Chrift were in the elements, yet fince he is there invifi- ART. ble, as God is by his effence every where, we ought to XXVIII. direct no adoration to the elements; we ought only to worship God, and his Son Chrift Jefus, in the grateful remembrance of his fufferings for us; which are therein commemorated. We ought not to fuffer our worship to terminate on the vifible elements; because if Chrift is in them, yet he does not manifeft that vifibly to us: fince therefore the opinion of the Corporal Prefence, upon which this adoration is founded, is falfe, and fince no fuch worship is fo much as mentioned, much less commanded in Scripture; and fince there can scarce be any idolatry in the world fo grofs, as that it fhall not excufe itself by fome fuch doctrine, by which all the acts of worship are made to terminate finally in God; we must conclude that this plea cannot excufe the Church of Rome from idolatry, even though their doctrine of the Corporal Prefence were true; but much less if it is falfe. We do therefore condemn this worship as idolatry, without taking upon us to define the extent of the mercies of God towards all those who are involved in it.

If all the premises are true, then it is needlefs to infift longer on explaining the following paragraph of the Article; that Chrift's body is received in the facrament in a beavenly and fpiritual manner, and that the mean by which it is received is faith: for that is fuch a natural result of them, that it appears evident of itfelf, as being the conclufion that arifes out of thofe premises.

The laft paragraph is against the referving, carrying about, the lifting up, or the worshipping the facrament. The point concerning the worship, which is the most effential of them, has been already confidered. As for the referving or carrying the facrament about; it is very visible, that the inftitution is, Take, eat, and drink ye all of it: which does import, that the confuming the elements is a part of the inftitution; and by confequence, that they are a facrament only as they are diftributed and received. It is true, the practice of referving or fending about the elements began very early; the ftate of things at first made it almost unavoidable. When there were yet but a few converted to Chriftianity, and when there were but few Priefts to ferve them, they neither could nor durft meet all together, especially in the times of persecution; fo fome parts of the elements were fent to the abfent, to those in prifon, and particularly to the fick, as a symbol of their being parts of the body, and that they were in the peace and communion of the Church. The bread was

fent

ART. fent with the wine, and it was fent about by any person XXVIII. whatfoever; fometimes by boys; as appears in the fa

mous ftory of Serapion in the third century. So that the Euf. Hift. condition of the Chriftians in that time made that necefib.vi.c.44 fary, to keep them all in the fenfe of their obligation to union and communion with the Church; and that could not well be done in any other way. But we make a great difference between this practice, when taken up out of neceffity, though not exactly conform to the first inftitution; and the continuing it out of fuperftition, when there is no need of it. Therefore inftead of confecrating a larger portion of elements than is neceffary for the occafion, and the referving what is over and above; and the fetting that out with great pomp on the altar, to be worfhipped, or the carrying it about with a vaft magnificence. in a proceffion, invented to put the more honour on it; or the fending it to the fick with folemnity; we choofe rather to confecrate only fo much as may be judged fit for the number of those who are to communicate. And when the facrament is over, we do, in imitation of the practice of fome of the ancients, confume what is left, that there may be no occafion given either to superstition or irreverence. And for the Jick, or the prifoners, we think it is a greater mean to quicken their devotion, as well as it is a clofer adhering to the words of the inftitution, to confecrate in their prefence: for though we can bear with the practice of the Greek Church, of referving and fending about the eucharift, when there is no idolatry joined with it; yet we cannot but think that this is the continuance of a practice, which the state of the first ages introduced, and that was afterwards kept up, out of a too fcrupulous imitation of that time; without confidering that the difference of the ftate of the Chriftians, in the former and in the fucceeding ages, made that what was at first innocently practifed (fince a real neceffity may well excufe a want of exactnefs, in fome matters that are only pofitive) became afterwards an occafion of much fuperftition, and in conclufion ended in idolatry. Thofe ill effects that it had, are more than is neceffary to justify our practice in reducing this ftrictly to the first institution.

As for the lifting up of the eucharift, there is not a word of it in the Gofpel; nor is it mentioned by St. Paul: neither Juftin Martyr nor Cyril of Jerufalem fpeak of it; there is nothing concerning it neither in the Conflitutions, nor in the Areopagite. In thofe firft ages all the elevation that is fpoken of, is the lifting up of their hearts to God. The elevation of the facrament began to be practised in

the

Conft. in

Ivo. Carn.

the fixth century; for it is mentioned in the Liturgy ART. called St. Chryfoftom's, but believed to be much later XXVIII. than his time. German, a writer of the Greek Church of the thirteenth century, is the first that defcants upon Germ. it; he fpeaks not of it as done, in order to the adoration Theor. of it, but makes it to reprefent both Chrift's being lifted Tit. up on the crofs, and alfo his refurrection. Ivo of Char-Bibl. patr. tres, who lived in the end of the eleventh century, is the Ep. de Sacr. first of all the Latins that fpeaks of it; but then it was Miffae. T. ii. not commonly practifed; for the author of the Microlo- Bibl. pat, gus, though he writ at the fame time, yet does not mention it, who yet is very minute upon all particulars relating to this facrament. Nor does Ivo fpeak of it as done in order to adoration, but only as a form of fhewing it to the people. Durand, a writer of the thirteenth century, Dur. Rat. is the first that fpeaks of the elevation as done in order to the adoration. So it appears that our Church, by cutting fexta parte off these abuses, has reftored this facrament to its primi-Can. tive fimplicity, according to the institution and the practice of the first ages.

div. offic.

lib. iv. de

ARTICLE XXIX.

Of the Wicked which eat not the Body of Chrift in the use of the Lord's Supper.

The Wicked and such as be void of a lively Faith, although they do carnally and visibly prefs with thei? Teeth (as St. Austin saith) the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Chrißk, pet in no wife are they Partakers of Chrift; but rather, to their Condemn= ation, do cat and dzink the Sign or Sacrament of so great a Thing.

THIS

HIS Article arifes naturally out of the former, and depends upon it: for if Chrift's body is corporally prefent in the facrament, then all perfons good or bad, who receive the facrament, do alfo receive Chrift: on the other hand, if Chrift is prefent only in a fpiritual manner, and if the mean that receives Chrift is faith, then fuch as believe not, do not receive him. So that to prove that the wicked do not receive Chrift's body and blood, is upon the matter the fame thing with the proving that he is not corporally prefent: and it is a very confiderable branch of our argument, by which we prove that the Fathers did not believe the corporal prefence, because they do very often fay, that the wicked do not receive Chrift in the facrament.

Here the fame diftinction is to be made, that was mentioned upon the article of Baptifm. The facraments are to be confidered either as they are acts of church-communion, or as they are federal acts, by which we enter into covenant with God. With refpect to the former, the vifible profeffion that is made, and the action that is done, are all that can fall under human cognizance: fo a facrament must be held to be good and valid, when as to outward appearance all things are done according to the inftitution: but as to the internal effect and benefit of it; that turns upon the truth of the profeffion that is made, and the fincerity of thofe acts which do accompany it : for, if these are not feriously and fincerely performed, God is difhonoured, and his inftitution is profaned. Our Saviour has exprefsly faid, that whofoever eats bis flefb and drinks bis blood, bas eternal life. From thence we conclude, that no man does truly receive Chrift, who does not at the fame time receive with him both a right to eternal life,

and

and likewife the beginnings and earnests of it. The fa- ART. crament being a federal act, he who difhonours God, and XXIX. profanes this inftitution, by receiving it unworthily, becomes highly guilty before God, and draws down judgments upon himself and as it is confeffed on all hands, that the inward and fpiritual effects of the facrament depend upon the ftate and difpofition of him that communicates, fo we, who own no other prefence but an inward and fpiritual one, cannot conceive that the wicked, who believe not in Chrift, do receive him.

In this point feveral of the Fathers have delivered themfelves very plainly.

15.

Origen fays, Chrift is the true food, whofoever eats him Comment. fball live for ever; of whom no wicked perfon can eat; for ifin Matth.c. it avere poffible that any who continues wicked should eat the word that was made flesh, it had never been written, Whofo eats this bread ball live for ever. This comes after a difcourse of the facrament, which he calls the typical and fymbolical body, and fo it can only belong to it. In another place he fays, The good eat the living bread, which came down from heaven; but the wicked eat dead bread, which is death.

d'Achery.

Zeno, bishop of Verona, who is believed to have lived Tom. ii. near Origen's time, has these words: There is caufe to fear Spicil. Sacr. that be, in whom the Devil dwells, does not eat the flesh of our Lord, nor drink bis blood; though be feems to communicate with the faithful: fince our Lord bas jaid, He that cats my Alefb, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him.

St. Jerome fays, They that are not boly in body and spirit, do In cap. 66. neither eat the flesh of Jefus, nor drink his blood; of which be Ifaiæ. faid, He that eats my flefb, and drinks my blood, bath eternal life.

St. Auguftin expreffes himself in the very words that Tract. 26. are cited in the Article, which he introduces with thefe in Joan. words: He that does not abide in Chrift, and in whom Chrift does not abide, certainly does not fpiritually eat bis flf, nor drink his blond, though he may vifibly and carnally prefs with bis teeth the facrament of the body and blood of Chrift: but be rather eats and drinks the facrament of fo great a matter to bis condemnation. And in another place he fays, neither are Lib. xxi. de they (fpeaking of vicious perfons) to be faid to eat the body Civ. Dei, c. of Chrift, because they are not his members: to which he adds, He that fays, Whofo eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, abides in me, and I in bim, fhews what it is not only in a facrament, but truly to eat the body of Chrift, and to drink bis blood. He has upon another occafion thofe frequently cited words, fpeaking of the difference between the other

Hh 2

Difciples

25.