this holy Sacrament's being a commemorative Sacrifice, in which we represent before God the Sacrifice of CHRIST upon the Cross, perfectly secures the holy mystery from that corrupt and absurd notion, it being impossible that a solemn commemoration of a fact or thing, should be the fact or thing itself; or to speak otherwise, with respect to the holy symbols by which we make the commemoration, that what represents should be the thing represented, the figure, the verity itself, or the sign, that which is signified thereby.

Sir, I have said all this in defence of the old, against the Doctor's new notion of the holy Eucharist, much more out of love to that old truth, than to prove Christian ministers to be proper priests. -pp. 174, 5.

To the modern testimonies I have cited for this doctrine in my first letter, I beg leave to add two or three more out of the writings of our learned divines, who have wrote of the holy Sacrament of the LORD's Supper as of a Sacrifice, altogether as plainly as I have done. Dr. Daniel Brevint, late dean of Lincoln, in his excellent little book entitled, "The Christian Sacrament and Sacrifice," to use his own words, hath endeavoured, as he speaks, "to set this holy Sacrament at liberty, without regard to Papists or Protestants, and rescue it out of the hands of such as have not treated rightly of it, and to restore it to the full meaning and institution of CHRIST.".... I forbear to transcribe any more, referring the reader to the discourse itself, which I wish were reprinted for the honour of GoD, and the benefit of the Church. Dr. Taylor plainly asserts this holy Sacrament to be a Sacrifice 2. The bishop of Sarum on Article XXXI., writes of the holy Eucharist in these words :

"In two other respects it may also more strictly be called a Sacrifice. One is, because there is an oblation of bread and wine made in it, which, being sacrificed, are consumed in act of religion. To this many passages in the writings of the Fathers relate. This was the oblation which was made at the altar by the people. And though at first the Christians were reproached, [Vid. sup. pp. 183, 4. 186, 7.] 3 [Burnet.]

1 [Vid. sup. pp. 190-200.]

2

as having a strange sort of religion in which they had neither temples, altars, nor sacrifices, because they had not those things in so gross a manner as the heathens had, yet both Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, and all the succeeding writers of the Church, do frequently mention the oblations that they made; and in the ancient Liturgies they did with particular prayers offer the bread and wine to GOD, as the Creator of all things. These were called the gifts and offerings, which were offered to GOD in imitation of Abel, who offered the fruits of the earth in a sacrifice to GOD. Both Justin Martyr, Irenæus, the Constitutions, and all the ancient Liturgies, have express words relating to this. Another respect in which the Eucharist is called a Sacrifice, is because it is a commemoration, and representation to GOD, of the Sacrifice that CHRIST offered for us upon the Cross. Upon these accounts we do not deny but that the Eucharist may be well called a Sacrifice. But still it is a commemorative Sacrifice, and not propitiatory.".... I wish his lordship had been pleased to add expressly, what is implied, that the Eucharist was also called a Sacrifice by the ancients, because the oblation of bread and wine, which they compared to other external Sacrifices, was always brought to the priest, to be presented by him as Sacrificial gifts to GOD upon the holy table or altar, and after the prayer of thanksgiving, to be consecrated by him in a second solemn oblation...

It is plain that Bishop Andrews thought the holy Eucharist to be the Christian Sacrifice, by this prayer in his Greek and Latin devotions Ο άνω κ. τ. λ. 3. . . .

...

Dr. Heylin..... cites a noble testimony out of Eusebius, De Demonstratione Evangelica, about the priesthood, altar, and Sacrifice of the Christians.

...

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 Bishop means, not propitiatory in itself, or by its own virtue, as the Papists assert their Sacrifice of the Mass to be.

2 [Vid. sup. p. 100.]

the people committed to their charge."... 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 Prayer, with notes, which I happened to meet with, and value very much2. . . .

And now I hope, by these additional authorities, and those cited in my book, and in the Appendix to it, I shall convince the "late writer" I have spoken of in the beginning of my first letter, that the Eucharist is a proper Sacrifice, and that we, 'who offer it, are proper Priests, and that there can be no danger in this doctrine, which was taught and practised by all the ancient Catholic Church. I hope also what I have said here, and in that letter, will sufficiently refute and expose the incomparable presumption of the author of the "Rights," who represents the whole notion of the LORD's Supper, as I have showed it was taught in the primitive times, for priestcraft, saying that "they made it a mystery in the heathenish sense of the word."... All serious Christians among us believe it to be a mystery, though not to be a Sacrifice,"'—a sacrificial mystery, as the Passover to which it answers, and in whose place it did succeed, by our SAVIOUR'S institution, was.-Prefatory Discourse, pp. xxvii-lii. lxiii.

It hath been my endeavour, especially in the first of the following letters, to revive this ancient, true, Catholic doctrine, which hath accidentally grown into disuse, and almost utter oblivion in this Church, by the alterations that were made in the Office, or order of administering the LORD's Supper in the first Liturgy of the Church of England, which in the Appendix I have presented to the view of the world.

In the changes made in that Office, the word " Altar," which had been used in all ages of the Church before, even in the purest as well as the most corrupt, was left out of the rubrics. And the Prayer of Oblation, which had been ever used before the delivering of the Sacrament, in which we pray GoD "mercifully to

1 In which are cited Laud, Hammond, Dodwell, Patrick, Wake, Bull, &c. 2 [Vid. sup. pp. 70-73.]

accept this our Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," was put in the Post-Communion after the LORD's Prayer; of which I read thus in my interleaved Common Prayer Book: "This prayer," &c.1

In the alterations made in the Office for administering the LORD's Supper, in king Edward the Sixth's Service Book, that Rubric was also left out which commanded the minister to "set the bread and wine upon the altar," as an offering. But this Rubric was restored, in the Office for the Church of Scotland, and likewise in the Office of the Holy Communion of our present Liturgy, established by the Act of Uniformity after the Restoration, with an intention undoubtedly to oblige the Priest to place the elements, as an offering, with reverence upon the LORD'S Table. But as the disuse of this practice had taken deep root from the fifth year of king Edward VI., when the first Service Book was altered, to that time, and helped to obliterate the notion of the Christian Sacrifice in the minds both of priests and people; so this restored Rubric, to the great reproach of the Clergy, was almost never since observed in cathedral or parochial churches. I say almost never, because I never knew or heard but of two or three persons, which is a very small number, who observed it; but the bread and wine was still placed upon the table before the office of the Communion began, without any solemnity, it may be, by the clerk or sexton, or any other, perhaps, unfitter person, to the great derogation of the reverence due to the holy mystery; and I hope, for the sake of my good intentions, no worthy clergyman will be displeased at me for taking notice thereof.

This practice of the officiating priests setting the bread and wine in the sight of the people with reverence upon the holy table, was so inviolably observed in ancient times, that they had in their churches a buffet, or side table, on the right or left hand of the altar, upon which a priest or deacon set the bread and wine, from whence they were carried by the deacon, or other priests, when there were two, to the officiating priest, who reverently placed them as an offering on the LORD's table. This

1 [Vid. sup. p. 72.]

side-table, for the elements and holy vessels, was called in the Greek Church IIpóleos, because they were first set in public view upon it; and in the Latin Church Paratorium, because they were prepared, and made ready upon it, for the Holy Communion; and in Italy it is called Credenza, in France Credence...

I have made these remarks for three reasons; first, to move the clergy of cathedral and parochial Churches to put the aforesaid Rubric in practice, which in the Communion enjoins the priest to place the bread and wine upon the LORD's table. Secondly, to persuade them to restore the ancient use of the Paratorium, or table, of preparation which that Rubric plainly implies; for the priest is supposed, either to fetch them from some place, or else to have them brought from some place to him, that he may set them on the altar; and I cannot tell why that should not be another table in some part of the Church or chancel, to set the bread and wine, and holy vessels upon, especially where there is no sacristy or vestry, where they may be conveniently set till they are brought unto the priest.

In cathedrals it seems to be most proper for the deacon, or another priest, as the sacrist commonly is, to bring the elements to the bishop, or officiating priest; but in parish Churches, where there is neither deacon nor second priests, the churchwarden, or other fit person, might reverently bring them from the Credence, wheresoever placed, to the rail, where the minister might receive them of him, to place them upon the altar. This practice would conciliate a greater measure of reverence than is often seen, to the holy Sacrament, and help the people to conceive how the bread and wine is their oblation, and how it is made a Sacrifice by the ministry of the priest.-pp. lxiii-lxviii.

ID.-Second Collection of Controversial Letters.

In this the reader will find the Holy Eucharist asserted to be a commemorative Sacrifice... that doctrine which so many of our greatest men have asserted to be the doctrine of the purest ages of Christianity, without seeing any danger in it, or any consequence from the old commemorative representative Sacrifice to the new Popish Sacrifice of the Mass.