by Christ in the Eucharist; the other is offered as a proper spiritual sacrifice k; and the bread and wine in the Eucharist are considered as symbols of both. I say, he considers the sacramental elements not merely as symbols of the natural body, but of the mystical also, viz. the Church, represented by the one loaf and the one cup: so that by the same symbols we symbolically consign ourselves over to God, and God consigns Christ, with all the merits of his death and passion, over to us. At length, his notion of the eucharistical sacrifice resolves into one compound idea of a spiritual sacrifice, (wherein the communicants offer up themselves,) commemorative of another sacrifice, viz. the grand sacrifice. The offering of the body of Christ is a phrase capable of two meanings; either to signify the representing the natural body, or the devoting the mystical body: and both are included in the eucharistical service. Such appears to be St. Austin's settled judgment in this article, grounded, as I said, upon St. Paul's. It is a most ridiculous pretence of Father Harduin, (which he pursues through many tedious pages m,) that, according to St. Austin, Christ's natural body is the sign, and his mystical body the thing signified in the Eucharist for nothing is plainer from St. Austin, than that the bread and wine are the only signs, and that the things signified by them are both the natural and the mystical body

of Christ, both his flesh and his Church. As the word 'offer' is a word of some latitude, he supposes both to be offered in the Eucharist; one by way of memorial before God, and the other as a real and spiritual sacrifice unto God.

Having thus traced this matter down through four centuries, and part of the fifth, I cannot think it of moment to descend lower, since the earliest are of principal value, and are alone sufficient. The Fathers were very wise and excellent men, saw very clearly what many learned moderns have had the misfortune to overlook, and agreed perfectly well in many points, about which the moderns have been strangely divided. The Fathers well understood, that to make Christ's natural body the real sacrifice of the Eucharist, would not only be absurd in reason, but highly presumptuous and profane; and that to make the outward symbols a proper sacrifice, a material sacrifice, would be entirely contrary to Gospel principles, degrading the Christian sacrifice into a Jewish one, yea, and making it much lower and meaner than the Jewish, both in value and dignity ". The right way therefore was, to make the sacrifice spiritual: and it could be no other upon Gospel principles. Thus both extremes were avoided, all perplexities removed, and truth and godliness secured.

So then here I may take leave of the ancients, as to the present article. The whole of the matter is well comprised and clearly expressed in a very few words, by as judicious a Divine as any our Church has had: We offer up our alms; we offer up our prayers, our praises, and ourselves: and all these we offer up in the virtue and consideration of Christ's sacrifice, represented before us [I would only add, “and before God"] by way of remembrance or commemoration; nor can it be proved, that the ancients did more than this: this whole service was their Christian sacrifice, and this is

How contemptibly the Romanists speak of a material sacrifice in that view, may be seen

in Bishop Morton, (p. 438,) who has collected their sentiments upon it.

cc

ours o'

A learned foreigner has likewise very briefly and justly expressed the nature of the Christian sacrifice; whose words I have thrown to the bottom of the page P, for the learned reader.

I shall now shut up this chapter with two or three short corollaries, which naturally offer, and may be of some use.

1. The first is, that this sacrificial view of the Eucharist squares exactly with the federal view before given. For if it be really a spiritual sacrifice, in or by which every faithful communicant devotes himself entirely to God; and if the sacerdotal offering up our Lord's mystical body be (as St. Austin explains this matter) a sacerdotal devoting all the faithful joining it, to God's service, and to God's glory: then may we again justly conclude, that the sacramental service is a federal, as well as a sacrificial solemnity: because, in this case, the administrator's devoting the communicants, and their devoting themselves to God, is tantamount to a solemn renewing former engagements or covenants made with him, under such symbols as God has appointed, and promised to ratify on his part.

2. From hence may be understood, how Christians, at large, are priests unto God 9: for every one that sacrificeth, is so far a priest. Therefore Justin Martyr represents Christians in common as so many priests, offering their

Archbishop Sharpe, vol. vii. serm. xi. p. 253. If any one is disposed to trace this matter down, even to the dark ages, he will find that most of the Greek and Latin Liturgies contain the same notion with the Fathers, of the spiritual sacrifice in the Eucharist. Covel, Acc. of Gr. Church, pref. p. 47; book, pp. 36, 41, 46, 53, 67, 68, 175. Deyling. Observat. Miscellan. p. 310, &c.

See

POblatio omnis quae fit a credentibus sub Novo Testamento, est incruenta, et vero castissima, et simplicissima, quia spiritualis.

Sive quis se ipsum, sive owμa suum, affectum, omnesque suas facultates et actiones Deo offerat ut sacrificium; sive alia oxéσe, ministri verbi, qui in nobis convertendis laborarunt, nos offerant Deo; sive preces, cuxapiorías, supplicationes nostras feramus ad Deum, ubique eadem ratio: nullus hic funditur sanguis, nihil committitur violentum; actio tota est spiritualis, et Aoyun.' Vitringa in Isa. lxvi. 21. P. 951.

91 Pet. ii. 5, 9. Rev. i. 6; v. 10;

xx. 6.

sacrifices in the Eucharist. And Isidorus, so late as the fifth century, does the likes, reckoning every man a priest, when he offers up his own body, or himself, a sacrifice unto God, by sacrificing his lusts and passions. Nevertheless, the proper officers, who minister in holy things, and who offer up to God both the sacrifices and sacrificers, are priests in a more eminent and emphatical sense; as Isidorus observes in the same place, and as the reason of the thing itself sufficiently evidences t. I may further note, that as Christians. at large were considered as priests, on account of their offering spiritual sacrifices, so their consecration to such their priesthood was supposed to be performed in or by Baptism: or, in other words, their baptism was their consecration u.

3. A third corollary is, that the Socinians, or others, who reject both the sacrificial and federal view, do not only causelessly depreciate a venerable sacrament and sacrifice, but at the same time do the greatest disservice imaginable to practical religion. For as the sacrificial notion of the Eucharist, here explained, carries in it the most instructive and compendious lesson of Christian practice, so does the federal notion of the same carry in it the strongest engage-ments to bind us for ever to it. The removing these awakening hints, and the dissolving these sacred ties, under fair and smooth pretences of supporting practical Christianity,

Justin. Mart. Dial. p. 386. Cp. Origen. in Levit. hom. ix. p. 236.

• Isidorus Pelusiot. lib. iii. ep. 75. p. 284.

Cum omnes credentes N. T. sint sacerdotes respectu status spiritualis, et juris appropinquandi Deo in sumino Pontifice Jesu; ministri verbi, dispensatores mysteriorum Dei, quatenus a Deo electi sunt, ut circa sacra publica versentur, respectu quodam oeconomico et externo, in externa Ecclesiae noλTeig fundato. Hunc

titulum sibi peculiari modo vindicant.' Vitringa in Isa. lxvi. 21. p. 951. Cp. Vitring. in Apocalyps. P. 335. N.B. This argument is discussed at large by Mr. Dodwell, De Jure Laico Sacerdotali, and by other tracts going along with his.

u Tertullian. de Monogam, cap. vii. p. 529. Origen, in Levit. hom. ix. 238. Cyrill. Hierosol. Catech. xviii. cap. 33. p. 301. Ambrosiaster. de Sacram, lib. iv. cap. i. p. 365. ed. Bened.

is betraying great want of judgment or want of sincerity; because there cannot be a more dangerous or more fatal way of subverting, by little and little, all true Christian morality.

CHAPTER XIII.

Of the Preparation proper for the HOLY COMMUNION.

If we have hitherto gone upon sure grounds, with respect to the nature, ends, and uses of the holy Communion, there can be no doubt made, but that so sacred and so salutary an institution ought to be held in great reverence, and to be observed with all joy and thankfulness, tempered with godly fear. If we consider it either as a Divine ordinance coeval with Christianity, and perfective of it, or as a solemn memorial of God made man, or as an instrument whereby God vouchsafes to receive us, Christ to dwell in us, and the Holy Ghost to shed his blessed influences upon us; or if we consider it as the noblest part of Christian worship, the renewing of our covenant with God, the sacrificing of the heart, and the devoting of the affections, and all that we have, to his service, and to his .glory; or if we further consider it as a badge of our most holy profession, and as a band or cement of union, whereby we abide in Christ, and have fellowship with all the family of heaven ; in which soever of these views we contemplate this holy ceremony, it must appear to be a matter of infinite concern to us, and highly deserving our most affectionate and devout regards. How we ought to express our esteem of it, is the next thing to be inquired into and the general rule here is, that we take care to do it in such a way, as may best answer those heavenly and salutary purposes for which this holy Sacrament was ordained.

:

Our esteem or disesteem of it will be seen by

* Heb. xii. 22-24.