reflection, for which there was no colour; unless he first wilfully perverted the meaning, and falsely charged the Protestants with the opus operatum. Smalcius plainly put that false construction upon it, and then took the handle to ridicule it, as if any remission could be extracted from the use of such common things as the bare symbols ares. So ridiculous a mistake of the doctrine which he opposed, either shewed no quickness of apprehension, or no sincerity. Schlictingius followed the same blunder, and still with greater levity: a certain argument, that he had no solid reasons to produce on that head. The Racovian Catechism, of the first Latin edition, (A. D. 1609.) pleaded, that a man ought to be sure of his pardoni in heaven, before he takes the Sacrament, and therefore could have no more pardon to receive here: that must be their meaning, if they intended it for an argument. However, the argument, at best, is a very lame one. For whatever certainty of that nature any man may pretend to, it is capable of being renewed and reinforced by repeated assurances : and as we are taught continually to pray for forgiveness, so may we receive it continually, both in the Word and Sacraments; but more particularly in the Sacraments. In the next edition of that Catechism, (A. D. 1659.) that trifling plea was struck out, and another was substituted in its room; which is to this effect, that remission cannot be conferred in the Eucharist, because commemoration only, and not remission, was the end of that rite by our Lord's account of it. But here the suggestion is not true; for our Lord himself has sufficiently intimated, (as I have before proved,) that remission of sins is one end of that service, in the very words of the institution1: and if he had not so plainly said it, the very nature of the act proclaims it, taking in what St. Paul has taught. There are more ends than one to be vivis et mortuis transformarunt, et idolum quoddam ex ea fecerunt. Socin. Quod. Regn. Polon. p. 701. g Quis enim de sua carne, cum omnibus concupiscentiis, crucifigenda cogitet, si usus panis et vini, qui quotidie obvius est, possit remissionem peccatorum, &c. consequi? Smalc. contr. Frantz. p. 333. h O facilem vero et expeditam adipiscendæ salutis rationem, si tot tantaque bona, mica panis, et gutta vini possis consequi. Schlicting. contr. Meisner. p. 799. ̧ i Qui vult digne cœnæ Domini participare, eum de remissione peccatorum, ex parte Dei, certum ac fide confirmatum esse oportet. Racov. Catech. cap. iii. Cum is finis ritus istius usurpandi sit, ut beneficium a Christo nobis præstitum commemoremus, seu annuntiemus, nec ullus alius præter hunc sit a Christo indicatus finis; apparet, non eo institutum esse ut aliquid illic beneficii, aliter quam quatenus digne observatus pietatis Christianæ pars est, a Christo sumamus. Racov. Catech. c. iv. sect. 6. p. 230. 1 Matth. xxvi. 28. : served by the same Sacrament, whether it be of Baptism or of the Eucharist and all are consistent, because allied and subordinate. Not to mention that commemoration itself, rightly considered, strongly infers and implies present benefits; as I have observed abovem, Moreover, the Socinians themselves are forced to allow other ends of the Sacrament, over and above the commemoration of Christ's death: namely, a declaration of their communion with Christ their head, and with their Christian brethren; besides a further declaration of their spiritual feeding upon Christ, then and at all times, and of their looking upon his death as the seal of the covenant, and upon his doctrine as the food of the soul. Now if they think themselves at liberty to invent as many ends as they please, such as may suit with their other principles, why are we debarred from admitting such other ends of the Sacrament as Scripture plainly points out to us, and the reason also of the thing manifestly requires? From hence then it appears, that the Socinian pleas in this case carry more of artificial management in them, than of truth or sobriety. However, it is visible from the last citation, that one principal drift is, to exclude God, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit, and all Divine influences, out of the Sacrament, and to make nothing more of it than a performance of man: and in this view they are content to account it a part of Christian piety. Ruarus, one of the shrewdest and learnedest of them, disliked their granting so much, and charged them, in a note of correction", with an inconsistency, in saying it because every pious observance contributes, in some measure, towards remission of sins, and they had before absolutely denied any benefit at all that way. Schlictingius left this note of Ruarus without any reply; though he replied to several others which went along with it: which shews, either that he found it impossible to evade the doctrine of remission in this Sacrament, unless it were at the expense of self-contradiction; or else, that he was willing, at length, to admit of it, provided only they may claim remission as their due reward for the service, and not as indulged them for the merits of Christ's death and sacrifice therein commemorated. It must be owned, that Ruarus's hint on that head was acute, and came home to the purpose: for, as those men supposed all other requisites for m See above, p. 520. Si pars est Christianæ pietatis, utique ad justificationem, atque ita ad remissionem peccatorum nobis prodest: quod tamen in initio quæstionis hujus, simpliciter negatum fuit. Ruari Note, p. 27. remission to be implied in worthy receiving, and now added this part of Christian piety to the rest, it must of consequence follow, that remission of sins is granted upon it, by their own principles. So then, in the last result, they and we may seem to be nearly agreed as to the point of remission in or upon this service; and the only remaining difference will be about the meritorious cause of it and that will resolve into another question, discussed, in some measure, above; namely, the question concerning the value, virtue, and efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ. 66 66 4. There is an insidious way made use of, by some of our Socinians, for the undermining the doctrine of remission in the Eucharist: they depreciate the service, and the preparation proper to it, making both so slight, that no man could justly expect so Divine a grant, from so contemptible a performance: "I know "not," says one, "to what purpose so many superstitious books are written to teach men to prepare themselves for the memo"rial supper, when an honest intention and a reverent performance are sufficient both preparations and qualifications for and "in all Gospel ordinances. Here is no mention of faith, nor of repentance from dead works; without which, undoubtedly, there can be no remission of sins, whether in the Sacrament or out of it. The proper answer to this pretence will fall under the head of worthy receiving, in a distinct chapter below. In the mean while, let it be considered, whether they who require sincere repentance as a necessary qualification for the holy Communion, or they who labour to defeat that most excellent end and use of it, do most consult the true interest of religion and virtue; which the Socinians would be thought much to befriend in what they teach on this head. I intended here to have closed this chapter, till it came into my mind that we have had some kind of dispute with the Romanists also, (as well as Socinians,) upon the point of remission in the Eucharist. For the Romanists, as it seems, being apprehensive, that if the people be taught to expect pardon from God, in receiving the Communion, they will think they need no other, and that thereupon masses, and indulgences, and other absolutions will sink in their value; I say, the Romanists considering this, have contrived, that venial sins only shall be pardoned upon reception of the Eucharist, but that mortal sins shall be remitted another way. Chemnitius, in his Examen, has • The Argument of the Unitarians with the Catholic Church, part i. p. 12. printed A. D. 1697. taken notice of this matter, and charged it upon them with very little ceremony P. Bellarmine, in reply, could not deny the main charge, as to their confining the eucharistical remission to venial sins only, or to mortal ones unknown; but passing over the secret reasons or motives for the doctrine, he employs all his wit and learning to give the fairest colours to it. Gerhard came after, and defended Chemnitius in that article, confuting Bellarmine'. I perceive not that the learned Cardinal, with all his acuteness, was able to prove any thing with respect to the main question, more than this, (which has been allowed above,) that Baptism is emphatically, or eminently, the Sacrament of remission, and the Eucharist of spiritual growth: and while he is forced to acknowledge that venial sins are remitted in the Eucharist, and unknown mortal ones, as often as necessary, it is obvious to perceive, that it was not any love of truth, or strength of argument on that side, which withheld him from granting more. His strongest plea, which all the rest do in a manner resolve into, is no more than this; that as the worthy communicant is supposed to bring with him true faith and sincere repentance to the Lord's table, he comes pardoned thither, and can have no pardon to take out there upon his receiving the Eucharist. I mention not how the argument recoils upon his own hypothesis. The true answer is, that the grace of remission, or justification, is progressive, and may be always improving, as before noted: and whatever pardon we may conceive ourselves P Remissionem peccatorum graviorum et mortalium, quæ post Baptismum commissa sunt, docent quærendam et impetrandam esse nostra contritione, confessione, satisfactione, sacrificio missæ, et aliis modis. Vident autem totam illam veniarum structuram collapsuram, si remissio illa et reconciliatio quæratur in corpore et sanguine Christi. Ne tamen nihil tribuant Eucharistic, loquuntur de venialibus, hoc est, sicut Jesuitæ interpretantur, de levioribus et minutioribus peccatis. Ut igitur satisfactionis suas et reliquas veniarum nundinationes retineant, acerbe dimicant, in vero usu Eucharistiæ non fieri applicationem remissionis peccatorum. Chemnit. Exam. Concil. Trident. part. ii. p. 70. q Bellarmin. tom. iii. lib. iv. de Eucharist. c. 17, 18, 19. Gerhard. Loc. Comm. tom. v. de Sacr. Cœn. c. xx. p. 175, &c. Com pare Vines, Treatise of the Lord's Supper, p. 328. printed 1657. s Posset etiam dici Eucharistiam applicare hæreditatem, etiam quantum ad remissionem peccatorum, sed tum solum cum ea est necessaria; nimirum cum ii qui non indigne accedunt, habent aliqua peccata mortalia, quorum tamen conscientiam non habent. Bellarm. ibid. c. xix. p. 655. t See above, p. 647. Bishop Taylor's doctrine on this head, as it lies scattered in distant pages, may be worth nothing. "Justification and "sanctification are continued acts: they are like the issues of a fountain "into its receptacles. God is always giving, and we are always receiving." Worth. Comm. p. 43. "The "Sacrament ministers pardon, as par"don is ministered in this world, by "parts. In the usual methods of "God, pardon is proportionable to "our repentance," p. 52. "If we to be entitled to before, or to be then in possession of, yet it is no slight advantage to have the same solemnly renewed, established, ratified, and sealed in the holy Communion, by a formal application there made of the merits of the grand atonement, in which only, after our performing the conditions, our remission stands. CHAP. X. Of the Sanctifying Grace of the Holy Spirit conferred in the EUCHARIST. THE Greek xápis, the Latin gratia, the English grace, is a word of some latitude, admitting of various acceptations: I need not mention all, but such only as are most for our present purpose. Grace, in the general, signifies favour, mercy, indulgence, bounty: in particular, it signifies a gift, and more especially a spiritual gift, and in a sense yet more restrained, the gift of sanctification, or of such spiritual aids as may enable a man both to will and to do according to what God has commanded. The last which I have named appears to be the most prevailing acceptation of the word grace at this day, derived from ancient usage, and common consent, which gives the law to forms of speech, and to the interpretation thereof. The use of the word in the New Testament is various, sometimes larger, sometimes stricter, often doubtful which. I will not be positive, as to several texts where the word grace occurs, and seemingly in the strict sense, that they must necessarily be taken according to such precise meaning, and can bear no larger, or no other construction: as where the " grace of our Lord Jesus Christ" is spoken of"; or where grace, mercy, and peace are implored; or grace and peacey; or where the grace of God is mentioned. In several texts of that sort, the word grace may be understood in the stricter sense, but may also admit of the larger in which, however, the grace of sanctification must be included among 66 "find that we increase in duty, then we may look upon the tradition of "the sacramental symbols, as a direct "consignation of pardon. Not that "it is completed for it is a work of "time; it is as long a doing, as repentance is perfecting.- -It is then "working and if we go on in duty, God will proceed to finish his me"thods of grace, &c.- -And this he "is pleased, by the Sacrament, all "the way to consign," p. 74. 66 66 : u Rom. xvi. 20, 24. I Cor. xvi. 23. 2 Cor. xiii. 14. Gal. vi. 18. Phil. iv. 23. 1 Thess. v. 28. 2 Thess. iii. 18. Philem. 25. Revel. xxii. 21. x 1 Tim. i. 2. 2 Tim. i. 2. Tit. i. 4. 2 John 3. y 1 Pet. i. 2. 2 Pet. i. 2. Revel. i. 4. z Acts xiii. 43. xiv. 26. xv. 40. XX. 24. 1 Cor. i. 4. iii. 10. xv. 10. 2 Cor. i. 12. vi. 1. Ephes. iii. 7. 1 Pet. iv. 10. Tit. ii. 11. |