Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

“Qui (liber Danielis) apud Hebræos nec Susannæ habet Historiam, nec Hymnum trium Puerorum, nec Belis et Draconis fabulas, quas nos, quia in toto orbe dispersæ sunt, veru anteposito easque jugulante subjecimus, ne videremur apud imperitos magnam partem voluminis detruncasse.” (Præfatio in Danielem.)Ibid. ibid. 9. g.

Quomodo igitur viginti duo elementa sunt per quæ scribimus Hebraicè omne quod loquimur: et eorum initiis vox humana comprehenditur: ita et viginti duo volumina supputantur. . ., Primus apud eos liber vocatur Breschith ; quem nos Genesim dicimus. Secundus Ellesmoth ; qui Ecodus appellatur. Tertius Vaiikræ; id est Leviticus. Quartus Vaiedabber ; quem Numeri vocamus. Quintus Ellehadborim ; qui Deuteronomium prænotatur. Hi sunt quinque libri Moysi : quos propriè Thora, id est legem, appellant. Secundum prophetarum ordinem faciunt, et incipiunt ab Jesu filio Nave, qui apud illos Josue ben Nun dicitur. Deinde subtexunt Sophtim, id est Judicum librum, et in eundem compingunt Ruth : quia in diebus Judicum facta ejus narratur historia. Tertius sequitur Samuel, quem nos Regnorum primum et secundum dicimus. Quartus Malachim, id est, Regum, qui tertio et quarto Regnorum volumine continetur. Quintus est, Esaias. Sextus, Hieremias. Septimus, Ezechiel. Octavus, liber duodecim prophetarum, qui apud illos vocatur There asar. Tertius ordo hagiographa possidet. Et primus liber incipit ab Job. Secundus a David, quem quinque incisionibus : et uno psalmorum volụmine comprehendunt. Tertius est Salomon tres libros habens: Proverbia quæ illi parabolas, id est Misle appellant.

[ocr errors]

Quartus, Ecclesiasten, id est Cöeleth. Quintus est Canticum canticorum, quem titulo Sira sirim appellant. Sextus est Daniel. Septimus, Dibre haiomini, id est verba dierum, quod significantius Chronicon totius divinæ historiæ possumus appellare : qui liber apud nos Paralipomenon primus atque secundus inscribitur. Octavus, Esdras : qui et ipse similiter apud Græcos et Latinos in duos libros divisus est. Nonus Hester. . . . Hic prologus Scripturarum quasi galeatum principium, omnibus libris quos de Hebræo vertimus in Latinum convenire potest: ut scire valeamus quicquid extra hos est, inter apocrypha esse ponendum. (Præfatio in librum Regum.)—Ibid. ibid. p. 5. m. 6. a, b, c.

The FATHERS IN THE COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE III. A.D. 397.

Canon 47. Who, though they admit most of the books in dispute, will not escape anathema, for they do not reckon Baruch, nor the Maccabees, except that Dionysius Exiguus thought fit to add them in his collection, whereas no Greek copy contains them. The learned Beveridge, in his note upon this canon, observes Dionysius Exiguus in sua horum canonum collectione addit, Machabæorum libri duo. Verum hi libri a nullo Græco codice vel manuscripto vel impresso recensentur.-See the canon in Labbé and Cossart, Conc. ii. 1177.

GREGORY THE GREAT, A.D. 590. Who rejects the Maccabees.-Edit. Rom. 1608, ex typogr. Va

tican, vol. ii. p. 899. “De qua re non inordinate agimus, si ex libris, licet non canonicis, sed tamen ad ædificationem plebis editis, testimonium proferamus. Eleazar, (1 Macc. 6.) namque in prælio elephantem feriens stravit, sed sub ipso quem extinxit occubuit."-Greg. Mor. lib. 19. in Job. c. 29.

. ..,

TRANSUBSTANTIATION.

Council of Trent, Session XII. Canon 2.—If any shall say, that in the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of bread and wine remains together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and shall deny that admirable and peculiar conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the wine into the blood, only the appearances of bread and wine remaining, which conversion the Catholic Church most aptly calls transubstantiation ; let him be anathema.

Canon 4.-If any shall say, that, after consecration performed, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are not in the admirable Sacrament of the Eucharist, but only for use while it is consumed, but not before or after, and that in the consecrated hosts or particles which are reserved or remain after communion, there does not remain the true body of the Lord ; let him be anathema.

Canon 8.-If any shall say, that Christ, exhibited in the Eucharist, is only spiritually eaten, and not also sacramentally and really ; let him be anathema.--See above, p. 140.

The Fathers of the Church anathematized by these decrees are the following:

JUSTIN MARTYR. Apolog. i. $ 65. Edit. Benedict. Paris, 1742,

p. 82, 83. "Έπειτα προσφέρεται το προεστώτι των αδελφών άρτος, και ποτήριον ύδατος και κράματος και ούτος λαβών, αίνον και δόξαν τω Πατρί των όλων διά του ονόματος του Υιού, και του Πνεύματος του Αγίου, αναπέμπει και ευχαριστίαν υπέρ του κατηξιώσθαι τούτων παρ' αυτού επί πολυ ποιείται, ού συντελέσαντος τας ευχάς και την ευχαριστίαν, πάς ο παρών λαός επευφημεί λέγων, αμήν. ... ευχαριστήσαντος δε του προεστώτος, και επευφημήσαντος παντός του λαού, οι καλούμενοι παρ' ημίν διάκονοι, διδόασιν εκάστω των παρόντων μεταλαβείν από του ευχαριστηθέντος άρτου και οίνου και ύδατος, και τοις ου παρουσιν αποφέρoυσι. Here it will be observed that Justin Martyr speaks of the elements after consecration, and when in the act of being distributed, as merely “ bread, and wine and water, blessed with thanksgiving."

Ιbid. και 66. Ου γαρ ως κοινόν άρτον, ουδέ κοινόν πόμα ταύτα λαμβάνομεν. αλλ' όν τρόπον διά λόγου θεού σαρκοποιηθείς Ιησούς Χριστός και σωτήρ ημών, και σάρκα και αίμα υπέρ σωτηρίας ημών έσχεν, ούτως και την δι' ευχής λόγου του παρ' αυτού ευχαριστηθείσαν τροφήν, εξ ης αίμα και σάρκες κατά μεταβολής τρέφονται ημών, εκείνου του σαρκοποιηθέντος Ιησού και σάρκα και αίμα εδιδάχθημεν είναι.

Here it will be observed that, while Justin plainly maintains the truth of the sacramental conversion from common into holy, from earthly into heavenly food, the means of conveying the spiritual nourishment of the body and blood of Christ, he expressly affirms that the elements, after this consecration and conversion, are capable of nourishing our bodies by digestion. But every Roman Christian will acknowledge that to affirm this of the glorified body of our Lord, would be plain blasphemy, and involve the guilt of the Stercorians. It is, therefore, beyond denial, that the conversion of which Justin speaks, is not a material change: that the substance of the bread and wine do still remain capable of digestion in the human stomach, capable of nourishing the human body. There is no need to multiply extracts from the same author ; those who have the leisure to refer to his Dialogue with Trypho, Sections 41, 70, 117, in all of which there is méntion of the Christian oblation of bread and wine, εις ανάμνησιν του πάθους, εις ανάμνησιν του σωματοποιήσασθαι αυτόν, will plainly see what gross perversion of plain sentences, and suppression of texts, and garbling of extraets must be had recourse to, before the Romans can declare Justin Martyr free from the anathemas of the Council of Trent.

Irenæus, Adversus Hæreses, lib. iv. c. 34. Edit. Grab. p. 327.

Ως γάρ από γής άρτος προσλαμβανόμενος την έκκλησιν του θεού, ουκέτι κοινός άρτος εστίν, αλλ' ευχαριστία, εκ δύο πραγμάτων συνεστηκυία, επιγείου τε και ουρανίου: ούτως και τα σώματα ημών μεταλαμβάνοντα της ευχαριστίας, μηκέτι είναι φθαρτά, την ελπίδα της εις αιώνας αναστάσεως έχοντα.

Here Irenæus distinctly affirms the elements in the eucharist to partake of two characters after consecration; heavenly, in respect to the invocation ; earthly, in respect to their substance. He compares the change which consecration effects in them to the change which the partaking of the eucharist effects in ourselves. When the Romans can show that every communicant becomes transubstantiated by the act of communion, then, but not till then, may they appeal to Irenæus. What Irenæus here says of the twofold character of the elements of the eucharist, spiritual and earthly, may serve to remove a difficulty which hindered Waterland from acknowledging the oblation of the eucharist to be a sacrifice; his difficulty was, that the Fathers speak of the Christian sacrifices as spiritual and heavenly, which expressions he was unable to reconcile with the idea of regarding the elements themselves as the sacrifice. To get out of this difficulty, he cut the knot, instead of untying it: drew a hairsplitting and untenable distinction between oblation and sacrifice, and, while in a reduced and qualified sense, he admitted the former term, which he could not wholly reject without casting off the whole primitive Church ; peremptorily rejected the latter, though, in doing so, he rejected the testimony of Justin's Quotūv Dial. .cum Tryphone, $ 40, of Irenæus’ "purum sacrificium," Adv. Hæres. iv. 34. and the general language of the ancients. By the άρτος προσλαμβανόμενος την εκκλησιν του θεού, there is an evident reference to the prayer of consecration by invoking the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the elements, to be found in all the early liturgies; and which St. Paul himself seems to bear in mind when he speaks of ή προσφορά των εθνών being ευπρόσδεκTos, because irylaquévn év Ivčúparı åyiq. Rom. xv. 16.

« PoprzedniaDalej »