« 上一頁繼續 »
OF THE SACRIFICE.
THE SEVENTEENTH ARTICLE.
THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY.
Or that the priest had then authority to offer up Christ unto his Father.
[OF THE PRIEST'S AUTHORITY TO OFFER UP CHRIST TO HIS FATHER.
ARTICLE XVII. H. A. 1564.)
Christ is offered up to his Father after three manners; figuratively, truly with bloodshedding, and sacramentally or mystically. In figure or signifi- Threefold oiation cation he was offered in the sacrifices made to God both in the time of Christ. the law of nature, and also in the time of the law written. And there- est ab origine fore St John calleth Christ “the Lamb, which was killed from the be- Rev. xiii. ginning of the world,” meaning in figure. The sacrifices of Abel, Noe, and Abraham, and aïl those of the people of Israel commanded by the law of Moses, figured and signified Christ. For which respect chiefly the law is reported of St Heb. x. Paul to have “the shadow of the good things to come.” St Augustine, Lib. ri. cap. v. writing against Faustus the heretic, saith : [Testamenti veteris sacrificia] omnia ... multis et variis modis unum sacrificium, cujus nunc memoriam celebramus, significaverunt?: .“ All the sacrifices of the old testament signified by many and
sundry ways this one sacrifice, whose memory we do now celebrate." And in M. Harding another place he saith, * that “in those fleshly sacrifices there was a De Fide ai peprosely
signification of Christ's flesh, which he should offer for sins, and of cap. cui
Truly and with bloodshedding Christ was offered on the cross in his own person,
Sacramentally or in mystery Christ is offered up to his father in the daily Christ offered sacrifice of the church under the form of bread and wine, truly and indeed, not in of the man respect of the manner of offering, but in respect of his very body and blood, really ing. (that is, indeed) present, as it hath been sufficiently proved here before.
inaimed this place St Augustine, ils shall appear.
ner of offer
THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY.
The greater and worthier the work is that our adversaries have imagined, that is, for a mortal and a miserable man to offer up the immortal Son of God unto his father, and that really and indeed, the more ought the same, either by manifest words or by necessary collection, expressly and plainly to be proved. “For no man taketh honour and office unto himself, but he that is called and appointed thereto by God." But for ought that may appear by any clause or sentence, either of the new testament or of the old, God never
appointed any such sacrifice to be made by any mortal creature. And TheophyThcophyl. in lact saith : Jesus, ejiciendo boves et columbas, præesignavit, non ultra opus esse
animalium sacrificio, sed oratione3 : "Jesus, throwing the oxen and doves out
Mall. cap. XXI.
[August. Op. Par. 1679-1700. Contr. Faust. Lib. vi. cap. v. Tom. VIII. col. 205.)
[Id. Lib. de Fid. ad Petr. cap. xix. Tom. VI.
Append. col. 30. See the next page.]
[ Theophyl. Op. Venet. 1754-63. In Matt. Comm. cap. xxi. Tom. I. p. 110.)
of the temple, signified, that they should no longer have need of the sacrifice of beasts, but of prayer."
Howbeit, the old learned fathers, as they oftentimes delighted themselves with these words, sabbatum, parasceve, pascha, pentecoste, and such other like terms of the old law, notwithstanding the observation and ceremony thereof were then abolished and out of use; even so likewise they delighted themselves oftentimes with these words, sacerdos, altare, sacrificium, “the sacrificer," ” “the altar," "the sacrifice,” notwithstanding the use thereof were then clearly expired, only for that the ears of the people, as well of the Jews as of the gentiles, had been long acquainted with the same. Therefore Pachymeres the paraphrast, writing upon Dionysius, saith thus : Presbyterum appellat sacerdotem, Pach, p. 401. ut etiam in Cælesti Hierarchia ; idque usus jam obtinuit" : “ Him that is the priest beta" empana or elder he calleth the sacrificer, as he doth also in his Celestial Hierarchy ; toe. and the same word 'sacrificer' is now obtained by custom.”
In this sense St Paul saith of himself: Sacrifico evangelium Dei: “I sacrifice the gospel of Rom. xv. God." And Origen saith : Sacrificale opus est annuntiare evangelium 6: “It is a Orig. In work of sacrifice to preach the gospel.” So the learned bishop Nazianzenus Rom. Lib. x. saith unto his people: Hostiam vos ipsos obtuli?: “I have offered up you for a Nazianz. in sacrifice.” So saith St Chrysostom : Ipsum mihi sacerdotium est, prædicare et Pleb. erangelizare. Hanc offero oblationem 8: "My whole priesthood is to teach and to pist. ad preach the gospel. This is my oblation : this is my sacrifice.” Thus the holy u. fathers, alluding to the orders and ceremonies of Moses' law, called the preaching of the gospel a sacrifice, notwithstanding indeed it were no sacrifice.
Now to come to M. Harding's words. Three ways, saith he, Christ is offered up unto his Father: in a figure, as in the old law; indeed and bloodily, as upon the cross; in a sacrament or mystery, as in the new testament. Of which three ways the bloody oblation of Christ upon the cross is the very true and only propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the world. The other two, as in respect and manner of signifying they are sundry, so in effect and substance they are all one. For, like as in the sacraments of the old law was expressed the death of Christ that was to come, even so in the sacraments of the new law of the gospel is expressed the same death of Christ already past. As we have mysteries, so had they mysteries ; as we sacrifice Christ, so did they sacrifice Christ; as the Lamb of God is slain unto us, so was the same Lamb of God slain unto them. St Augustine saith : Tunc... Christus venturus, modo Christus August. de renit. Venturus, et renit, diversa verba sunt; sed idem Christus':
Then was cap. i. *Christ shall come:' now is Christ is come. "Shall come' and 'is come sundry words; but Christ is all one.” Again, in like comparison between the law of Moses and the gospel of Christ, he saith thus : Videte, fide manente, August
. in signa variata. In signis diversis eadem fides 10: “Behold, the faith remaining, the Tract. 26. (sacraments, or) signs are changed. The signs or sacraments being divers, the faith is one.”
But here hath M. Harding done great and open wrong unto St Augustine, wilfully suppressing and drowning his words, and uncourteously commanding him to silence in the midst of his tale. Wherein also appeareth some suspicion of no simple dealing. St Augustine's words touching this whole matter are these: In illis ... carnalibus victimis figuratio fuit carnis Christi, quam pro nobis August. de ... fuerat oblaturus, et sanguinis, quem erat effusurus in remissionem peccato- Diacon. cap. rum.... In isto autem sacrificio gratiarum actio est, et commemoratio carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit, et sanguinis quem pro nobis idem Deus effudit.... In illis ... sacrificiis, quid nobis esset donandum, figurate significabatur : in hoc
[* Oftetimes, 1565.]
[" The following is probably the passage meant : ...τους γαρ ιερέας πρεσβυτέρους είωθε καλείν, ως εν τω περί της εκκλησιαστικής Ιεραρχίας διετρά. YWOF.—Dion. Areop. Op. Antv. 1634. Schol. S. Max. in Epist. Octav. Tom. II. p. 123.]
[ Orig. Op. Par. 1733-59. Comm. in Epist. ad Rom. Lib. x. cap. xv. Tom. IV. p. 676; where esse for est.)
[? Perhaps the following may be intended: looù
ut poodyw col Tous émous ikétas.-Gregor. Nazianz.
[ Chrysost. Op. Par. 1718-38. In Epist. ad
[° August. Op. Serm. ccclii. De Util. Agend, Pen. ii. cap. i. 3. Tom. V. col. 1366.]
[' In signis diversis eadem fides... Videte ergo, fide manente, signa variata.-Id. in Johan. Evang. cap. x. Tractat. xlv. 9. Tom. III. Pars 11. col. 598.]
autem sacrificio, quid nobis jam donatum sit, evidenter ostenditur. In illis sacrificiis prænuntiabatur Filius Dei pro impiis occidendus : in hoc autem, pro impüs annuntiatur occisus': “In those fleshly sacrifices (of the Jews) there was a figure of the flesh of Christ, which he would afterward offer for us, and of the blood which he would afterward shed for the remission of sin; but in this sacrifice (of the new testament) there is a thanksgiving and a remembrance of the flesh which he hath already offered for us, and of the blood which he, being God, hath already shed for us. In those sacrifices it was represented unto us under a figure what thing should be given unto us; but in this sacri. fice it is plainly set forth what thing is already given us. In those sacrifices it was declared that the Son of God should be slain for the wicked; but in this sacrifice it is plainly preached unto us that the same Son of God hath
already been slain for the wicked.” August. Likewise again he saith: Hujus sacrificii caro et sanguis ante adventum Christi Lib. xx. cap. per victimas similitudinum promittebatur : in passione ... per ipsam veritatem redde
batur : post ascensum [vero] Christi per sacramentum memoriæ celebratura : “ The flesh and blood of this sacrifice, before the coming of Christ, was promised by sacrifices of resemblance; the same in his passion (upon the cross) was given in truth and indeed; but after his ascension it is solemnized by a sacrament of remembrance.”
This is the difference that St Augustine noteth between the sacraments of the old law and the sacraments of the new. Therefore the words that M. Harding hath hereunto added, “ Christ is offered up unto his Father, and that under the forms of bread and wine, yea, and that truly and indeed,” are his own only words, confidently and boldly presumed of himself, never used neither by St Augustine nor by any other ancient godly father.
But, whereas he addeth further, that Christ is indeed and verily offered by the priest, albeit, as he saith, “not in respect of the manner of offering, but only in respect of the presence of his body;" either he understandeth not what himself meaneth, or else with a vain distinction of cloudy words without sense he laboureth to dazzle his reader's eyes. For what a fantasy is this, to say Christ is offered verily and indeed, and yet not in respect of the manner of offering! What respect, what manner is this? Wherefore come these blind mysteries abroad without a gloss? Which of all the old doctors or holy fathers ever taught us thus to speak? Certainly, as he saith, “Christ is really offered, and yet not in respect of the manner of offering;” so may he also say, Christ died
the cross, and yet not in respect of the manner of dying. By such manners and such respects he may make of christian religion what him listeth.
If he think somewhat to shadow the matter with these words of the council Concil
. Nic. of Nice, Sine sacrificio oblatus3; let him consider aforehand it will not help «θύτως...
him, θυόμενος. .
For the holy fathers in that council neither say that Christ is really offered by the priest, nor seem to understand these strange respects and manners
of offering. They agree fully in sense with that is before alleged of St AugusContr. Faust. tine: “In this sacrifice the death of Christ is solemnized by a sacrament of
remembrance 4;” and with that St Chrysostom saith: Hoc sacrificium exemplar Epist. ad illius est : “ This sacrifice is an example of that sacrifice.” Thus the death of
Christ is renewed before our eyes. Yet Christ indeed neither is crucified, nor dieth, nor sheddeth his blood, nor is substantially present, nor really offered by the priest. In this sort the council saith Christ is offered ádúrws, “with
out sacrifice.” So St Augustine saith : Quod ab omnibus appellatur sacrificium, Lib. x. cap. v. signum est veri sacrificiic: “ The thing that of all men is called a sacrifice is
a token or a sign of the true sacrifice.” Likewise again he saith: Vocatur...
Lib. xx. cap.
Hebr. Hom. 17.
[ Id. Lib. de fid. ad Petr. cap. xix. Tom. VI. Append. col. 30; where significatio fuit, pro peccatis nostris, and gratiarum actio atque commemoratio est. See Fulgent. Op. Par. 1623. col. 356.]
[* Id. contr. Faust. Lib. xx. cap. xxi. Tom. VIII. eol. 348.]
[ Gelas. Cyz. Hist. Concil. Nic. cap. xxx. in Concil, Stud. Labb. et Cossart. Lut. Par. 1671-2.
Tom. II. col. 233; where Ovójevov.]
[* See note 2.]
[5 Τούτο εκείνης τύπος εστί, και αύτη εκείνης.Chrysost. Op. Par. 1718-38. In Epist. ad Hebr. cap. x. Hom. xvii. Tom. XII. p. 168.]
[6 August. Op. Par. 1679-1700. De Civ. Dei, Lib. s. cap. v. Tom. VII. col. 242.]
ipsa immolatio, ... quce sacerdotis manibus fit, Christi passio, mors, crucifixio, non rei veritate, sed significante mysterio?: “ The sacrifice that is wrought by the hands of the priest is called the passion, the death, the crucifying of Christ; not in deed, but by a mystery signifying."
And whereas M. Harding saith further, “ Christ is offered only in respect of the presence of his body;" neither would the real presence, being granted, import the sacrifice (for Christ was really present in his mother's womb and in the crib, where notwithstanding he was no sacrifice), nor hath M. Harding hitherto any way proved his real presence.
The two first manners of the offering of Christ our adversaries acknowledge and confess; the third they deny utterly. And so they rob the church of the greatest treasure it hath or may have, the body and blood of our Saviour Christ once offered upon the cross with painful suffering for our redemption, and now daily offered in the blessed sacrament in remembrance. For which we have so many proofs, as for no one point of our christian religion more. And herein I am more encumbered with store than straited with lack, and doubt more what I may leave than what I may take. Wherefore, thinking it shall appear to the wise more skill to shew discretion in the choice of places, rather than learning in recital of number, though we are over pertly thereto provoked by M. Jewels vaunting and insolent challenge, I intend herein to be short, verily shorter than so large a matter requireth, and to bring for proof a few such authorities (I mean a few in respect of the multitude that might be brought) as ought in every man's judgment to be of great weight and estimation,
THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY.
Touching the oblation of Christ's body, we believe and confess as much as the Holy Ghost hath opened in the scriptures. Whereas M. Harding saith, Christ's body is offered up by the priest unto God the Father, in remembrance of that body that Christ himself' offered upon the cross; he seemeth not to consider the inconstancy and folly of his own tale. For it is well known to all creatures, not only Christians, but also Jews, Turks, and Saracens, that Christ was crucified upon the cross: but that Christ should be sacrificed by a mortal man, invisibly, and, as they say, under the forms of bread and wine, and that really and indeed, it is a thing so far passing the common sense of christian knowledge, that the best-learned and wisest of the ancient learned christian fathers could never know it.
Therefore this is not only the proving of a thing known by a thing unknown, and of a thing most certain by a thing uncertain, but also the confirmation of a manifest truth by an open error.
Neither do we rob the church of God of that most heavenly and most comfortable sacrifice of Christ's body; but rather we open and disclose the errors wherewith certain of late years have wilfully deceived the church of God. We know that Christ's body “ was rent for our sins, and that by his Isai. liii. wounds we are made whole;" “that Christ in his body carried our sins upon 1 Pet. ii. the tree;” and “ by the oblation thereof, once made upon the cross, hath sanctified us for ever,” and “hath purchased for us everlasting redemption;" and Heb. ix. " that there is none other name (or sacrifice) under heaven whereby we can Acts iv. be saved, but only the name (or8 sacrifice) of Jesus Christ.” I reckon, whoso teacheth this doctrine leaveth not the church of God without a sacrifice,
Touching the multitude of authorities wherewith M. Harding findeth himself so much encumbered, the greater his store is, the more will wise men require his discretion and skill in the choice. His choice will seem unskilful, if he allege his authorities beside his purpose. His purpose and promise is to prove that the priest hath good warrant to offer up Christ the Son of God unto
[ Id. in Lib. Sentent. Prosp. in Corp. Jur. Canon. Lugd. 1624, Decret. Gratian. Decr. Tert.
Pars, De Consecr, Dist. ii. can. 48. col. 1937.]
his Father: which purpose if he never vouchsafe once to touch, but range abroad, as his manner is, and rove idly at matters impertinent, then must we needs say, he bewrayeth his want, and bringeth his great store out of credit. So shall the offer that is gently made him seem to stand upon good and convenient terms of truth and modesty. So shall his storeful vaunt of all things, performing nothing, "unto the wise” (to use his own words) seem pert and insolent,
The scripture itself ministering evident proof for the oblation of Christ to his Father by the priests of the new testament, in the institution of this holy sacrament, in the figure of Melchisedech, and in the prophecy of Malachi the prophet ; the authorities of the fathers needed not to be alleged, were not the same scripture, by the overthwart and false interpretations of our adversaries, wrested and turned to a contrary sense, to the horrible seducing of the unlearned.
THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY.
Alas! what tool is there so weak that M. Harding will refuse to strike withal ? To prove his imagined kind of sacrifice, he hath brought us forth out of his great store the example of Melchisedech and the prophecy of Malachi; as if he would reason thus: God saith unto Christ, “ Thou art a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech ;" or, God saith by the prophet Malachi, “A pure oblation shall be offered unto me in every place;" ergo, the priest hath authority and power to offer up the Son of God unto his Father. If he had not had good choice and store of authorities, he would never have begun with these.
But he addeth further, as matter of grievance, that “these plain scriptures by the overthwart and false interpretations of his adversaries are wrested and turned to a contrary sense, and that,” as he saith, “to the horrible seducing of the unlearned.” Doubtless, here is a very horrible accusation. Howbeit, if we happily had mistaken these places, and our error therein were fully proved, yet should not M. Harding in such horrible terms reprove us for doing that thing once that he and his fellows do so often. But by what words, by what false interpretation, into what perverse or heretical sense, have we so horribly wrested these scriptures ? M. Harding is wise, is eloquent, is watchful, is circumspect, is fast addicted unto his cause; he dissembleth, and leaveth nothing that any way may serve his purpose. If our errors be so horrible, he should not have spared them: if there be none, he should not thus have touched them. If M. Harding wink at them, who can see them ? If M. Harding know them not, who can know them?
Perhaps he will say: Ye expound the prophecy of Malachi sometimes of prayer, and sometimes of the preaching of the gospel. This was never the prophet's meaning. This is an horrible wresting of the scriptures. Thus, no doubt, M. Harding will say; for otherwise he can say nothing. And yet he knoweth, and, being learned, cannot choose but know, that this is the old learned
catholic fathers' exposition touching these words of the prophet Malachi, and Tertul. contr. not ours. He knoweth that the ancient father Tertullian saith thus : The pure
sacrifice that Malachias speaketh of, that should be offered up in every place,
est prædicatio evangelii usque ad finem mundi?, “is the preaching of the gospel Tertul. contr. untothe end of the world.'” And in another place: Simplex oratio de conscientia
pura3 : “ The sacrifice that Malachi meant is a devout prayer proceeding from a pure conscience.” He knoweth that St Hierome expoundeth the same words in this wise: [Dicit] orationes sanctorum Domino offerendas (esse) ... non in una
Hieron. in i
['Tertullian quotes the passage of Malachi, and another from the psalms, and, inquiring why such expressions were used, replies: Indubitate quod in omnem terram exire habebat prædicatio apostolo
rum.— Tertull. Op. Lut. 1641. Adv. Jud. 5. p. 211.
[? Until, 1565, 1609.7