ANNOTATIONS. CHAP. XXII.

↑ 15. With desire I have desired.) This great desire he had to eat this Paschal lamb, was not for itself, which he had celebrated many years before: but because he meant immediately after the Paschal of the Law was sacrificed and eaten, to institute the other new Paschal in the oblation and eating of his own body, by which the old Paschal should end and be fulfilled, and in which the old Testament and Law ceasing, the Kingdom of God (which is the state of the new Testament and of his Church) should begin. For, the very passage from the old Law to the new was in this one supper.

↑ 17. Taking the chalice.) This chalice according to the very evidence of the text itself also, is not the second part of the Holy Sacrament, but that solemn cup of wine which belonged as a libament to the offering and eating of the Paschal lamb. Which being a figure specially of the holy Chalice, was there drunken by our Saviour, and given to the Apostles also, with declaration that it should be the last cup of the Law, not to be drunken any more, till it should be drunken new in the Kingdom of God, that is to say, in the celebration of the Bl. Sacrament of his blood of the new Testament. And by this place it seemeth very like that the words in St. Matthew, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine &c, were pertaining to this cup of the old Law, and not to the Holy Sacrament, though they be there by repetition or recapitulation spoken after the holy Chalice.

↑ 19. This is my body.) Although sense tell thee it is bread, yet it is the body, according to his words, let faith confirm thee, judge not by sense. After the words of our Lord let no doubt rise in thy mind. Cyril. mystag. 4. Of the verity of flesh and blood there is left no place to doubt: by the profession of our Lord himself, and by our faith it is flesh and blood indeed. Is not this truth? To them be it untrue, which deny JESUS CHRIST to be true God. Hilar lib. 8 de Trinit.

↑ 19. Which is given.) As the former words make and prove his body present, so these words plainly signify, that it is present, as given, offered or sacrificed for us: and being uttered in the * present tense, it signifieth not only that it should afterward be given or offered on the Cross, but that it was then also in the Sacrament given and offered for us. Whereby it is invincibly proved that his Body is present as an Host or Sacrifice: and that the making or consecrating thereof must needs be Sacrificing. And therefore the holy Fathers in this sense call it a Sacrifice. Nissen. orat. 1 de resur. Leo ser. 7 et 8 de Pass. Hesychius lib. 2. in Levit. ch. 8. Grego. hom. 37 in Evang. et Dial. lib. 4. ch. 59. Cyrillus Hieros. mystag. 5. Dionys. Eccl. Hier. ch. 3. Ignat. ep. 5. ad Smyrn. Justinus dial. cum Tryph. circ. med. Iren. lib. 4. ch. 32 et 34. Tertul. de cult, faem. et ad uxor. lib. 2. Cypr. ep. ad Caecil. et de Caen. Do. Euseb. Demonst. evang. lib. 1 ch. 10. Nazian. orat 1 cont. Julianum. Chryso. hom. 83 in 26 Mat. et lib. 6 de Sacerd. Ambros. lib. 4 de Sacram. ch. 6. et lib. 3. Offic. ch. 48. Hiro. in ep. ad Hebid. q. 2. et ad Evagr. ep. 126 to. 3. August. in psal. 33. conc. 1. et alibi saepe. Graeci omnes in 9 Hebr. et Primasius. Conc. Nic. 1. 14. Ephes. ad Nestor, Constantinop. 6. can. 32. Nicen. 2 act. 6 to. 3. Lateran. Constant. Flor. Trid.

↑ 19. Do this.) In these words the holy Sacrament of Order is instituted, because power and commission to do the principal act and work of Priesthood, is given to the Apostles: that is, to do that which Christ then did concerning his body: which was, to make and offer his body as a sacrifice for us and for all that have need of Sacrifice, and to give it to be eaten as Christ’s body sacrificed, to all faithful. For as the Paschal lamb was first sacrificed, and then eaten; so was his body: and thus to do he here giveth commission and authority to the Apostles, and to all Priests which be their successors in this matter. Dionys. cael. Hierar. ch. 3. Iren. lib. 4. ch. 52. Cyp. ep. ad Cecil. Chrys. hom. 17 inep. ad Heb. Ambros. in Ps. 38. and in ch. 10 ad Hebr.

↑ 19. For a commemoration.) This Sacrifice and Sacrament is to be done perpetually in the Church for the commemoration of Christ, specially of his Passion: that is to say, that it may be a lively representation, exemplar, and form of his Sacrifice upon the cross. Of which one oblation on the cross, not only all other Sacrifices of the Law were figures, but this also: though this in a more nigh, high, mystical, and marvellous sort than any other. For in them Christ’s death was signified as by resemblance and similitudes of external creatures and bodies of brute beasts: but in this of the new Testament, his body visibly sacrificed on the cross, in and by the selfsame body sacrificed and immolated in Sacrament and under the shapes of bread and wine, is most nearly and perfectly resembled. And therefore this is most properly commemorative, as most nearly expressing the very condition, nature, efficacy, sort, and substance of that on the cross. For which the holy Fathers call it the very selfsame sacrifice (though in other manner) which was done on the cross, as it is the selfsame thing, that is offered in the Sacrament, and on the cross. Whereby you may see the perversity of the Protestants or their ignorance, that think it therefore not to be Christ’s body because it is a memory of his body or a figure of his body upon the cross: nor to be a true Sacrifice because it is a commemorative Sacrifice. For as the thing that more lively, nearly, and truly resembleth or representeth, is a better figure than that which shadoweth it afar off: so this his body in the Sacrament, is more perfectly a figure of Christ’s body and Sacrifice, than any other. Christ himself the Son of God is a figure and character of his Father’s Person, being yet of the selfsame substance. And Christ’s body transfigured on the holy Mount, was a figure and resemblance of his Person glorified in Heaven. Even so is his body in the Sacrament to a faithful man that knoweth by his belief grounded on Christ’s own word, that in the one form is his body, in the other his blood, the most perfect representation of his death that can be. As for the Sacrifice, it is no less a true Sacrifice, because it is commemorative of Christ’s Passion, than those of the old Testament were the less true, because they were prefigurative. For that is the condition annexed to all Sacrifice of every Law, to represent Christ’s Passion.

↑ 20. The new Testament in my blood.) Moyses took the blood of the first sacrifice that was made after the giving of the Law Exod. 24. and with blood confirmed the covenant and compact betwixt God and his people, and so dedicated the old Testament, which without blood (saith St. Paul) was not dedicated. Moyses put that blood also into a standing piece, and sprinkled all the people &c. with the same, and said these formal words: This is the blood of the covenant &c. or (as it is read in St. Paul) of the Testament which God hath delivered unto you. Unto all which, Christ in this action about the second part of this his Sacrifice, in every of the Evangelists most clearly alludeth: expressing that the new Testament is begun and dedicated in his blood in the Chalice, no less than the old was dedicated, begun, and ratified in that blood of calves contained in the goblet of Moyses. With which his own blood he sprinkled inwardly his Apostles as the first fruits of the new Testament, imitating the words of Moyses, and saying: This is the Chalice the new Testament &c: Which the other Evangelists spoke more plainly: This is my blood of the new Testament. By all which it is most certain, that Christ’s blood in the Chalice, is the blood of Sacrifice, and that in this Sacrifice of the Altar consisteth the external religion and proper service of the new Testament, no less than the sovereign worship of God in the old Law did consist in the Sacrifices of the same. For though Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross and his blood shed for us there, be the general price, redemption, and satisfaction for us all, and is the last and perfectest sealing or confirmation of the new law and Testament: yet the Service and Sacrifice which the people of the new Testament might resort unto could not be that violent action of the Cross, but this on the Altar, which by Christ’s own appointment is and shall be the eternal office of the new Testament, and the continual application of all the benefits of his Passion unto us.

↑ 20. Which shall be shed.) It is much to be observed that the relative, which, in these words is not governed or ruled (as some would perhaps think) of the noun blood, but of the word chalice. Which is most plain by the Greek: Which taketh away all cavillations and shifts from the Protestants, both against the real presence and the true Sacrificing. For it showeth evidently, that the blood as the contents of the chalice, or as in the chalice, is shed for us (for so the Greek readeth in the present tense) and not only as upon the cross. And therefore as it followeth thereof invincibly, that it is no bare figure, but his blood indeed, so it ensueth necessarily, that it is a Sacrifice and propitiatory, because the chalice (that is the Blood contained in the same) is shed for our sins. For all that know the manner of the Scriptures speeches, know also that, Blood to be shed for sin, is to be sacrificed for propitiation or for pardon of sins. And this text proveth all this so plainly, that * Beza turneth himself roundly upon the Holy Evangelist, charging him with Solecism or false Greek, or else that the words (which yet he confesseth to be in all copies Greek and Latin) are thrust into the text out of some other place: which he rather standeth upon than that St. Luke should speak incongruously in so plain a matter. And therefore he saith plainly that it can not be truly said neither of the chalice itself nor of the contents thereof: which is indeed to give the lie to the Blessed Evangelist, or to deny this to be Scripture. So clear is the Scripture for us, so miserable flights and shifts is falsehood put unto, God be thanked.

↑ 24. Contention.) The Apostles perceiving Christ’s departure from them and his Kingdom to be near, as infirm men and not yet endowed with the Spirit of God, began to have emulation and cogitations of Superiority one over another which our Master represseth in them by exhortation to humility and by his own example, that being their Lord, yet so lately served them: not forbidding Majority or Superiority in them, but pride, tyranny, and contempt of their inferiors.

↑ 31. Simon Simon.) Lastly to put them out of doubt, he calleth Peter twice by name, and telling him the Devil’s desire to sift and try them all to the uttermost (as he did that night) saith that he hath specially prayed for him, to this end that his faith should never fail, and that he being once converted, should after that for ever confirm, establish or uphold the rest in their faith. Which is to say, that Peter is that man whom he would make Superior over them and the whole Church. Whereby we may learn that it was thought fit in the providence of God, that he who should be the Head of the Church, should have a special privilege by Christ’s prayer and promise never to fail in faith and that none other either Apostle, Bishop, or Priest may challenge any such singular or special prerogative either of his Office or person, otherwise than joining in faith with Peter and by holding of him. The danger (saith St. Leo) was common to all the Apostles, but our Lord took special care of Peter, that the state of all the rest might be more sure, if the Head were invincible: God so dispensing the aid of his grace, that the assurance and strength which Christ gave to Peter, might redound by Peter to the rest of the Apostles: St. Augustine. also, Christ praying for Peter, prayed for the rest, because in the Pastor and Prelate the people is corrected or commended. And St. Ambrose writeth, that Peter after his tentation was made Pastor of the Church, because it was said to him, Thou being converted, confirm thy brethren. Neither was this the privilege of St. Peter’s person, but of his Office, that he should not fail in faith but ever confirm all other in their faith. For the Church, for whose sake that privilege was thought necessary in Peter the Head thereof, was to be preserved no less afterward, than in the Apostles’ time. Whereupon all the Fathers apply this privilege of not failing and of confirming other in faith, to the Roman Church and Peter’s successors in the same. To which (saith St. Cyprian) infidelity or false faith can not come. And St. Bernard saith writing to Innocentius Pope, against Abailardus the Heretic: We must refer to your Apostleship all the scandals and perils which may fall, in matter of faith specially. For there the defects of faith must be helped, where faith can not fail. For to what other See was it ever said: I have prayed for thee Peter, that thy faith do not fail? So say the Fathers: not meaning that none of Peter’s seat can err in person, understanding, private doctrine or writings, but that they can not nor shall not ever judicially conclude or give definitive sentence for falsehood or heresy against the Catholic faith, in their Consistories, Courts, Councils, Decrees, Deliberations or Consultations kept for decision and determination of such controversies, doubts, or questions of faith as shall be proposed unto them: because Christ’s prayer and promise protecteth them therein for confirmation of their brethren. And no marvel that our Master would have his vicar’s Consistory and Seat infallible, seeing even in the old Law the high Priesthood and Chair of Moyses wanted not great privilege in this case, though nothing like the Church’s and Peter’s prerogative. But in both, any man of sense may see the difference between the person, and the Office, as well in doctrine as life. Liberius in persecution might yield, Marcellinus for fear might commit Idolatry, Honorius might fall to Heresy, and more than all this, some Judas might creep into the Office: and yet all this without prejudice of the Office and Seat, in which (saith St. Augustine) our Lord hath set the doctrine of truth. Caiphas by privilege of his Office prophesied right of Christ, but according to his own knowledge and faith, knew not Christ. The Evangelists and other penners of holy writ, for the execution of that function had the assistance of God, and so far could not possibly err: but that Luke, Mark, Salomon or the rest might not err in other their private writings; that we say not. It was not the personal wisdom, virtue, learning, or faith of Christ’s Vicars, that made St. Bernard seek to Innocentius the third: St. Augustine and the Bishops of Afrika to Innocentius the first, and to Celestinus, ep. 90. 91. 95: St. Chrysostom to the said Innocentius: St. Basil to the Pope in his time ep. 52.: St. Jerom to Damasus ep 57. 58. to. 2. but it was the prerogative of their Office and higher degree of Unction, and Christ’s ordinance, that would have all Apostles and Pastors in the world, for their confirmation in faith and Ecclesiastical regiment, depend on Peter. The lack of knowledge and humble acceptation of which God’s providence, that is, that one is not honoured and obeyed of all the brotherhood, is the cause of all Schisms and Heresies, saith St. Cyprian. A point of such importance, that all the Twelve being in Apostleship like, Christ would yet for the better keeping of unity and truth, have one to be Head of them all, that a Head being once appointed, occasion of Schism might be taken away, saith St. Jerom. lib. 1. adv. Jovinian. ch. 14.