The works of the pious and profoundly-learned Joseph Mede, B.D., sometime fellow of Christ's Colledge in Cambridge

DISCOURSE LI.

PSALM 50. 14.

Offer unto God praise, and pay thy Vows unto the most High.

THE Book of Psalms is a Book of Prophecies; witness the frequent citing of them by our Lord and his Apostles; witness the Surname of King David, who being the penman of no other but this Book is styled the * 1.1 Prophet David. I say the Psalms are Prophecies, and that both Con∣cerning Christ himself, and also the Church which should be after him. Concerning Christ himself it needs must be; Saith he in the Gospel, (Luke 24. 24.) These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, That all things must be fulfilled which were written of me in the Law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the PSALMS: and more especially concerning his Beginning, * 1.2 S. Paul quotes the words of the Psalm speaking in the Person of God, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee; and again concerning his Office,* 1.3 Thou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedek. Now for the Church of the Gospel and calling of the Gentiles, as many parts of many Psalms do foretel thereof, so is this whole Psalm a description of the same; 1. What manner of one it should be; 2. What worship God would establish therein. For the first, it should be Catholick and gathered out of all Nations, The God of Gods (saith the beginning of the Psalm v. 1, 2.) even the Lord hath spoken, and called the Earth from the rising of the Sun to the going down thereof. Out of Sion, the perfection of beauty, hath God shined: Agreeable to the words of the * 1.4 Gospel it self, That it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day; And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his Name among all Nations, beginning at Ierusalem: and that it did begin at Ierusalem where Christ him∣self began, where the Holy Ghost came down in cloven tongues: So out of Sion God shined, our God came and kept not silence; for a fire came before him, and a tempest moved round about him.

Now for the Worship and service which Christ would establish in his new reformed

Church, it concerns either the First or the Second Table. For the First Table,* 1.5 it tells us What Offerings God would abolish, namely, all Typical Offerings or all the Offer∣ings of fire; and then What Offerings he would accept, to wit, the Offerings of Praise and Prayer; Offer unto God Praise, and pay thy Vows unto the most High. For the Second Table, it commands a right and upright conversation, from the 16. verse unto the last; and the last is the Summe or a brief summary of both Tables, He that offereth Praise, shall glorifie me; and to him that disposeth his way aright, will I shew the Salva∣tion of the Lord.

But to return again to the reformation of the First Table, whereof my Text is the Affirmative part: where (as I said) we are told both What Offerings God will not have offered, and What Offerings he requireth. He will no longer have any Typical Offerings, any Offerings of, fire, or bloudy Sacrifices: For* 1.6 I will not (saith he) reprove thee for thy Sacrifices or thy burnt-offerings; I will take no bullock out of thine house, nor goats out of thy folds; For all the beasts of the forrests are mine, and the beasts on a thousand hills. If I were hungry, I would not tell thee; for the world is mine and all that therein is. Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the bloud of goats? Nevertheless he still requireth Offer∣ings of Thanksgiving, and a Present when we come to pray unto him: so faith my Text, Offer unto God Praise, &c. And so here is an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as S. Paul saith in a like case,* 1.7 He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

But as in Typical Speeches it often comes to pass that the things which are spoken are true both in the Type and Antitype;* 1.8 as that in Hosea 11. 1. Out of Egypt have I called my Son, was in some sense true both of Christ and Israel; and that in Exod. 12. 46. Thou shalt not break a bone thereof, was true literally both of Christ and the Paschal lamb; and that in Psal. 22. 18. They parted my garments among them, was true figuratively in David,* 1.9 and literally in Christ: Even so it comes to pass in Prophecies, and namely in this, That it so foretells of things to come, that it concerned also the time present; it foretells the estate of the Church in the Gospel, and yet meant something that con∣cerned the present Church of the Law. To which purpose we must frame the sense after this manner, That God even then did not so much regard the Offerings of fire and Expiatory sacrifices as he did the Offerings of Praise and Thanksgiving, because the first were Ceremonial, the other Moral; the first, their End was changeable, the other, everlasting. So that in respect of the Catholick Church the words of my Text are an Antithesis or Aphaeresis with the former, I will in no sort have any Typical and Bloudy Offerings, but only Offerings of Praise and Prayer: But in respect of the Legal Church or the Church of the Law they are a Protimesis or Estimation, I require not so much any Typical offerings, as I do that you should offer unto me Praise, and pay your Vows unto the most High. For so when God saith elsewhere,* 1.10 I will have mercy and not sa∣crifice; it is no Antithesis, but a Protimesis, that I had rather have mercy than sacrifice. So again Matth. 6. 19. Lay not up for your selves treasures upon earth, but lay up for your selves treasures in heaven; this is no Antithesis or Aphaeresis, as though Christ would not have us at all provide for things of this life; but a Protimesis, he would not have us take so much care for this life as for the life to come.

The Scope therefore of my Text is, to shew What kind of Offerings God did chiefly accept under the Law, and doth only require in the Gospel; to wit, two sorts of Offer∣ings, Eucharistical, and Euctical or Votal. Eucharistical Offerings are such whose End is Thanksgiving to God for Benefits received, which are here termed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Of∣ferings of Praise. Euctical I call such as are made to God upon occasion of suit we have unto him, that is, when we come to pray before him, that he might accept our supplications and we find favour in his sight. And this is performed two manner of ways; either by promise if God shall hear us and grant our petition, which is called a Vow; or by actual exhibition at the time we do pray unto him. An example of the first kind is that of Iacob;* 1.11 If the Lord shall be with me and bring me back again, of all I have, the Tenth will I give unto him. The second was much used in the first times of the Christian Church, and of it in the Law we understand chiefly that Commandment, That no man should appear before the Lord empty; that is, Let no man that comes to pray before the Lord appear empty-handed.* 1.12 But because the first was very ordinary among the Iews, my Text by a Trope only names it in stead of the whole kind of Eu∣ctical offerings. Pay thy Vows, that is, when in praying before me thou shalt vow a gift to me or mine, if I shall hear thee; or at thy prayer dost exhibit the same before me, that thou mightest find favour in my sight; such Offerings are well pleasing unto me, such Offerings will I accept at thine hands: Offer therefore unto me praise, and pay thy vows unto the most High.

This last word [most High] will serve us in stead of a Reason why God should re∣quire this kind of service at our hands, Because he is the most High God: Offer unto God an Offering of Thanksgiving, because he is the most High God, that is, the chief∣est and highest Cause of all that thou hast received: Offer unto God, when thou hast a suit unto him, because he is the most High God, that is, the Lord of Lords, the highest Lord; and therefore it doth little beseem thee to appear before him without a present, when thou wouldest do it unto thine earthly Lord, if thou hadst a suit unto him.

Now also the Lord, as he is the most High God, so lie ever was and ever shall be the most High; and therefore this kind of Offering is due unto God naturally and perpetual∣ly. Therefore both Iew and Gentile must offer unto God Praise, and make and pay their Vows unto the most High. For these are Offerings made to God for a cause un∣changeable, our Subjection and his Greatness; our receipt of daily benefits and his daily showers of blessings. These therefore even among the Iews and under the Law he did accept without any regard of Type, simply and for themselves; and these among the Gentiles he only accepts, when all the rest are quite abolished. Those other he rejects, because Christ, who was then to suffer and to be offered, is not now to be offered any more: These he will still accept, because the most High God then is the most High God still and shall be evermore.

HAVING briefly shewn the scope and meaning of these words, and what these Offerings of Praise and Votal offerings are which God did chiefly accept in the Law, and will only admit in the Gospel; there remain yet in my purpose these things to be treat∣ed of.

• 1. To distinguish this Moral kind of Offerings from the rest in use under the Law,* 1.13 I will take a short Survey of all the Offerings then used.
• 2. I will give some infallible marks whereby we may know this kind of Offerings from those whose End was to figure and represent things to come.
• 3. I will bring some Reasons to prove, That the main End of those Offerings I call Eucharistical and Votal was not Ceremonial but Moral.
• 4. Lastly, I will shew how far and in what sort these Eucharistical and Votal Offer∣ings have been used in the first ages of the Church, specially about the holy Sacra∣ment and at the celebration of the Lord's Supper: and how the blind ignorance of af∣ter-times turned them into ••xpiatory Sacrifices, which were only a real Thanksgiving and a kind of real Praying unto God.

To begin therefore with the First.* 1.14 All the Offerings in the Law were either Oblati∣ones Sanctae simply Holy, or Sanctae Sanctarum most Holy, or Holy of holies. This divi∣sion is founded in the Scripture it self, and without this division it is impossible either to bring the multitude of Offerings into method, or to understand the End, Scope and Use of them aright. The Holy Offerings are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Terumoth, which we tran∣slate Heave-offerings; the Holy of holies or most Holy Offerings are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉* 1.15 Cor∣banim. And the Scripture is so precise in these words, as I dare affirm though one of them be used sixty times, they are never confounded; but Terumoth is only given to Offerings simply Holy, and Corbanim only to those who were Sanctae Sanctarum or Holy of holies

Now for the reason of this difference of Holy and Holy of holies,* 1.16 it is this. The Heave-offering is called simply Holy, because it was only consecrate to God, and had no other Holiness but this. The Corban is called Holy of holies, because it was not only consecrate to God, as was the other; but was also a Shadow and Type of Holy things to come: and hence it had a priviledge that whatsoever it should touch, that should be Holy also, as we may see Exod. 29. 37. & chap. 30. 29. Which was a My∣stery of that Holy one who by the union of Faith should one day sanctifie us and what∣soever is ours, as it is Heb. 10. verse 10, 14.

The Corban therefore,* 1.17 or the most Holy Offering I define, An Offering of fire, figu∣ring the satisfaction which Christ was one day to perform to God for us. And therefore the faithful Iew was to present this Corban before God, and lay his hand upon it, as it were presenting unto God Christ who was to come, and apprehending him by the hand of Faith. But the Priest alone was to offer it, and to eat up whatsoever remain∣ed from the fire, and that* 1.18 in the Holy place; that so the Sacrifice it self being turn∣ed into the Sacrificer, might foreshew that our great Priest and great Sacrifice should be one and the same; that is, that Christ should offer himself for us to God his Fa∣ther, and that he should do it in the Holy City whereon the name of God was cal∣led.

Now every Corban or most Holy Offering was of two parts or (if you will) two kinds, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Zebach I define a Corban or a most Holy Offering,* 1.19 where by the slaughter and shedding of the bloud of Beasts was figured the Expiation of sin to be wrought by the death and passion of Christ to come. For our Expiation could not be wrought but by death and the effusion of bloud; and therefore God here made choice of Beasts for Types, because they were capable of death and shedding of bloud. This Offering is by a special name called The bloudy Sacrifice, and the LXX in Amos 5. 22. turn it * 1.20 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, both properly and alluding to the word Zebach: the Latines well call it Hostia and Victima.

* 1.21 Mincha was a Corban for the most part joyned to a Zebach or Bloudy Sacrifice, where by the burning and ascending of inanimate things, as Meats and Drinks, was sha∣dowed the Obedience and Merits of Christ to come, which God would accept for our want of Obedience. By Obedience here I understand Christ's Active obedience, whereby he fulfilled the Law for us, not by his unvaluable Death, but by a blameless Life; for which of you (saith he) convinceth me of sin? Here therefore was no need of Beasts for Types, but Meats and Drinks;* 1.22 for godly works are as it were Meat and Drink to pre∣serve that life which is according to Godliness. This Corban we turn the Meat-and-Drink-offerings, others Munus; the Gentiles called it Libum. But I said, This Of∣fering was commonly adjoyned to the Zebach or Bloudy Sacrifice; for sometimes it is separate from it. For to this Mincha I refer the holy Incense which was within the Temple, which figured that continual sweet favour and Incense of the Merits and Obedience which Christ presents unto his Father in a Temple not made with hands, that is, in Heaven.

* 1.23 Again, both Zebach and Mincha, the Bloudy Sacrifice with its Meat-and-Drink-Offering, were of differing kinds, and for differing Ends. For either kind was Simple or Diverse. Simple I call that which all of it was most holy, and the whole was to shadow out the Satisfaction of Christ. And this was either for Internal sins, or for External. For Internal sins, that is, the sins of our‖ 1.24 Hearts, Thoughts and Affections was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Holocaust or Burnt-offering. For External sins or evil deeds were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Sin-offering and the Trespass-offering, as we call them:* 1.25 the one (if I am not deceived) for Sins against the First Table, to wit 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or the Trespass-offering; the other for sins of the Second Table. But because our In∣ternal sins or sins of Infirmity are peccata jugia, continual and daily sins, therefore the Holocaust or Burnt-offering was* 1.26 continual and daily offered; the Sin-offering and Trespass-offering were not so: and yet whensoever they were offered, they were offered with a Burnt-offering; to shew that our Evil works cannot be expiated and made pure, unless the Heart, the fountain whence they spring, be also purged.

A Diverse Sacrifice or Varium Sacrificium I call that which was not wholy most Holy,* 1.27 neither was all of it to figure the Offering of Christ to come: So that it was partly holy, and partly most holy. Such a one was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or the Peace-offering, which I define A Cor∣ban, part whereof was burnt upon the Altar, as in other Sacrifices, but the remainder and greater part was eaten by the faithful people who brought it; that so their Sacrifice by be∣ing turned into their bodies nourishment, might be a Sign of their incorporation into Christ to come, who was the true Sacrifice for sin. Here that which was eaten by the People was not most Holy, for then had it belonged only to the Priest: but it was a Sacrament and a Communion of that Sacrifice which was offered, and signified Christ, whose Bloud was to be shed and Body broken for their atonement. Rightly therefore was it called a Sacrifice of Peace, as being a Ceremony or Sacrament of Peace and Communion with Christ Iesus, and by him with God the Father.

The Greeks commonly call it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, an Eucharistical sacrifice, it being to be celebrated with both oral and real Thanksgiving to God; as for the same reason our Sacrament of Peace is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Eucharist, which our Saviour Christ hath ordained in stead of that Eucharistical Sacrifice under the Law. And of this kind were the ordinary Sacrifices of the Gentiles, of which the Christians were forbidden to eat, because they who in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper had communion with Christ already come, (as the Iews in the Peach-offerings had communion with Christ who was to come) might have no peace and communion with Devils, as the Greeks had in their sacrifice; as S. Paul (after he had compared these three together) concludes,

1 Cor. 10. 21. Ye cannot drink the Cup of the Lord, and the Cup of Devils; ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's Table, and of the Table of Devils. Out of which place and the Epistle to the Hebrews you may gather all that I have said hitherto of the Vse and Ends of the Corbanim or most Holy Offerings. This affinity of the Eucharistical sacrifice with the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper moved the ancient Christians to frame the Office of the Lord's Supper as near as could be unto the Office of the Eucharistical Sacrifice; * 1.28 as might be easily shewn in most particulars.

BUT now will I leave The most holy Offerings, and come to Those which had but a single holiness, which I said before were called Terumoth or Heave-offerings, more seldom 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tenuphoth or Wave-offerings; both from the manner of offering them, which was not by Fire, as in the most Holy, but by holding up or shaking them before the Lord.

A Terumah therefore or Heave-offering I define thus,* 1.29 An Offering made unto God of that we have received, in way of thankfulness or acknowledgement of his dominion over the whole earth; or thus more shortly, An Offering made only unto the praise and ho∣nour of God: and therefore it is Levit. 19. 24. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sanctum laudationum, an holy thing of praise, or an offering of praise. And to this purpose are those words of David unto God, 1 Chron. 29. 11, 12, 13, 14. whenas himself and the Princes of Israel had offered an huge Terumah of Gold and Silver for the building of the Temple; Thine, O Lord, (saith he) is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victo∣ry, and majesty: for all that is in heaven and in earth is thine. Thine is the Kingdom, O Lord, and thou art exalted as Head above all. Both riches and honour come of thee, and thou reignest over all—Now therefore, our God, we thank and praise (namely, by this Heave-offering) thy glorious Name—For all things come of thee, and of thine own hand we have given thee.

Now the Terumah or Heave-offering was either Definite or Indefinite.* 1.30 A Definite Heave-offering was the Tenth of all increase; and this alone was certain, both in regard of the things to be offered, and the measure according to which they were to be of∣fered. The Indefinite Terumah was either Commanded, or Free. That which was Commanded was either General, as the First-fruits; or Special,* 1.31 as the Heave-offering of the breast and shoulder of the Peace-offerings, and of one loaf of the Meat-offering of the same; and these the Greeks call fitly 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.* 1.32 The Freewill-offering or voluntary Heave-offering was either more, or less solemn. The most so∣lemn and usual was that which the Hebrews call Terumah-gedola which indeed was or∣dinary, but I think no where absolutely commanded. Voluntary Heave-offerings less usual were the Offerings of Gold, Silver, Land, and whatsoever else they might give unto the use of the Lord, his Temple and Ministers.

AND thus have we seen all the Kinds of the Offerings in the Law, both holy and most holy; and I think there is no Offering to be found but it belongs to some of these I have named: either to the Corbanim, the most Holy; or to the Terumoth, which were simply holy.

Concerning this last, which we translate Heave-offerings, there remain two things to be treated of: 1. Their Morality; 2. The practice of this kind by the ancient Church in the Office of the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper.

Concerning their Morality or Moral condition I will shew three things.

• 1. That they were not Typical.
• 2. That they were Offerings Eucharistical and Euctical, that is, addressed or used to Thanksgiving and Prayer, according to the meaning of my Text.
• 3. That this kind of Offering is required at the hands of Christians.

[unspec 1] For the First,* 1.33 That Heave-offerings were not Typical, I argue

• 1. From their distinction from the rest, as being always simply holy, never holy of holies. The force of this Argument I frame thus; If all the Oblationes ignitae or Fire-offerings are therefore called Sanctae sanctarum, Holy of holies, because they were not only consecrate to God, but further Signs and Types of holy things to come, and so had a double Holiness, one of Sanctification, another of Signification; then the Heave-offer∣ings, which never are nor ought to be so called, were only simply holy, but no Types of Holy things to come: But the first is true, neither can other reason be given of this distinction: Therefore Heave-offerings were no Types of things to come.
• 2. My second Reason shall be from the differing usage of Terumoth from the most Holy offerings. For the most Holy Offerings were to be eaten only of Priests by con∣dition, of Males by sex, and in no place but the Holy place; and that because Christ, whose Types they were, was to be a Priest, no ministring Levite; a Male, no Fe∣male; and was to offer and make his own Body a Sacrifice for sin in no other part of

• the world but the Holy city of Ierusalem: But as for Heave-offerings, not only Priests, but every Levite, Singer and Door-keeper; not only Males, but the Wives and Daughters of the Levites; not only Virgins, but even Widows and divorced wo∣men; not only free Israelites, but even their Slaves and Bondmen who were not of the Sons of Israel; and not only in the Holy place, but in every place, they ate them. The truth hereof is certain and obvious through all the Law of Moses, without any one little crossing it. I will not trouble you therefore with quotations, but frame my second Reason after this manner; If none may eat of the most Holy Offerings but only Priests, only Males, and only in the Holy place; because only Priests, only Males, and of all places only the Sanctuary or holy place were Types of Christ: then surely those Offerings which every under-Levite ate of, every Levite's wife and daughter, widows and divorced women, every Levite's slave and bondman, and that in every place, those Offerings doubtless cannot be Typical or Signs of Christ or any thing proper to him; unless we affirm That every Levite, Levite's Wife, Daughter, Wi∣dow, divorced woman, yea Slaves and Bondmen, and every corner in the Land of Canaan, were Types of Christ.
• 3. To this we may add in the third place, That there is no one word to be found in the whole Scripture concerning the abolishment of Terumah or the Heave-offering: but of the most Holy in express terms it is said Dan. 9. 27. That the Messias 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should cause to cease the Zebach and Mincha, that is, all the Offerings of fire or Holy of holies. And S. Paul, Heb. 9. 9, 10. that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sacrifices and Gifts were ordained 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; until the time of reformation: he saith not so of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which word the LXX. use almost every where for the simply holy Terumah or Heave-offering; whereas by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they translate Corban, Ze∣bach and Mincha, according to* 1.34 S. Paul's own quotation out of Psalm 40. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zebach and Mincha thou would∣est not, that is, no Offering of fire, no Corban or most Holy; and more specially of the several kinds, A burnt-offering and an offering for sin thou requiredst not.
• 4. And hence it is in the fourth place, That God no where rejects the Heave-offer∣ing or any one kind thereof; but Zebach and Mincha almost as often as they are na∣med in the Prophets or Psalms: As in this 50. Psalm, ver. 8, 13. I will not reprove thee for thy Zebachim nor thy burnt-offerings: Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the bloud of goats? And in Psalm 40. 6. which S. Paul before quoted for the abolishment of Typical Offerings, Zebach and Mincha thou wouldest not, a burnt-offering and an of∣fering for sin thou requiredst not. And Ier. 7. 21, &c. Put your burnt-offerings unto your Zebachim—For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt concerning Holocausts and Zebachim: But this I commanded them, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; and walk ye in all the ways I commanded you, that it may be well with you. He that will, may look further in Psal. 51. 16. Esay 1. 11, &c. Ier. 6. 20. Hos. 6. 6. Amos 5. 22. where we may hear God still rejecting and disdaining Holocausts, Zebachim and Min∣cha, Sh••lamim or Peace-offerings, the whole rabble of Corbanim or most holy offer∣ings; but no word of Terumah. What force of reason this may bear with those who consider that these appellations of Offerings are never confounded in the whole Law of Moses or History of Israel, and therefore not like to be in these places only, I know not; I am sure Terumah is about sixty times found in the Bible, and no where taken for an Offering of fire or most Holy: Nor can it any where be shewn that Zebach and Mincha are put for any other Offerings but Offerings of fire, whereof I have already shewn Zebach was one part and Mincha the other.

And therefore I dare conclude, That Heave-offerings, called Terumoth and simply ho∣ly, howsoever many of them might be Ecclesiastical or Iudicial sacred in regard of some circumstance, yet in their proper nature and principal end they were no Types of things to come.

AND so I come to the Second thing I propounded, to shew That these Offerings [unspec 2] were Eucharistical and Euctical,* 1.35 that is, their formalis ratio and essence consisted in Thanksgiving and Prayer. For an Offering is then Eucharistical, when we give some∣thing unto the Lord's use in way of Thankfulness for Blessings received; an Offering is then Euctical, when we give something to the Lord's use, to the end that he seeing our Obe∣dience and Thankfulness in honouring him, might grant us a further Blessing we sue for: And this is either de praesenti, or de futuro: De praesenti, when our Of∣fering is presently exhibited; De futuro, when we bind our selves then to do it when we obtain our suit: And this is called a Vow, differing from the other not in nature

but in time: and this special kind, because usual, my Text puts for the whole kind, Pay thy vows, &c. Further, here is to be noted, that as Thanksgiving is joyned with Prayer, so is the Gift for Thanksgiving joyned with a Gift for Prayer; Or the same Gift is first applied to Thanksgiving, and then to Prayer; that so as Thanksgiving is a mean to obtain by Prayer, so a Present of Thanksgiving for a former Benefit is a mean to obtain of God a favour.

Herein then consists the Nature of an Offering addressed to Prayer, not to merit the thing we ask, but to be an argument before God that he would hear us, because he hath promised in Christ to hear them who honour him. This is not then orare sa∣tisfactoriè, as the Papists do in their Mass, but only oblatorié. To pray satisfactoriè or meritoriè, is to offer a price worth the thing we ask for; To pray only oblatoriè, is to offer a motive or condition in regard of God's promise in Christ to obtain our suit; that is, to make as it were a visible or real Prayer. And such a Prayer were the Alms of Cornelius, Acts 10. of whom it is said, v. 4. That his Prayers and Alms were come up for a memorial before God.

Now before this Offering Euctical or Eucharistical can be complete,* 1.36 it must consist of three degrees or parts, Cordis, Oris, Operis, the Offering of the Heart, of the Mouth, and of the Hand. The Offering of the Heart is a Sursum Corda, the lifting up of our Hearts to God either to praise him, or to pray unto him. The Offering of our Mouth is to express the same with our tongues, and is called The* 1.37 Calves of our lips. The Offering of our Hand (which is properly call'd an Offering) is a Testimony of what our Heart conceives or Tongue can express, by honouring God with a Present of our substance. The first of these is the formalis ratio or that whereby the two last are sanctified; without it they are no Offerings, no Thanksgiving, no Prayer: But the last is hallowed by the two former; for a Sursum corda, the lifting up of our Hearts, and the profession of our Mouths, is that which makes our Gift an Offering, which without this Consecration is no Offering at all.

Hence it is that this kind of Offerings in regard of other Offerings is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not (as some have thought) from the thing offered,* 1.38 as though nothing were offered but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rationes or orationes; but from the manner of hallowing it, which was (as* 1.39 Iustin Martyr speaks) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by way of Prayer and Thanks∣giving. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not (as some have thought) opposed to a material offer∣ing, but to an offering earthly and terrenely sanctified, as were the Typical Sacrifices of the Law by Fire and Bloud; but this Offering is offered by no other Fire but the Fire of the Spirit, by no other Bloud than the precious drops of Prayer and Thanks∣giving. In brief, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is an Offering spiritually offered, not an offering only of the Spirit; it is opposed to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and [* 1.40 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not to a material and real offering: as it is easily to be seen in Iustin Martyr, Irenaeus, and the ancient Li∣turgies, who call the material offering of Bread and Wine for the Sacrament 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a reasonable and unbloudy Sacrifice. As the most Holy offerings were called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Fiery offerings, not because they offered only fire, but because that which was offered was done by fire: so are all these Heave-offerings called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, because they were offered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, meaning the manner, not the matter of the offering.

To come therefore to a conclusion. That the Heave-offerings were such Offerings as I have now described, it appears plainly in three principal sorts of them, First-fruits, Tithes, and Voluntary Heave-offerings. In First-fruits it appears by the Con∣fession which every one was to make who offered them, Deut. 26. 6, &c. When the Egyptians evil intreated us and afflicted us—and when we cried unto the Lord God of our fathers, the Lord heard our voice—and brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand and out-stretched arm—and he hath brought us into this place, and hath given us this land, even a land that floweth with milk and honey. And now behold, I have brought the First-fruits of the Land which thou, O Lord, hast given me. And (so saith the Text) thou shalt set them before the Lord thy God, and worship before the Lord thy God. Whither tend all these words but to a thankful acknowledgment and remembrance of the Blessings they had received from God in giving them so good a Land, and doing so great things for them?

And for Tithes, you may see in the same place what he was to say that offered them, namely,* 1.41 I have brought away the hallowed things out of mine house, and also have given them unto the Levite, and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, accord∣ing to all thy Commandments which thou hast commanded me—Look down (there∣fore) from thy holy habitation, from heaven,* 1.42 and bless thy people Israel, and the Land which thou hast given us, as thou swarest to our fathers, a Land that floweth with milk and honey. Here is an Euctical offering, an offering applied to Prayer; as if they had said, We honour thee, O Lord, with this part of our substance; that thou seeing our Obedience, mightest in mercy vouchsafe to look down from thy holy habitation, and bless us thy people, and the Land which thou hast given us.

I come now to the voluntary Heave-offering, of which we have a noble Pattern in that great Terumah of Gold and Silver which David and his Princes offered for the building of the Temple, in 1 Chron. 29. Where we shall find first Praise or Thanksgi∣ving, that is, an acknowledgment of God's Dominion, Power and Goodness, from which comes all the good we have; Thine, O Lord, (saith David ver. 11.) is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the Majesty; for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine—ver. 12. Both riches and honour come of thee, and thou reignest over all—ver. 13. Now therefore, our God, we thank thee, and praise thy glorious name. And afterwards he comes to Prayer (ver. 18, 19.) O Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel our fathers,—Give unto Solomon my son a perfect heart to keep thy Commandments, thy Testimonies and Statutes. I will add for a conclusion that of Nehemiah 13. 14. who being the Head and Ruler of his brethren when he com∣manded them to give the Heave-offering or portions of the Levites, it was as it were an Offering of his own, and therefore he applieth it Euctically, saying, Remember me, O my God, concerning this, and wipe not out my good deeds that I have done for the house of my God, and for the offices thereof.

AND now I come unto the third thing I propounded, That this kind of Offering [unspec 3] or Terumah (the essence and formalis ratio whereof consisted in Prayer and Thanksgi∣ving) was still required at the hands of Christians; and then afterward shall speak of the Practice of the ancient Church.

That these Offerings (as I may so speak) of visible Prayer and Thanksgiving are re∣quired at the hands of Christians, I prove

• 1. Because the inward worship of the Heart is still due, and therefore also the out∣ward so far as it was to be a Sign thereof: For what reason can be given why we should be still bound to honour God with the Praise and Prayer of our Hearts, yea and Mouth too, and should not be bound to do the same also by our Works and Deeds? Without doubt he that commands us to honour him with our whole Heart, with all our Mind, with all our Soul, and with all our Strength, would have us honour him in all the degrees of honour, with the honour of the Heart, of the Mouth and of the Hand; and howsoever the first of these be required simply, yet the other two are at least conveniently.
• 2. We know it is the Law of God,* 1.43 That no man should appear before him empty:* 1.44 And this is so natural, that we never almost come before a man, if we have a suit or would shew our selves thankful, but we think fit to honour him with a present, that we might find him the more favourable: Why should not God much more expect some fruits of our Obedience when we come into his pre∣sence; seeing he gives all things as Lord of all, not as a Steward to another; yea and of his free goodness, not as bound to give us any thing more than seems fit to his good will and pleasure? And that this Law was to have place in the Gospel as well as in the Law, it appears by S. Paul's decree concerning the Lord's day, which being the day wherein every Soul was publickly to present himself before the Lord to make his prayers and to give thanks unto his name; that * 1.45 this might not be done with empty hands, S. Paul gives order to all the Churches of Galatia and Corinth, That upon the first day of the week every one should lay by him in store, as God had prospered him, that is, he should give for pious uses accord∣ing to his ability. Thrice in the year (saith the Law, Deut. 16. 16.) shall eve∣ry male appear before the Lord, and no man shall appear empty. Once in a week (saith the New Testament) shall every Soul appear before the Lord, and no man shall appear empty. Deus non indiget eorum quae à nobis sunt, sed nos indigemus offerre aliquid Deo;—à nobis propter nos fieri vult, nè simus infructuosi; God stands not in need of any thing that is ours, but it is needful for us to present God with some Ob∣lation of our own—And it is not for any advantage to himself, that God would

• have this to be done by us; but for our own good and behoof, that we may not be in the number of unprofitable servants, saith* 1.46 Irenaeus, one of the most ancient Fathers, whose argument this is which I have brought; urged also by M. Bucer in his censure of our Liturgy.
• 3. My third Argument is something like unto the former. God is a King, and therefore to be honoured like a King. The proper honour of a King as a King is Tri∣bute, whereby his Subjects acknowledge his Supremacy and Dominion. God is a King, a King of Kings, as well now in the Gospel as ever in the Law; and therefore now as well as then to be honoured with a Tributary Offering. This reasoning is good,* 1.47 seeing God himself so reasoneth with his people; If I am a Father, (saith he) where is mine honour? if I am a Lord, where is my fear? Why may we not add in the same force of reason, If God be a King, where is his Tribute, the proper honour of a King? yea so proper to a King, that they are terms convertible in the Scripture, To be a King, and To receive Tribute or Presents of his Subjects; To acknowledge to be a King, and To bring Presents. For those sons of Belial (1 Sam. 10. 27.) which did not acknowledge Saul to be their King, are said to have brought him no Presents. And 2 Chron. 17. 5. the Holy Ghost useth no other words to signifie that Iehoshaphat was acknowledged and confirmed King of Iudah but these, That all Iudah brought him Presents. We know the discipline of the Persians was, That none might come before their King without a Gift, were it never so small; and therefore the Peasant* 1.48 Sinaetas offered Artaxerxes an handful of water, having nothing else to give him. And this the Magi, who came from the East to worship Christ, knew well enough, and therefore they offered him Presents of Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh; for they came to worship a King, and worshipped him like a King:* 1.49 Where is he (say they) that is born King of the Iews? for we have seen his Star in the East, and are come to worship him. Nay the very reason why we give Tribute unto Kings is because they are God's Ministers: So saith S. Paul, Rom. 13. 6. For this cause pay you Tribute; for they are God's Ministers. Prop∣ter quod unumquodque est tale, illud magis est tale; If this be due unto the Vicegerent, what is due unto the Lord himself? I conclude therefore in the words of Irenaeus, * 1.50 Offerre igitur Deo oportet primitias ejus creature, We ought therefore to offer unto God an Heave-offering of his creatures; for so the Lxx, and from them all ancient Writers, use 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which the Latines turn Primitiae, not meaning that which in Hebrew is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but every Terumah or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Irenaens a little before hath this, Per munas enim erga Regem & hono•• & affectio ostenditur; For the Present shews what affection and esteem the giver hath for the King he honoureth therewith: and afterwards, Sicut & Moses ait, Non apparebis vacuus ante conspectum Domini Dei tui; Even as Mo∣ses saith, Thou shalt not appear before the Lord thy God empty.

But before I go from hence, it shall not be amiss to distinguish the use of this word Offering taken materially; for our writers in the point of Christian Oblations speak somewhat confusedly thereof. An Offering therefore is taken properly or analogically. An Offering properly taken is a work of the First Table; an Offering analogically taken is a work of the Second Table, otherwise called Eleemosyna or Alms. The first is done to God immediately, and is when we give ought to the use and maintenance of his Worship. The Second is done to our Neighbour immediately, as when we supply his wants out of our abundance: and this is done to God only mediately; unless it be done unto the stranger, fatherless, and widow; for they in the old Law were in a special manner Cura Dei God's care, together with the Levite. Of these two kinds I have hitherto extended the first; though I exclude not Alms, so far as God is wor∣shipped by the good we do unto our brother.

I COME now unto the last point I proposed, namely, The Practice of the anci∣ent Church in the use of this Offering or Oblatory Praise and Thanksgiving at the celebrati∣on of the Lord's Supper; and here I will shew first, What their custom was; secondly, What ground and reason they had for the same.

To begin with the first. Among the ancient Christians the whole Office of this Sacrament, I mean the whole Body of Rites and Actions about the same, consisted of three parts, namely, as they are distinguished by* 1.51 Ignatius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was an act of Oblatory praise and prayer by addressing or applying Bread and Wine unto the use of the Sacrament, and other Gifts to the use of God's service. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Sacrifice, the consecration or mystical changing of Bread and Wine thus sancti∣fied into the Body and Bloud of our Lord Iesus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was the eating or recei∣ving of the same in sign of Communion with Christ and all the fruits of his Incarnati∣on; whence Nazianzen defines this Sacrament 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the

Communion of the Incarnation of God. To these three acts answer three words: To 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or the Oblation, hallowed Bread and hallowed Wine; but no more: To 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or the Consecration, the Body and Bloud of the Lord: To the third, the Com∣munion of the Body and Bloud of the Lord. The first act of common Bread and Wine made holy and sanctified Bread and Wine,* 1.52 called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, the Bread and Wine of Blessing and Thanksgiving: The second act of holy Bread and Wine made most holy, that is, holy signs of the Lord's Body and Bloud: The third of holy signs in general holy signs in special applied to the soul of each receiver. The first was done by being used to Prayer and Thanksgiving:* 1.53 The second by pronoun∣cing the words of Institution at the breaking of the Bread and pouring of the Wine: The third by receiving it with Amen or So be it. The first and last were acts of Priest and People; the second of the Priest alone. Thus was there as it were a mutual com∣merce between God and the People; the People giving unto God, and God again unto his People: the People giving a small Thanksgiving, but receiving a great Bles∣sing; offering Bread, but receiving the Body; offering Wine, but receiving the my∣stical Bloud of Christ Iesus.

I know that the names of these are often confounded, all being used for the whole, and often one for another; but especially the Sacrament it self is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Oblation or Offering, by a Metonymic of the matter, because the matter was offered Bread and offered Wine. For the same reason is it called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Eucharist, because the matter of it was Eucharistia, Bread of Blessing and Thanksgiving; not, as some think, because the End thereof is Thanksgiving. It is called also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Sacri∣fice, I think of the matter also, which was taken out of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 though some will have it so called because it was a sign of Christ's sacrifice.

But I return again unto the Oblation, which (as you have seen) was as it were a Prologue unto the Sacrament, and had the full nature of the Heave-offering, which I have so long spoken of.

First it was in every part complete, having all the degrees or parts of a true offer∣ing, namely, of the Heart, of the Tongue, and of the Hand; all formally expressed in the ancient Liturgies. For when the people began to bring their Offering unto the Altar,* 1.54 the Priest was to say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Lift up your hearts; to which they an∣swered, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, We lift them up unto the Lord: This was the use of those Versicles in ancient time. When this was done, then came the calves of their lips offered both to Praise and Prayer.

• 1. To Praise and Thanksgiving. When the Priest cried, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Let us give thanks unto the Lord; the people answered, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, It is meet and just we should do so: and so they went on to give God thanks, or to make a thank∣ful remembrance of the Creation of the World and all things therein for the use of man, for the Providence of God in governing the same, for the Oeconomy of his Church afore the Law and in the Law; recounting in brief as they went the principal Histories of the Bible in all these particulars. This part of Oblatory Thanksgiving is now called the Preface in the Mass, though something diverse from the ancient.

But because Christ had commanded that in this service they should chiefly remember him, they made in the next place a large Thanksgiving unto God, that he so loved the world as to give his own Son for the same, that the Son of God would abase himself so low as to take upon him the nature of sinful man, and by his death and passion to redeem us out of the jaws of death and pit of hell. And this is now for the greater part called The Hymn: and here ended The offering of Praise and Thanksgiving.

• 2. Next comes the Offering of Prayer,* 1.55 or Prayer with an Offering for Kings and Princes, the whole Catholick Church; and so along as we have it in our Litany, or in the Prayer for the whole state of Christ's Church: both which are beaten out of that mint. And our Prayer for the whole state of Christ's Church is yet Oblatory, if the Ru∣brick were observed, which enjoyns the Church-wardens to gather the Alms of the people, and then to make this Vniversal Prayer; and in the very beginning thereof we desire Almighty God to accept our Alms and to receive our Prayers. In no other sense did the ancient Church use their word [Offer] so often repeated in those Prayers, but that God would accept of their Obedience in thus honouring him, and so accord∣ing to his promise in Christ to hear their Prayers. And hence it is that sometimes they say,* 1.56 We offer, sometimes,* 1.57 We beseech thee; one expounding the meaning of the other. But this is now made to be the Canon of the Mass, and all this Offering of Prayer is turned into an Offering of Expiation for the quick and the dead. For this offering of Bread and Wine and Alms being out of use, the Priest could apply

• the word [Offer] to no other thing but the offering of Christ's Body and Bloud.

Thus have you seen as briefly as I could the Practice of the ancient Church in their offering of Praise afore the Sacrament; for after this was done, as ye have heard, then came the Sacrament, and then the Communion of the same.

NOW it remains I should shew What ground and reason they had for this Custom; which I will do briefly.

The First ground they seem to have had is from the Office of the Peace-offering or Eucharistical Sacrifice, because they were both of the like nature and same end; the Iews in the Eucharistical Sacrifice having communion with him who was to come, by eating of their Sacrifice, as we in this Sacrament have with him who is already come, by eating of his Mystical Body and Bloud under the forms of Bread and Wine: And because of this affinity they framed the office of the one like unto the office of the other. For in every Peace-offering there was first a Terumah of Praise and Thanks∣giving, both of* 1.58 animalia and cibaria: secondly, A part of this being reserved for the Priest's use, the rest was made a Sacrifice by sprinkling of bloud, and burning some part thereof upon the Altar as a Memorial of the whole: And in the third place, That which was saved from the fire, was eaten both of Priest and people. This may be seen in the Law of Peace-offerings and the offerings of Consecration and Purification, all being of the same Law.

According to this Pattern was framed the Office of the Sacrament: for in this also was first offered a Terumah of Praise and Prayer, some part of which being kept for some other holy use, the rest was consecrate into a Sacrament, and then eaten both of Priest and People.

The Second reason they have is from the first celebration of this Sacrament by Christ and his Apostles, which the Evangelists record thus, That Christ took Bread, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, having made a blessing and a thanksgiving, he said, Take, eat, This is my body which is broken for you; and then likewise of the Cup: and to both adds, Do this in remembrance of me. In these words of the Story we see three acts plainly expressed: 1. A Blessing or Thanksgiving; 2. A Consecration of a Sacra∣ment, This is my Body, &c. 3. A Communion or Receiving of the same, Take and eat. Now because after all this Christ adds, Do this in remembrance of me, or, As of∣ten as ye do this, do it in remembrance of me; it may be a question whether he means that all these acts should be done in remembrance of him, or only some one of them. The * 1.59 Singular number may argue he meant of some one; and then it is a Question which of the three; whether he would have the Blessing and Thanksgiving, or the Consecration, or the Eating done in remembrance of him. It may seem not to be meant of the Eat∣ing or Communion, for the words seem to be spoken before it was; and besides the words seem to be spoken of something himself had done, which were the two first acts only. To be short, The most ancient Fathers, Iustin Martyr, Irenaeus, with others, if I understand them, they understand these words of that first act, of Blessing and Thanksgiving; as if Christ had said, Whereas heretofore in this act of Blessing and Thanksgiving you made a chief remembrance or chiefly gave thanks to God for passing by you, when he slew all the first-born of Egypt; henceforth in lieu of this ye shall do it in remembrance of me, that is, you shall give thanks to God for my Incarnation and coming into the world to save mankind, for my precious Death and Passion, for my glorious Ascension, and all the Benefits ye have from me. And so the meaning of S. Paul's words expounding the words of Christ,* 1.60 As often as ye eat of this bread and drink of this cup, ye declare the Lord's death until he come, is to be construed after the same manner, viz. Not by eating this bread or by drinking this cup, but at the eating of this bread and at the drinking of this cup, ye use to make a thankful remembrance of the Lord's death: meaning that this remembrance or declaration is neither the Form nor the Effect of the Sacrament it self, but a Connexum or thing joyned unto it, or used at the same time with it. For the Form of the Sacrament is a Sign and Communion of the Lord's body, the End and Effect the Confirmation of our Faith; neither of which seems to be meant by remembring of his death.

Howsoever it be, upon this Exposition the Fathers ground their Oblation of Prayer and Thanksgiving before the Sacrament as a thing injoyned by Christ himself.* 1.61 Ire∣naeus expresly saith, That Christ in this his taking bread and giving thanks, Novi Te∣stamenti novam docuit oblationem, did teach and appoint the New Oblation of the New

Testament; and that by so doing he taught his disciples Primitias Deo offerre ex suis creaturis, non quasi indigenti, sed ut ipsi nec infructuosi nec ingrati sint, to offer unto God an Heave-offering of his creatures; not for that God had any need thereof, but that they might not shew themselves ungrateful and unprofitable servants: and that of this Malachi prophesied,* 1.62 when he saith, In every place Incense shall be offered unto my Name, and a pure Offering.

If you wonder how it could be so taken, I will make it plain as I conceive it thus. Where it is said that Christ took bread and gave thanks or made a blessing; it may be understood either that he gave thanks to God for the Bread, or with the Bread: If with the Bread, he made an Oblatory thanksgiving or blessing, as I have shewed the Ancients did: And in this sense the Fathers take the words, and Beza himself leans the same way, quoting the words of Theophylact, That he gave not thanks for the bread, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 upon the bread, that is, he did an act of Oblatory praise by addressing Bread and Wine to the Lord's use in the Sacrament.

And that such should be the meaning of the words, this reason made great appear∣ance, because it is like that Christ used the same kind of Blessing and the same kind of Thanksgiving which the Iews used in the Passeover, only changing the End thereof: Now their Thanksgiving was by way of Oblation; for the Passeover was a kind of Peace-offering, in which I have shewed, that which was to be a Sacrifice, was first of∣fered a Terumah of Thanksgiving, whereof the whole Sacrifice was called Eucharisti∣cal. Whether this be the meaning of the words or no, I will not say.

The End of all this Discourse of Offerings hath been to help my self and others to understand the Fathers rightly, and to know the difference of the Romish Mass from this ancient Terumah of Thanksgiving and Prayer; which I will briefly point at, and so make an end. 1. This Offering of the Fathers was before the Consecration; the Mass is after. 2. This was of bare and naked Bread and Wine; the Mass of the Body and Bloud of Christ. 3. This was an Heave-offering of Praise and Prayer; the Mass is an Offering of Expiation, or a price of redemption for the quick and dead. 4. This was an act of all the Faithful; but the Mass is of the Priest alone.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Acts 2. 30.
• * 1.2

  Acts 13. 33. Psal. 2. 7.
• * 1.3

  Heb 5. 6. Psal. 110. 4.
• * 1.4

  Luke 24. 46, 47.
• * 1.5

  Psal. 50. 14.
• * 1.6

  Verse 8. 9. &c.
• * 1.7

  Heb. 10. 9.
• * 1.8

  Typical Speech∣es often true in the Type and Antitype.
• * 1.9

  Prophecies so foretel things to come in the Church of the Gospel, as that they instruct also the present Church of the Law.
• * 1.10

  Matth. 9. 13.
• * 1.11

  Gen. 28. 20, &c.
• * 1.12

  Deut. 16. 16.
• * 1.13

  [The Author 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the follow∣ing part of this Discourse h••nd••es the first and second par∣ticulars toge∣ther.]
• * 1.14

  The Legal Of∣f••••••ngs were either Simply Holy, as the Terumoth: or most Holy, as the Corbanim were
• * 1.15

  The most Holy offering is cal∣led 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Corban, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that is, an Of∣fering of or by fire.
• * 1.16

  Why some Of∣ferings are cal∣led Simply Ho∣ly; others most Holy.
• * 1.17

  The Corban or most Holy Of∣fering defined. Levit. 1. 4. and often else∣where.
• * 1.18

  Levit. 10. 17.
• * 1.19

  The Corban was either Ze∣bach, or Min∣cha. Zebach defined.
• * 1.20

  And in Dan. 9. 27. (and most common∣ly) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which properly signifies a Slaughter Of∣fering, as in the Hebrew, so in the Greek, of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Macto.
• * 1.21

  Mincha defi∣ned.
• * 1.22

  Iohn 8. 46.
• * 1.23

  Zebach, as also Mincha, was either Simple or Di∣verse. What's meant by a Simple Sacri∣fice.
• ‖ 1.24

  So Aben Ezra on Levit. 1. 3. and the Targum of Io∣nathan on Levit. 6. 9.
• * 1.25

  The Hebrew writers on Levit. 4. thus distinguish them: they make Chattaah or the Sin-Offering to be for a thing done ignorantly against some Negative Precept, and now certainly known to have been against the Precept; but Asham or the Trespass-offering to be for a thing done also against some Negative Precept, but as yet not certainly known by the party to be a vi∣olation or breach of the Precept.
• * 1.26

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Numb. 28. 10. Holocaustum juge.
• * 1.27

  What's meant by a Diverse Sacrifice.
• * 1.28

  Of the Offer∣ings which were Simply Holy, viz. Te∣rumoth or Heave-Offer∣ings.
• * 1.29

  The Terumah defined.
• * 1.30

  The Terumah or Heave-offer∣ing was either Definite or In∣definite; and this either Commanded, or Free.
• * 1.31

  The Command∣ed was either General, or Special.
• * 1.32

  The Freewill-Offering was either more, or less solemn.
• * 1.33

  That the Teru∣moth were not Typical, and that their main End was not Ceremonial, but Moral.
• * 1.34

  Hebr. 1••.
• * 1.35

  Offerings Eu∣charistical and Euctical de∣scribed.
• * 1.36

  The Qualifi∣cations of Of∣ferings Eucha∣ristical and Votal.
• * 1.37

  Hos. 14. 2. Heb. 13. 15. The fruit of our lips.
• * 1.38

  How these Of∣ferings were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.39

  Apolog. 2.
• * 1.40

  This or the like w••rd was wanting 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Manuscript. In the writings of the Ancient Fathers are frequently op∣posed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Vid. Iustin. Mart. in Apol. 2. Euseb. Dem. Evang. l. 1. ••. 10. & l. 5. c. 23.
• * 1.41

  Verse 13.
• * 1.42

  Verse 15.
• * 1.43

  Exod. 23. 15.
• * 1.44

  Deut. 16. 16.
• * 1.45

  1 Cor. 16. 2.
• * 1.46

  L. 4. c. 34.
• * 1.47

  Mal. 1. 6.
• * 1.48

  AElian. var. hist. lib. 1. cap. 32.
• * 1.49

  Matth. 2. 2.
• * 1.50

  L. 4. c. 34.
• * 1.51

  In Ep. ad S••yrnens••••. Of these three see more in Book II in the Treatise Of the Christian Sa∣crifice. chap. 4.
• * 1.52

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Cup of Blessing which we bless.
• * 1.53

  1 Cor. 10. 16.
• * 1.54

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.55

  Tertullian 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Scap. c. 2. Cyrill 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Mystagog. 5.
• * 1.56

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.57

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.58

  The living creatures were Bullocks, Sheep, or Goats, Levit. 3. The other things without life, and which were ••••r food, that were offered up, were the unleavened cakes, and wafers, of fine flour, and oil; as also leavened bread, &c. which according to the Law (Levit. 7.) were required in every Peace-offering of Thanksgiving; whence it was called The Peace-offering that was offered with bread.
• * 1.59

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 This, Luke 22. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 24.
• * 1.60

  1 Cor. 11. 26.
• * 1.61

  Lib. 4. c. 32.
• * 1.62

  Mal. 1. 11.