their images are placed. Again, the demons having learned what happened to Moses, the prophet of whom we have spoken, and wishing to imitate him, introduced the practice, that those who enter into their temples, and worship the gods there, should be exhorted by the priests to loose their shoes from off their feet. For at the time when Moses was commanded to go down to Egypt, and lead out the people of the Israelites who were there, as he was feeding the flock of his mother's brother, in the land of Arabia, CHRIST, whom we worship, spake with him in the appearance of fire out of a bush, and said, "Put off thy shoes, and come and hear." And he put off his shoes, and went; and heard that he must go down to Egypt, and lead out the people of the Israelites who were there; and received great power from CHRIST who spake with him in the appearance of fire. So he went down, and led out the people, and performed great and wonderful miracles; which, if ye wish to hear them, ye may learn perfectly from his writings. 82. Now all the Jews to this day, teach that God, who cannot be named, spake to Moses. Whence the prophetic spirit reproached them by Isaiah the aforementioned prophet, as we have already declared, thus saying, "The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master's crib but Israel doth not know me; and the people doth not consider me." And in like manner JESUS CHRIST himself also said, upbraiding the Jews for that they knew not what the Father is, and what the Son is: "No one knoweth the Father, but the Son; neither knoweth any one the Son, but the Father, and they to whomsoever the Son shall reveal it." a And the Word of God is his Son, as we have before said. He is called also the Angel,' (who declares,) and the Apostle, (who is sent;) since he declares whatever is * Exod. iii. 1. Jethro was the father-in-law of Moses. Justin was perhaps led into the error by thinking of Jacob feeding the flock of Laban, his mother's brother. Gen. xxix. 10; xxx. 29. > Exod. iii. 5. * Justin treats on this subject, in his Dialogue with Trypho, p. 282. Matt. xi. 27. This passage is quoted in the same manner in the next Section,-§ 83. necessary to be known, and is sent to publish whatever is intrusted to him: as our LORD himself said, “He that heareth me, heareth him that sent me." This also will plainly appear from the writings of Moses. For in them it is thus said: "And the Angel of the LORD spake unto Moses in a flame of fire out of the bush, and said, I am he who is; the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the GoD of Jacob, the God of thy fathers. Go down to Egypt, and lead out my people.” Ye may learn what follows from the writings themselves; since it is impossible to comprise every thing in the present address. 83. Now these words have been spoken, to show 96 that the Son of GoD, and Apostle, is JESUS CHRIST, who before was the Word, and appeared sometimes in the form of fire, and sometimes in the image of incorporeal beings, but hath now by the will of GoD, and for the sake of mankind, been made man; and endured whatsoever the demons caused to be inflicted upon him by the senseless Jews: who, when they find it expressly declared in the writings of Moses, "And the Angel of GoD spake to Moses in a flame of fire in a bush, and said, I am he who is; the GOD of Abraham and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," say that it was the Father and Creator of all things who so spake. Whence also the prophetic spirit reproached them, saying, "But Israel doth not know me, and the people doth not consider me."s And again JEsus, while he was with them, said, as we have already shown, "No one knoweth the Father but the Son: neither knoweth any one the Son, but the Father, and they to whomsoever the Son shall reveal it." The Jews, therefore, who always thought that it was the Father of all things who spake to Moses, whereas he who spake to him was the Son of God, who is also called the Angel and the Apostle, are justly upbraided both by the prophetic spirit, and by CHRIST himself, as knowing neither the Father nor the Son. For they who say that the Son is the Father, are proved not to know the Father, nor that the Father of all things hath d Matt. x. 40. Isa. i. 3. • Exod. iii. 2, 14, 15. ! Ibid. a Son, who, being the first-begotten Word of Gon, is also GOD. He also formerly appeared to Moses and the prophets in the form of fire, and of an incorporeal image: but now in the time of your empire, as we have already said, was made man, and born of a virgin, according to the will of the Father, for the salvation of those who believe in him. He permitted himself also to be set at naught, and to suffer, that by dying and rising again he might conquer death. Moreover when he spake out of the bush to Moses, saying, "I am he who is; the GOD of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and the GoD of thy fathers," he intimated that they who were dead, did still exist and were men of CHRIST himself. For they were the first of all men who diligently sought after GoD, Abraham being the father of Isaac, and Isaac of Jacob, as Moses also hath recorded. : 84. Ye may also, from what hath been already said, perceive, that it was in imitation of that which was written by Moses, that the demons caused to be placed by fountains of water, the statue of her who is called Proserpine, and said to be the daughter of Jupiter. For Moses said, in the words which have been already adduced, "In the beginning GOD created the heaven and the earth: and the earth was invisible and unformed and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." They therefore said, that Proserpine was the daughter of Jupiter, in imitation of the spirit of GOD, which was said to have moved over the water. By a similar perversion, they spake of Minerva as being the daughter of Jupiter, but not by natural generation. But having learned that God after deliberation made the world by the Word, they spake of Minerva as the first Intelligence. Now this we consider most absurd, to carry about the image of Intelligence in a female form. In like manner, the actions of the others, who are called sons of Jupiter, prove what they really are. 85. We, then, after having so washed him who hath expressed his conviction and professes the faith, lead him to those who are called brethren, where they are gathered together, to make common prayers with great i Sect. 76. Gen. i. 1, 2. * See note on Sect. 34. earnestness, both for themselves and for him who is now enlightened, and for all others in all places, that having learned the truth, we may be deemed worthy to be found men of godly conversation in our lives, and to keep the commandments, that so we may attain to eternal salvation. When we have finished our prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. After which, there is brought, to that one of the brethren who presides, bread and a cup of wine mixed with water.1 And he 1 IRENEUS, in like manner, speaks of the cup of the Eucharist, as consisting of wine mixed with water. He calls it κεκράμενον TOTρLOV, (Adv. Hæres. Lib. v. c. 2,) and speaks of our Saviour, who in his last supper declared the mixture of the cup to be his own blood: ("temperamentum calicis suum sanguinem declaravit :") (Lib. iv. c. 57;) and, in describing the promise of our LORD that he would drink the fruit of the vine new with his disciples in his Father's kingdom, (Matt. xxvi. 29,) he uses the expression, "Hæc enim et Dominus docuit, mixtionem calicis novam in regno cum discipulis habiturum se pollicitus." (Lib. v. c. 36.) Some early heretics, as part of the sect of the Ebionites and of the followers of Tatian, used water only in the administration of the Eucharist; whence they are opposed by EPIPHANIUS (Hær. xlvi. Encrat. 4, 16,) who calls them Encratite; by AUGUSTIN (De Hæres. 64,) under the appellation of Aquarii; and by THEODORET, (De Fab. Hæret. i. 20,) who styles them Encratite and Hydroparastata. CLEMENS Alexandrinus (Stromat. i. p. 375. Pædagog. ii. 2. p. 177, ed. Potter) mentions the same error. An Epistle of CYPRIAN to Cæcilius (Ep. 63, p. 148, ed. Fell) is directed against this practice. His argument is intended to prove, that wine is essential to the sacrament, and supposes that the cup, of which our LORD partook, contained water as well as wine. He imagines that the union of water with the wine indicated a mystical union between the people and CHRIST, and that the absence of either substance dissolves this union. It will be observed, that the object of CYPRIAN in this Epistle, is to show, not that the wine must be mixed with water, but that water alone did not represent sacramentally the blood of CHRIST. The third council of Carthage, (Can. 24,) decreed that in the Eucharist the wine should be mixed with water. And many other early writers maintain the same opinion. In the first Common Prayer-book of the Church of England, published by authority of Edward the Sixth, the Minister was directed by the rubric, when he put the wine into the chalice, "to put thereto a little pure and clean water." The same custom existed in the AngloSaxon Church. See PALMER'S Antiquity of the English Ritual, c. iv. sect. 9. Although, however, this custom is primitive and perhaps apostolical, and although it is probable that the cup which our Saviour consecrated at the last supper did contain water as well as wine, according to the general practice of the Jews, (MAIMONIDES, Lib. de Solennitate Pasch. c. 7,) yet it has been long decided by theologians that the having received them gives praise and glory to the FATHER of all things, through the name of the Son and of the HOLY SPIRIT, and gives thanks in many words for that God hath vouchsafed to them these things. And when he hath finished his praises and thanksgiving, all the people who are present express their assent, saying, Amen, which in the Hebrew tongue, implies, So be it. The President having given thanks, and the people having expressed their assent, those whom we call deacons give to each of those who are present a portion of the bread which hath been blessed, and of the wine mixed with water; and carry some away for those who are absent. 86. And this food is called by us the Eucharist, (or Thanksgiving:) of which no one may partake unless he believes that what we teach is true, and is washed in the laver, which is appointed for the forgiveness 98 of sins and unto regeneration, and lives in such a manner as CHRIST commanded. For we receive not these elements as common bread or common drink. But even as JESUS CHRIST Our Saviour, being made flesh by the Word of God," had both flesh and blood for our salvation, even so we are taught, that the food which is blessed by the prayer of the word which came from him, by the conversion of which (into our bodily substance) our blood and flesh are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that JESUS who was made flesh. For the Apostles, in the Memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have related that JESUS thus commanded them; that having taken bread, and given mixture of water is not essential to the sacrament. Cardinal BONA refers to BERNARD, as speaking of those who considered water to be essential, but, he says, "The judgment of theologians is certain, that the consecration of the elements is valid, even if water be omitted, although he who omits it is guilty of a grievous offence." (BONA, Rer. Lit. Lib. ii. c. 9, 3.) In our present rubric, although the mixture of water with wine is not enjoined, it is not prohibited. This question is treated by BINGHAM, Eccl. Ant. XV. ii. 7; WHEATLEY on the Common Prayer, c. vi. sect. 10, 5; PALMER'S Antiquity of the English Ritual, c. iv. sect. 9, and in a Dissertation by VOSSIUS, Theses Theologica, p. 494. See note on Sect. 43, and Bp. KAYE's Account of Justin Martyr, ch. iv. p. 86, note 6. * Matt. xxvi. 26. Mark xiv. 22. Luke xxii. 19. |