ID.-MS. Introduction to the Liturgy'.

It is objected by the Romanists, that to the very being of a Bishop, the order of Priesthood is essentially required, which they say is not to be found in the Church of England, neither in the one function of the power of sacrificing, nor in the other of absolution.

To which is answered, that by the Book of Common Prayer and ordinations, they are called and made Presbyters, Priests, as appears thereby. And as touching the function of sacrificing, whereby, they say, a true and proper Sacrifice is to be made for the sins of the quick and the dead, and an oblation of the very Body and Blood of CHRIST;

We say, that forasmuch as our Priests have authority to minister the Sacraments, and, consequently, the Eucharist, which is a representation of the Sacrifice of CHRIST; therefore they may be said to offer CHRIST in a mystery, and to sacrifice Him by way of commemoration.

And our Church by the Articles of 1562, Art xxxi. teacheth, that the offering of CHRIST once made is sufficient and perfect, and that there needs no other satisfaction for sins, and consequently condemns the Mass for the quick and the dead as blasphemous. And by the place of Acts xiii. 2, there cannot be anything thence inferred, to prove that their ministering at that time, may warrant the Popish massing, in these times, as now it is used.

ID.-Daily Office.

O Thou that sittest on high with the Father, and art here invisibly present with us, &c. . . .

1 From "An Introduction to the Liturgy of the Church of England, written by way of preface before Archbishop Laud's collection of various readings out of the several ancient Common Prayer Books, &c. .... Printed by a copy exactly compared with the original MS. in his Grace of Canterbury's library at Lambeth."-See Supplement to Nicholls's Commentary on the Book of Common Prayer, where reasons are given for attributing these MS. notes to Abp. Laud.

2 Vide sup. cit. p. 100.

ID.-History of his Troubles and Trial.

Now we are come to the arraignment of the [Scotch] Liturgy, and the Book of Common Prayer; . . . for they say:

"1. This book inverteth the order of the Communion in the Book of England ... Of the divers secret reasons of this change we mention one only, enjoining the spiritual sacrifice and thanksgiving, which is in the book of England pertinently after the Communion, with the Prayer of Consecration, before the Communion; and that under the name of Memorial, or Oblation; for no other end, but that the Memorial and Sacrifice of praise mentioned in it, may be understood according to the Popish meaning: (Bellarm. de Missa, 1. 2. c. 21.) not the spiritual sacrifice, but of the oblation of the Body of the LORD." . . .

As for the only reason given of this change, it is in my judgment a strange one. "Tis, forsooth, for no other end (they say) but that the memorial and sacrifice of praise mentioned in it, may be understood according to the popish meaning, not of the Spiritual Sacrifice, but of the oblation of the Body of the LORD. Now, ignorance, and jealousy, whither will you? For the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, no man doubts but that it is to be offered up. Nor doth any man of learning question it, that I know, but that, according to our SAVIOUR'S Own command, we are to do whatsoever is done in this Office, as a memorial of His Body and Blood offered up, and shed for us. (Luke xxii.) Now 'tis one thing to offer up His Body, and another to offer up the memorial of His Body, with our praise and thanks for that infinite blessing; so that, were that change of order made for this end, (which is more than I know,) I do not yet see how any Popish meaning, so much feared, can be fastened upon it. And the words in that Prayer are plain, (as they are also in the Book of England,) that we offer and present unto God ourselves, our souls, and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively Sacrifice unto Him. What is there here that can be drawn to a Popish meaning, unless it be with the cords of these men's vanity ?—pp. 109. 114-116.

Yet the charge goes on

"4. The Book of England abolishes all that may import the oblation of an unbloody Sacrifice but here we have, besides the preparatory oblation of the elements, which is neither to be found in the Book of England now, nor in King Edward's Book of old, the oblation of the body and the blood of CHRIST, which Bellarmine calls, Sacrificium laudis, quia Deus per illud magnopere laudatur. This also agrees well with their late doctrine."

First, I think no man doubts, but that there is, and ought to be offered up to GOD, at the consecration and reception of this Sacrament, Sacrificium laudis, the Sacrifice of praise; and that this ought to be expressed in the Liturgy, for the instruction of the people. And these words, "We entirely desire thy fatherly goodness, mercifully to accept this our Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," &c. are both in the Book of England, and in that which was prepared for Scotland. And if Bellarmine do call the oblation of the Body and the Blood of CHRIST a Sacrifice for praise, sure he doth well in it; (for so it is) if Bellarmine mean no more, by the oblation of the Body and the Blood of CHRIST than a commemoration and a representation of that great Sacrifice offered up by CHRIST Himself: as Bishop Jewell very learnedly and fully acknowledges. But if Bellarmine go farther than this; and by the oblation of the body and the blood of CHRIST, mean, that the Priest offers up that which CHRIST Himself did, and not a commemoration of it only, he is erroneous in that, and can never make it good.-pp. 123, 4.

HALL, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR.-No peace with Rome, § xix. The priestly office of CHRIST is not a little impeached by the daily oblation of the Missal Sacrifice, and the number of mediators. For the first: that in the sacred Supper there is a Sacrifice (in that sense wherein the Fathers spoke) none of us ever doubted; but that is there, either Latrieutical (as Bellarmine distinguishes it not ill) or Eucharistical: that is here (as Chrysostom speaks) a remembrance of a Sacrifice; that is, as Augustine interprets it, a memorial of CHRIST's passion, celebrated in the Church; and from this sweet commemoration of our

redemption there arises another Sacrifice, the Sacrifice of praise; and from thence a true Peace-offering of the Christian soul: these three sacrifices offer themselves to us here; but for any propitiatory Sacrifice, unless it be (as the gloss interprets it) representatively, I find none, none essential; none (as the Tridentines labour to persuade) true and proper; neither, indeed, can there be. For what? Doth the priest offer the same that CHRIST hath offered, or another? If another, then not propitiatory, for only CHRIST is our propitiation; if the same, then not an unbloody Sacrifice (for CHRIST's Sacrifice was a bloody one): then, the natural being of CHRIST should again be destroyed; then, the blood of the Mediator (which I abhor to imagine) must be of a finite value and power: yea, CHRIST Himself did not sacrifice on the table, but on the cross; for if the Sacrifice, which He offered in His supper, were perfect, and fully propitiatory, what needed He to die afterward? Wherefore was His blood shed upon the cross which by His transubstantiated blood (not yet shed) had formerly redeemed the world? But if it be unbloody, then it is not propitiatory; for without shedding of blood (saith the Apostle) is no remission.

MOUNTAGUE, BISHOP.—An answer to a late Gagger of Protestants.

For why? Who can alter CHRIST's institution? who dare change that which He hath ordained? Sacrificium verum et plenum tunc offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri, &c. [“ He (the priest) doth then offer in the Church to GOD the FATHER a true and full Sacrifice, if he begin so to offer, even as he seeth CHRIST Himself did offer," saith St. Cyprian. "But," saith he again, and we know it is true, Constat, &c. [" It is acknowledged that the LORD offered the cup for the commemoration of the Passion. And because we make mention of His Passion at every Sacrifice, we ought to do nothing else than what He did."] Why? because otherwise we offer not the Sacrifice as we should. Nec. &c. [" Neither do we celebrate the LORD's Sacrifice with a lawful hallowing, except our oblation and Sacrifice answer to the Passion :"] and that cannot be without pouring out of wine, that representeth the shedding of His

blood. But your Church hath altered it; presumptuously done. Who gave your Church such authority? Hear St. Cyprian again : Quare, &c. ["Wherefore if CHRIST alone is to be heard, we ought not to attend to what any other before us hath thought should be done, but what He who is before all, even CHRIST, first did. For we ought not to follow the custom of men, but the truth of GOD. For if JESUS CHRIST, our LORD and GOD, be Himself the High Priest of GOD the FATHER, and first offered Himself a Sacrifice to the FATHER, and commanded that this should be done for the commemoration of Him, then verily that priest doth truly fulfil his office in CHRIST's stead, who copieth that which CHRIST did; and doth then offer in the Church to GOD the FATHER a true and full Sacrifice, if he so begin to offer, even as he seeth CHRIST Himself did offer."] You do not this; therefore, in St. Cyprian's judgment, your Sacrifice is neither full nor true.-pp. 262, 3.

ID.-Appeale to Cæsar.

I hope you will not overthrow the Sacrifice. You well confess the blessed Sacrament of the altar, or communion table, whether you please, to be a Sacrifice. Not propitiatory, as they call it (I will use this word, "call it," lest you challenge me upon Popery, for using " propitiatory") for the living and dead. Not an external, visible, true, and proper Sacrifice, but only representative, rememorative, and spiritual Sacrifice.-p. 287.

FORBES (WILLIAM), BISHOP'.-Considerationes Modestæ, lib. iii.

c. 1.

The Eucharistic bread is consecrated to GOD, inasmuch, as from being profane, or not sacred, it is made sacred; it is also specially dedicated to GoD, as is plain by the actions that are performed, and the words that are said concerning it. It cannot, therefore, be denied, but that it is specially offered to GoD: moreover, when offered to Him, there is the benediction, and there

1 Consecrated First Bishop of Edinburgh.