(1, 2) THESE prophetical words of Solomon are of great importance, as being a manifest prophecy of Christ's mingling water and wine in the chalice at his last supper; which at this day, the Catholic Church observes: but Protestants, counting it an idle ceremony, frame their translation accordingly; suppressing altogether this mixture or mingling, contrary to the true interpretation both of the Greek and Hebrew; as also, contrary to the ancient fathers' exposition of this place. "The Holy Ghost "The Holy Ghost (says St. Cyprian) by Solomon, foreshoweth a type of our Lord's sacrifice, of the immolated host of bread and wine; saying, Wisdom hath killed her hosts, she hath mingled her wine into the cup; come ye, eat my bread, and drink the wine that I have mingled for you." (a) Speaking of wine mingled (saith this holy doctor) he foreshoweth prophetically, the cup of our Lord mingled with water and wine. (b) St. Justin, from the same Greek word, calls it, xqaua; that is, (according to Plutarch) wine mingled with water so likewise does St. Irenæus. (c) See also the sixth general council, (d) treating largely hereof, and deducing it from the apostles and ancient fathers; and interpreting this Greek word by another equivalent, and more plainly signifying this mixture, viz., uyruvai.

(3) In this place, they very falsely translate and," instead of "or," contrary both to the Greek and Latin. And this they do on purpose, to infer a necessity of communicating under both kinds, as the conjunctive "and" may seem to do: whereas, by the disjunctive "or" it is evident, that we may communicate in one kind only; as was, in divers cases, the practice of the primitive church; as also of the apostles themselves. (Act. ii. 42, and xx. 7.)

But the practice of our Saviour is the best witness of his doctrine: who, sitting at the table at Emaus (e) with two of his disciples, " took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and did reach to them." By which St. Augustine and (f) the other fathers, understand the eucharist: where no mention is made of wine, or the chalice: but the reaching of the bread, their knowing him, and his vanishing away, so joined, that not any time is left for the benediction and consecration

of the chalice.

In the primitive times," it was the custom to administer the blood only to children," as St. Cyprian tells us and, both he and Tertullian say, "that it was their practice, most commonly, to reserve the body of Christ;" which, as Eusebius witnesses, "they were wont to give alone

(a) Ep. 63, 2.

(b) Apol. 2, in fine.

(c) St. Irenæus, lib. 5, prop. Init.

(d) Concil. Constantinop., 6, Can. 32,

Luke xxiv. 30; Lib. 3, de Consensu.

Hier. Epitaph. Paulæ. Beda. Theophylact. St. Cyprian. 1. de lapsis, n. 10; Tertul., 1. 2, ad Ux., n. 4; Euseb. Eccl. Hist., 1. 6 c. 36; St. Basil, Ep. ad Cæsariam Patritiam,

to sick people, for their viaticum." Also, "the holy hermits in the wilderness, commonly received and reserved the blessed body alone, and not the blood," as St. Basil tells us.

For whole Christ is really present, under either kind, as Protestants themselves have confessed read their words in Hospinian, (g) a Protestant, who affirms, "that they believed and confessed whole Christ to be really present, exhibited and received under either kind; and therefore under the only form of bread: neither did they judge those to do evil, who communicated under one kind." And Luther, as alleged "that it is not needful to by Hospinian, (h) says, both kinds; but as one alone sufficeth, the church has power of ordaining only one, and the people ought to be content therewith, if it be ordained by the church." Whence it is granted, that, "it is lawful for the Church of God, upon just occasions, absolutely to determine or

give

limit the use thereof."

(4, 5) To translate temple instead of altar, is so gross a corruption, that had it not been done thrice immediately within two chapters, one would have thought it had been done through oversight, and not on purpose. The name of altar both in Hebrew and Greek, and by the custom of all people, both Jews and Pagans, implies and imports a sacrifice. We therefore, with respect to the sacrifice of Christ's body and blood, say altar, rather than table, as all the ancient fathers were accustomed to speak and write; though, with respect to eating and drinking Christ's body and blood, it is also

called a table. But because Protestants will have only a communion of bread and wine, or a supper, and no sacrifice; therefore, they call it table only, and abhor the word altar, as papiswhich was made when they were throwing down tical; especially in the first translation of 1562, altars throughout England.

(6) Where the name altar should be, they suppress it; and here, where it should not be, they put it in their translations; and that thrice in one chapter; and that either on purpose to dishonour Catholic altars, or else to save the credit of their communion table; as fearing, lest the name of Bell's table might redound to the dishonour of their communion table. Wherein

it is to be wondered, how they could imagine it any disgrace either for table or altar, if the idols also had their tables and altars; whereas St. Paul so plainly names both together: "The table of our Lord, and the table of devils. (i) If the table of devils, why not the table of Bell? By this we see, how light a thing it was with them to corrupt the scriptures in those days.

ST. AUGUSTINE affirms, "That in the divine scripture several sacrifices are mentioned, some before the manifestation of the New Testament, &c., and another now, which is agreeable to this manifestation, &c., and which is demonstrated not only from the evangelical, but also from the prophetical writings." (a) A truth most certain; our sacrifice of the New Testament being most clearly proved from the sacrifice of Melchizedek in the Old Testament; of whom, and whose sacrifice, it is said, "But Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine; for he was the priest of God most high, and he blessed him," &c. And to make the figure agree to the thing figured, and the truth to answer the figure of Christ, it is said, "Our Lord hath sworn, and it shall not repent him; thou art a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchizedek." In the New Testament, Jesus is made an "high priest, according to the order of Melchizedek." For according to the similitude of Melchizedek, there arises another priest, who continues for ever, and has an everlasting priesthood. Whence it is clearly proved, that Melchizedek was a priest, and offered bread and wine as a sacrifice; therein prefiguring Christ our Saviour, and his sacrifice daily offered in the church, under the forms of bread and wine, by an everlasting priesthood.

But the English Protestants, on purpose to abolish the holy sacrifice of the mass, did not only take away the word altar out of the scripture; but they also suppressed the name priest, in all their translations, turning it into elder; (b) well knowing that these three, priest, sacrifice, and altar, are dependents and consequents one of another; so that they cannot be separated. If there be an external sacrifice, there

must be an extenal priesthood to offer it, and an altar to offer the same upon. So Christ himself being a priest, according to the order of Melchizedek, had a sacrifice, "his body;" and an altar, "his cross," on which he offered it. And because he instituted this sacrifice, to continue in his church for ever, in commemoration and representation of his death, therefore, did he ordain his apostles priests, at his last supper; where and when he instituted the holy order of priesthood or priests, (saying, hoc facite, "do this,") to offer the self-same sacrifice in a mystical and unbloody manner,

until the world's end.

But our new pretended reformers have made the scriptures quite dumb, as to the name of any such priest or priesthood as we now speak of; never so much as once naming priest, unless

(a) St. August., Ep. 49, q. 3.

(b) Psal. cx. 4; Heb. vi. 20, and chap. vii. 15, 17, 24.

when mention is made either of the priests of the Jews, or the priests of the Gentiles, especially when such are reprehended or blamed in the holy scripture; and in such places they are sure to name priests in their translations, on purpose to make the very name of priests odious among the common ignorant people. Again, they have also the name priests, when they are taken for all manner of men, women, or children, that offer internal and spiritual sacrifices; whereby they would falsely signify, that there are no other priests in the law of grace. As Whitaker, (c) one of their great champions, freely avouches, directly contrary to St. Augustine, who, in one brief sentence, distinguishes priests, properly so called in the church; and priests, as it is a common name to all Christians. This name then of priest and priesthood, properly so called, as St. Augustine says, they wholly suppress; never translating the word Presbyteros“ priests," but "elders ;" and that with so full and general consent in all their English Bibles, that, as the Puritans plainly confess, and Mr. Whitgift denies it not, a man would wonder to see how careful they are, that the people may not once hear of the name of any such priest in all the holy scriptures: and even in their latter translations, though they are ashamed of the word "eldership," yet they have not the power to put the English word priesthood, as they ought to do, in the text, that the vulgar may understand it, but rather the Greek word presbytery: such are the poor shifts they are glad to make use of.

So blinded were these innovators with heresy, that they could not see how the holy scriptures, drawn several words from their profane and the fathers, and ecclesiastical custom, have common signification, to a more peculiar and ecclesiastical one; as Episcopus, which in Tully is an "overseer," is a bishop in the New Testament; so the Greek word, zagotovε, signifying "ordain," they translate as profanely, as if they Athens, rather than the holy scriptures; when, were translating Demosthenes, or the Laws of as St. Hierom tells them, (d) it signifieth holy orders," which is done not only by prayer Clericorum ordinationem; that is, "giving of according to St. Paul to Timothy, "Impose of the voice, but by imposition of the hands," hands suddenly on no man ;" that is, "Be not hasty to give holy orders." In like manner they translate minister for deacon, ambassador for apostle, messenger for angel, &c., leaving, I say, the ecclesiastical use of the word for the original signification.

(c) Whitaker, p. 199; St. Aug., lib. 20, de Civit. Dei, cap. 10. See the Puritan's Reply, p 159, and Whitgift's Defence against the Puritans, p. 722. (d) St. Hierom. in cap. lviii. Esai.