfect remission was supposed to have been just granted, is worth noting:

'De Baptismatis fonte surgentes, et regenerati in Dominum Salvatorem . . statim in prima communione corporis Christi dicunt: et dimitte nobis debita nostra, quae illis fuerant in Christi confessione dimissa. . . . Quamvis sit hominum perfecta conversio, et post vitia atque peccata virtutum plena possessio; numquid possunt sic esse sine vitio, quomodo illi qui

statim de Christi fonte procedunt? Et tamen jubentur dicere, dimitte nobis debita nostra, &c. Non humilitatis mendacio, ut tu interpretaris; sed pavore fragilitatis humanae, suam conscientiam formidantis.' Hieronym. Dialog, adv. Pelag. lib. iii. p. 543.

y See the Clementine Liturgy quoted above, and compare Fabricius's Collection, pp. 120, 333. Renaudot's, vol. i. p. 51; vol. ii. pp. 42, 152, 174, 212, 233, 253, 269, 447, 634. Mabillon's in Mus. Ital. vol. i. p. 281. Missal. Gall. p. 331. Liturg. Gallic. p. 300.

Christ, there be but two, namely, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord z.' Here it is not only supposed that remission is conferred in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, but that it could not in strictness be reputed a Sacrament, if it were not so: so great a stress is there laid on this principle. Accordingly, afterwards in the same Homily, absolution is rejected as no Sacrament, having no such promise of remission annexed and tied to the visible sign: and Orders also is rejected, because it lacks the promise of remission of sin.' In another Homily, where the Lord's Supper is particularly treated of, it is observed that therein the favourable mercies of God are sealed, the satisfaction by Christ towards us confirmed, and the remission of sins established a.'

After these public authentic evidences of the doctrine of our Church in this particular, it will be needless to add the concurring sentiments of our eminent Divines, all along from that time. But because the point has been sometimes contested, both abroad and at home, and difficulties have been raised, it will be but fair and just to the reader, to set before him the utmost that has been pleaded on the contrary side, and to suggest, as briefly as may be, the proper solutions of the appearing difficulties.

Objections removed.

1. It has been objected, that 'the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is not itself like Baptism, a rite appointed for the remission of sins; but it is a commemoration only of the

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

all-sufficient sacrifice, which was once offered for an eternal expiation b. To which I answer, 1. That supposing this Sacrament were not appointed at all for remission, it does not follow that it must be appointed only for commemoration; because it might be (as it certainly is) appointed in part for sanctification also. 2. Supposing further, that it is not completely equal to Baptism in point of remission, yet it does not follow that it may not confer remission in some measure, or to an inferior degree. 3. It is untruly suggested, that the Eucharist is only a commemoration of the all-sufficient sacrifice, since it most certainly is, as hath been proved, an application of that sacrifice to every worthy receiver and since remission of sins is one of the fruits of that sacrifice, it must, it cannot but be allowed, that the Eucharist carries remission in it, more or less, and to some degree or other.

2. A second objection runs thus: To imagine that the Lord's Supper, which is to be repeated perpetually, has such a promise annexed to it of taking away all past sins, as Baptism had, which was to be administered but once, is a dangerous and fatal error, because such an opinion would be plainly an encouragement for men to continue in sin, that the grace of forgiveness might be perpetually repeated and abound c.' In answer hereto, let but the reader put repentance instead of Lord's Supper, and then traverse the objection over again in his mind, if it be only to see whether the very same objection does not plead as strongly against repeated forgiveness upon repeated repentance, as against the same forgiveness upon repeated communion: for we never suppose any new forgiveness granted in the communion, but upon new repentance. What then have we to trust to, if the plain and comfortable Gospel doctrine of forgiveness (toties quoties) upon true repentance, shall be represented as a dangerous and fatal error, and an encourage

b Dr. Clarke's Posth. Sermons, vol. iv. serm. vi. p. 133.
Dr. Clarke, ibid. p. 134.

« PreviousContinue »