106

Heylin; Bp. Stillingfleet; St. Jerome.

PREFAT. add another for the sake of those presbyters, who doubt SECT. II. whether they are proper priests, out of the same chapter.

DISCOURSE,

"And first beginning with the priesthood, in case you are not grown ashamed of that holy calling, you may remember that you were admitted into holy orders by no other name; being presented to the bishop at your ordination, you did require to be admitted to the order of priesthood, and being demanded by the bishop, 'if you did think in your heart that you were truly called according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the order of this Church of England, unto the ministry of the priesthood,' you answered positively, that 'you did.' If you thought otherwise than you said, as Acts 5. 4. you do sometimes, you 'lied not unto men, but unto God.'

Look in the Book of Ordination, and you shall find it oftener than once or twice, entitled the office of priesthood, and the holy office of priesthood; the parties thereunto admitted, called by no other name than that of priests; or if you think the Book of Ordination is no good authority, (to which you have subscribed however in your subscription to the articles ;) look then upon the Liturgy, and the rubrics of it, by which you would persuade the world that you are very much directed in all this business; find you not there the name of priest, exceeding frequent, especially in that part thereof which concerns the Sacrament? The priest standing at the north side of the table'... 'then shall the priest rehearse distinctly all the ten commandments'...' then shall the priest say to them that come to receive the holy communion'... 'then shall the priest turning himself to the people, give the absolution'd... 'then shall the priest kneeling down at God's board,'e" &c.

Bishop Stillingfleet saith, "It is the peculiar honour of the Christian religion, to have an order of men set apart, not merely as priests to offer sacrifices, (for that all religions have had,) but as preachers of righteousness, to set good and evil before the people committed to their charge." This is exactly agreeable to that of St. Hierom, in his Epistle to Evagrius,

[Antid. Linc., sect. ii. c. 5. pp. 27, 28.]

c Book of Ordination.

d ["Then shall the priest or the bishop (being present) stand up, and turning himself to the people, say thus."-The Booke of Common Prayer,

&c. London, 1607.]
e [Ibid.]

[Visitation Charge, Sept. 11, 1690. In his Collected Works, vol. iii. p. 621. London, 1710.]

[Ad Evangelum, "Veteres editiones falso hanc Epistolam inscribunt

Interleaved Prayer-Book at Durham.

107

De gradibus presbyteri et diaconi. Ut sciamus traditiones apostolicas sumptas de veteri testamento, quod Aaron et filii ejus atque Levitæ in templo fuerunt, hoc sibi episcopi et presbyteri et diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia. So in his Epistle Ad Nepotianum, Esto subjectus pontifici tuo. . . . . Quod Aaron et filios ejus, hoc esse episcopum et presbyteros noverimus. Those who desire more authorities may consult the Appendix', to which I refer the reader.

And to these authorities of learned men in print, I shall add others of no less moment out of an interleaved Book of Common Prayerk, with notes, which I happened to meet with, and value very much. In the Prayer of Consecration on these words, "sufficient sacrifice," et paulo post, "that His precious death1." "That. This word refers to the sacrifice mentioned in lin. 8, for we still continue and remember [commemorate, MS.] that sacrifice which Christ once made upon

ad Evagrium; quum MSS. Codices, quoscumque vidi, retineant Evangelum vel Evangelium."-Not. edd. Ben. ad locum, tom. ii. p. 1166. Epist. cxlvi. tom. i. p. 1077, col. i. D, E. S. Hieronymi Op., Vallarsii. Veronæ, 1734.] h [Epist. lii., ibid., p. 260. col. 2, B, D.]

i [Appendix, Nos. vii., viii., ix.]

This book was imprinted in folio at London by Robert Barker, printer to the king's most excellent majesty, Anno Dom. 1617. I cannot tell who was the author or collector of the notes, but perhaps some other person may by these following observations: At the third exhortation to the Communion, he refers to his sermon on the Pharisee and Publican, Luke xviii. 13, part 2. At the prayer before consecration, "vid. Conc. nostram, in 1 Cor. xi. [27.] "Whosoever shall eat,'" &c. He speaks of Bishop Overall, as then bishop of Norwich. At baptism. "Vide Concionem meam ad John iii. [5.] 'Except ye be born of water,'" &c. "Liber Constit. Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ, qui compositus est ab illo qui πολλῶν ἀντάξιος Bλλwv, J. O.”—He often calls him my Lord Overall in his notes. In the Catechism at these words, "Secondly, in God the Son, who hath redeemed me," &c. "Vide Concionem meam in hunc locum tempore pomeridiano." At the office of burial, "Vide Concionem nostram ad Ps. xcvi. [9.] 'O worship

the Lord in the beauty of holiness.'"'

[The whole of the notes in this Prayer
Book are printed in the additional
notes appended to Nichols' Comment
on the Common Prayer, 1710, who
gives this account of them.
"MSS.
notes written in an interleaved Com-
mon Prayer-Book, in the bishop of
Durham's library, printed in the year
1619, supposed to be made from the
collections of Bishop Overall, by a
friend or chaplain of his: a copy of
which MS. is in the hands of the
reverend Dr. Hickes, some part thereof
being printed by him, in his preface to
the Christian Priesthood." (Add. Notes,
p. ii.)

The portion quoted by Hickes has
been collated with the MS. at Dur-
ham, and the variations (which were
unimportant) corrected by it, through
the kindness of the editor of Bp. Cosin's
Works, Angl. Cath. Library, 1843;
who has also identified these notes as
Bp. Cosin's, by his marked and beauti-
ful hand-writing. Cosin was librarian
to Bp. Overal. There is another in-
terleaved Prayer Book, the notes of
which have always been known as
Cosin's. (See Nichols, ibid.)
large portions which are translated
from Maldonatus de Sacramentis have
been marked with single inverted com-
mas.]

[Nichols, ibid., p. 46. col. 1.]

The

ADDIT.

TESTI

MONIES.

PREFAT.

SECT. III.

108

the cross.

[Bp. Cosin], from Maldonatus, in

And this sacrifice which the Church makes (as

DISCOURSE, a sacrifice is taken pro mactatione et occisione victime') 'is only commemorative and sacramentalm;' for in that sense Christ only offered it really upon the cross by His own death. And so likewise as it is taken for a visible sacrifice,' Christ only offered it; for here it is invisible.' But as it is taken for a sufficient sacrifice' to take away the sins of the world, so indeed it was offered upon the cross, as having power in itself to abolish all sin whatsoever; but it doth not abolish any man's sin for all that, unless it be applied. And the ways to apply it are divers; by faith, by good works, by the unbloody offering up of the same sacrifice, by the receiving of His most precious body and blood. So if we compare the Eucharist with the sacrifice once made upon the cross, with reference to the killing and destroying of the sacrifice, or with reference to the visibility of it, in that sense we call it only a commemorative sacrifice, as the fathers do. But if we compare the Eucharist with Christ's sacrifice made once upon the cross, as concerning the effect

m

[Nos igitur cum comparamus Eucharistiam cum sacrificio corporis Christi, quod in cruce oblatum est, non negamus degenerare aliquo modo ab illo verissimo sacrificio, si spectentur omnia, quæ in sacrificio esse solent.

Primum enim in sacrificio solebat esse mactatio et occisio victimæ, quæ in cruce reipsa facta est: in Eucharistia non fit, nisi commemoratione et sacramento.

Secundo, in cruce corpus Christi forma visibili oblatum est, in Eucharistia, invisibili.

Tertio, in cruce corpus Christi oblatum est ad sufficientiam, ut dicunt Theologi, id est, tanquam sacrificium habens in se ipso vim abolendi peccata omnium hominum, quamvis non continua abolerentur, nisi sacrificium illud singulis hominibus applicaretur. Quod variis fit modis: per fidem, per charitatem, per bona opera, et per oblationem incruentam ejusdem corporis, item per sumptionem illius. Quapropter cum comparamus Eucharistiam cum sacrificio facto in cruce, habita ratione mactationis et visibilis formæ, vocamus illam sacrificium commemorativum. Et quia fuerunt nonnulli authores, qui existimarunt, verbum sacrificandi concludere in se occi

sionem (ut revera accidit Græcis, apud quos Ove utrumque significat, et sacrificare et occidere) dixerunt Eucharistiam tantum esse sacrificium commemorativum. Ut D. Chrysost. in Homil. contra Judæos parte 2. [συγκρινομένη πρὸς ἐκείνην αὕτη ἡ θυσία, κυρίως ἂν λεχθείη μόνη καθαρά· οὐ γὰρ διὰ καπνοῦ καὶ κνίσσης, οὐδὲ δι' αἱμάτων καὶ λύτρων, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος προσάγεται Xápiros.-Adversus Judæos, Orat. v. (ii. ed. Lat.1546.) tom. i. p. 648,C. ed. Ben.] Et Magister Sentent., 1. 4. dist. 12. ['Ad hoc breviter dici potest, illud quod offertur et consecratur à sacerdote vocari sacrificium et oblationem; quia memoria est et repræsentatio veri sacrificii, et sanctæ immolationis factæ in ara crucis.'] Sed cum hoc dicunt, non negant esse verum sacrificium, sed tantum esse commemorativum, si spectes vim verbi quatenus significat occidere et mactare. Cum autem conferimus Eucharistiam cum illo sacrificio corporis Christi, quod in cruce peractum est, quantum ad effectum, dicimus illud fuisse sacrificium sufficiens, hoc efficiens et applicatorium, utrumque tamen propitiatorium.-Maldonati Disp. circa vii. Sacramenta, tom. i. pp. 322, 323. Lugduni. 1614.]

interleaved Prayer-Book at Durham.

of it, we say, that that was a sufficient sacrifice; but withal, that it [this?] is a true, real, and efficient sacrifice, and both of them propitiatory" for the sins of the whole world.' And therefore in the oblation following we pray, that it may prevail so with God, that we, and all the whole Church of Christ (which consists of more than those that are upon the earth°) may receive the benefit of it."

ADDIT.

TESTI-41 MONIES.

PREFAT.

SECT. III.

110

[Bp. Cosin], from Maldonatus, in

"Neither do we call this sacrifice of the Eucharist an effiDISCOURSE, cient sacrifice, as if that upon the cross wanted efficacy; but because the force and virtue of that sacrifice would not be profitable unto us, unless it were applied and brought into effect by this Eucharistical sacrifice, and other the holy Sacraments, and means appointed by God for that end. But we call it propitiatory, both this and that, because both of them have force and virtue in them to appease God's wrath [against this sinful world, MS.].' Read Maldonat., de Sacrament., p. 323. Therefore this is no new sacrifice, but the same which was once offered, and which is every day offered to God by Christ in heaven, and continued here still on earth by a mystical representation of it in the Eucharist. And the Church intends not to have any new propitiation, or new remission of sins obtained, but to make that effectual, and in act applied to us, which was once obtained by the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross.

P [Et non vocamus Eucharistiam sacrificium quantum ad efficientiam, propterea quod sacrificium crucis non fuerit etiam efficax; sed quia vis illius sacrificii non poterat prodesse, et ad efficientiam effectumque redigi, nisi tum per hoc sacrificium, tum per alia sacramenta, tum aliis modis.

Propitiatorium autem ideo dicimus esse utrumque, quia propitiatorium sacrificium esse non est aliud, quam habere vim placandi Deum.-Maldonatus, ibid., p. 323.]

Here he takes Sacraments in the general improper sense of the word, as Calvin, (Instit. Christ. Rel., lib. iv. c. 14. § 20.) "Impositionem manuum, qua Ecclesiæ ministri in suum munus initiantur, ut non invitus patior vocari Sacramentum, ita inter ordinaria Sacramenta non numero." And in the notes on the answer to the question in the Church Catechism, "How many Sacraments hath Christ ordained in His Church?" he asserts there are but two Sacraments, in the first and proper acceptation of the word, viz. Baptism and the Lord's Supper. [See Nichols, Add. Notes, p. 59, col. 2. Hickes evidently supposed, as others have done, that the passage he is quoting was originally written by Bp. Overal's chaplain; whereas it now appears to be a translation from Maldonatus; Cosin's object in inserting it, will be seen in

That

the latter part of the extract in brackets in note n, p. 109. The note referred to, after quoting St. Augustine, Ep. 118, says, "Where though St. Augustine may seem to allow more Sacraments than two, yet in this sense which our Church propounds (as generally necessary to salvation), Maldonate himself confesseth, that he acknowledgeth no more, (de Sacram., p. 111.) Divus Augustinus (inquit) non de omnibus Sacramentis novis agit illo loco; sed de illis quæ omnibus hominibus communia esse debent ad salutem, &c. to me it seems strange, there should any controversy be made between our Church and the Church of Rome for the number of the Sacraments; whenas in this sense they acknowledge no more but two, and in a larger sense we acknowledge many more, and more eminently the other five; which though we call not Sacraments ordinarily, and though that general name be gone, yet for the things themselves, their proper names, their true natures, those we preserve inviolable." In Bp. Cosin's other interleaved book (Nichols, ibid., col. 1.) the words occur, "Quanquam enim interdum nomen hoc Sacramenti latius, ut solet et nostris etiam Scriptoribus Reformatis, adhibetur, quando tamen appositè et propriè loquuntur, non nisi duo numerant."]