Eucharist in common: the particulars of their faith, so far, is therein collected into one large complex idea, and for conveniency is comprised in the single word Sacrament. And yet it must be observed, that this word Sacrament, as applied to those two religious rites, admits of a threefold acceptation in Church writers: sometimes denoting barely the outward sign of each, sometimes the thing signified, and sometimes both together, the whole action, service, or solemnitys. The Socinians, observing that the received sense of the word Sacrament is against their whole scheme, have often expressed their dislike of it. Smalcius particularly complains of it, as an unscriptural name, and besides, barbarous Latin, and leading to superstition and idolatry; and therefore he moves to have it totally laid aside t. He was offended, it seems, at the name, because it served to keep up the sense of something mysterious, or mystical, of a sign and somewhat signified, viz. grace &c., to which he had an aversion. Volkelius, more complaisant with respect to the name, turns. all his resentment upon the thing, flatly denying that the Eucharist is a Sacrament ": his reason is, because it neither exhibits nor seals any spiritual grace. His master Socinus had intimated as much before. The sum is, that the strict sense of the Sacrament, as implying an outward sign of an inward grace, can never suit with their schemes, who allow of no inward grace at all. I may here note by the way, that while the Socinians s Vid. Lamb. Danaeus. Isag. part. iv. lib. 5. P. 441. Vox sacramenti, in hac significatione, barbara, vel saltem sacris literis incognita est; ab hominibus vero otiosis (qui ceremoniis hujusmodi nescio quid praeter sacram Scripturam superstitiosum, aut etiam idololatricum ex parte, tribuere non sunt veriti) ad tegendum dolum usurpata: praestat igitur aliis nominibus appellari in Christi coetu hanc ceremoniam.' Smalcius c. Frantz. p. 347. "Satis constat nec alteram appellationem, nimirum sacramentum corporis Christi, veram esse. Si enim haec actio ne sacramentum quidem est, quo pacto, quaeso, corporis Christi sacramentum erit?' Volkel, de Ver. Relig. lib. iv. cap. 22. p. 678. Socinus de Baptism. Aquae, cap. xiv. reject the invisible grace, the Romanists destroy the visible sign, and both run counter to the true notion of a Sacrament, by their opposite extremes: from whence it is manifest, of what moment it is to preserve the word Sacrament, and to assert to it its true and full sense. For though the word, as here applied, is not in Scripture, yet the notion is there, and the general doctrine is there: and the throwing that notion, or that general doctrine, under the name of Sacrament, is nothing more than collecting several Scripture ideas, or Scripture truths, and binding them up together in a single word, for the better preserving them, and for the ease and conveniency of speech. But as to the proof of those doctrines or those truths, I cannot enter into it now, but must reserve it for a more proper place, and proceed in the account of ancient names. A. D. 107. Eucharist. Another name, as famous as any, is the name Eucharist, signifying properly thanksgiving or blessing, and fitly denoting this holy service, considered as a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving. I set the date no higher than Ignatius's Epistles, because there it first certainly occurs: though one can make no doubt of its having obtained in the apostolical age, when it is considered how familiarly Ignatius makes use of it y. Some have thought that St. Paul himself led the way as to this name, 1 Cor. xiv. 16. But that construction of the text appears too conjectural to build upon, and is rejected by the generality of interpreters; I think, with good reason, as Estius in particular hath manifested upon the place. I content myself therefore with running up that name no higher than Ignatius's time. After him, Justin Martyr", Irenaeus a, Clemens of Alexandria b, Origen, and others, make familiar use of that name, y Ignatius, Epist. ad Smyrn. c. 7, 8. ad Philadelph. c. 4. Justin. M. Apol. 96. Dialog. pp. 220, 386. Thirlby. Irenaeus, pp. 251, 294, 341, 360, ed. Bened. b Clem. Alex. Paedag. lib. ii. cap. 2. p. 178. ed. Oxon. Origen. contr. Cels. lib. viii. sect. 57. p. 784. ed. Bened. Soci Rom as is well known. One may judge how extensive and prevailing that name, above any other, anciently was, from this consideration, that it passed not only among the Greeks, but among the Orientalists also, (as may be seen in the Syriac version before mentioned,) and likewise among the Latins; who adopted that very Greek word into their own language; as is plain from Tertulliand and Cyprian in many places. A. D. 150. Sacrifice. Ovoía. e Justin Martyr is the first I meet with who speaks of the Eucharist under the name of sacrifice or sacrifices. But he does it so often, and so familiarly f, that one cannot but conceive, that it had been in common use for some time before and it is the more likely to have been so, because oblation (which is near akin to it) certainly was, as we have seen above. Irenaeus of the same century mentions the sacrifice of the Eucharist more than once 8, either directly or obliquely. Tertullian, not many years later, does the like h. Cyprian also speaks of the sacrifice in the Eucharist, understanding d Tertullian. pp. 102, 135, 215, 220, 562, 570. Rigalt. e Cyprian. Tract. pp. 132, 147, 230. Ep. pp. 34. 37, 38, 39, 117, 118, 125, 190, 191, 223. Ox. edit. 1 Περὶ δὲ τῶν ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ὑφ ̓ ἡμῶν τῶν ἐθνῶν προσφερομένων αὐτῷ θυσιῶν, τουτέστι τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς εὐχαριστίας, καὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου ὁμοίως τῆς εὐχαριστίας, προλέγει TÓTE. Just. Dialog. p. 220, edit. Lond. θυσίας &ς παρέδωκεν Ἰησοῦς δ Χριστὸς γίνεσθαι, τουτέστιν ἐπὶ τῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ τοῦ ἄρτου καὶ τοῦ ποτης píov. Ibid. p. 386. ὅτι μὲν οὖν καὶ εὐχαὶ καὶ εὐχαριστίαι, ὑπὸ τῶν ἀξίων γινόμεναι, τέλειαι μόναι καὶ εὐάρεστοί εἰσι τῷ Θεῷ θυσίαι, καὶ αὐτός φημι· ταῦτα γὰρ μόνα καὶ Χριστιανοὶ παρέλαβον ποιεῖν, καὶ ἐπ' ἀναμνήσει δὲ τῆς τροφῆς αὐτῶν ξηρᾶς τε καὶ ὑγρᾶς. Ibid. p. 387. Ecclesiae oblatio, quam Dominus docuit offerri in universo mundo, purum sacrificium reputatum est apud Deum' &c. Sacrificia in populo, sacrificia et in ecclesia.' Iren. lib. iv. c. 18. p. 250. 'Omni autem loco sacrificium offeretur ei, et hoc purum.' Lib. iv. c. 17. p. 249. hNon putant plerique sacrificiorum orationibus interveniendum.... Accepto corpore Domini et reservato, utrumque salvum est, et participatio sacrificii, et execu. tio officii.' Tertull. de Orat. c. xiv. pp. 135, 136. 'Aut sacrificium offertur, aut Dei sermo administratur. De cultu Fem. lib. ii. c. II. it, in one particular passage, of the lay oblationi. This is not the place to examine critically what the ancients meant by the sacrifice or sacrifices of the Eucharist: it will deserve a distinct chapter in another part of this work. But, as I before observed of oblation, that, anciently, it was understood sometimes of the lay offering, the same I observe now of sacrifice; and it is plain from Cyprian. Besides that' notion of sacrifice, there was another, and a principal one, which was conceived to go along with the Eucharistical service, and that was the notion of spiritual sacrifice, consisting of many particulars, as shall be shewn hereafter: and it was on the account of one or both, that the Eucharist had the name of sacrifice for the two first centuries. But by the middle of the third century, if not sooner, it began to be called a sacrifice, on account of the grand sacrifice represented and commemorated in it; the sign, as such, now adopting the name of the thing signified. In short, the memorial at length came to be called a sacrifice, as well as an oblation: and it had a double claim to be so called; partly as it was in itself a spiritual service or sacrifice, and partly as it was a representation and commemoration of the high tremendous sacrifice of Christ God-man. This last view of it, being of all the most awful and most endearing, came by degrees to be the most prevailing acceptation of the Christian sacrifice, as held forth in the Eucharist. But those who styled the Eucharist a sacrifice on that account, took care, as often as need was, to explain it off to a memorial of a sacrifice rather than a strict or proper sacrifice, in that precise view. Cyprian, I think, is the first who plainly and directly styles the Eucharist a sacrifice in the commemorative view, and as representing the grand sacrifice k. Not that there was anything new in the 1 'Locuples, et dives es, et Dominicum celebrare te credis, quae corban omnino non respicis, quae in Dominicum sine sacrificio venis, quae partem de sacrificio quod doctrine, but there was a new і application of an old name, which had at the first been brought in upon other accounts. I shall endeavour to set that whole matter clear in a chapter below: for the present these few hints may suffice, and so I pass on. A.D. 150. Commemoration, Memorial. 'Avduvos, Mun. Justin Martyr, if I mistake not, once names the Eucharist a commemoration or memorial; where he takes notice, that the Christians offered up spiritual sacrifices, prayers and lauds, in the memorial of their food dry and liquid', that is, in the Eucharist of bread and wine. I know not how otherwise to construe ȧváμvois there, but as a name of the whole service. It was natural enough, because many of the other names which have been used to denominate the whole service, (as breaking bread, oblation, sacrifice, and Eucharist,) manifestly took their original from some noted part of the solemnity, and were at first but partial conceptions of it. Now since the commemoration or memorial was always a considerable part of the solemnity, (as the learned well know,) it is reasonable to suppose, that that also might be made use of in like manner, as a name for the whole service. I am aware that our excellent Mr. Mede gives a very different turn to that passage of Justin, translating it thus: 'In that thankful remembrance of their food both dry and liquid, wherein also is commemorated the passion which the Son of God suffered by himself.' He interprets it of agnizing God as the 'giver of our food both dry and liquid m' But that construction must needs appear harsh and unnatural. Justin nowhere else does ever speak of the remembrance of our food, but constantly understands the Eucharistical remembrance or commemoration to refer to Christ only, his est enim Domini sacrificium quod 1 Επ' ἀναμνήσει δὲ τῆς τροφῆς τοῦ πάθους 8 πέπονθε δι' αὐτοῦ ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ μέμνηται. Just. Dial. 387. m Mede, Christian Sacrifice, b. ii. ch. 5. p. 460. |