118 ANIMADVEllSIONS ON A TRExVTISE
they say tliey are any. It is true, which our author pleads in justi- fication of the sacrifice of his church, that there were sacrifices among the Jews, yea, from the beginning of the world, after the entrance of sin and promise of Christ to come made to sinners; for in the state of innocency there was no sacrifice appointed, because there was no need of an atonement. But all these sacrifices, properly so called, had no other use in religion than to prefigure and represent the great sacrifice of himself to be made by the Son of God in the fulness of time. That being once performed, all other sacrifices were to cease, I mean properly so called ; for we have still sacrifices metaphorical, called so by analogy, being parts of God's worship tendered unto him, and accepted with him, as were the sacrifices of old. Nor is it at all necessary that we should have proper sacrifices, that we may have metaphorical. It is enough that such there have been, and that of God's own appointment; and we have still that only one real sacrifice which was the life and soul of all them that went before. The substance being come, the light shadowing of it that was before under the law is vanished. The apostle doth expressly place the opposition that is between the sacrifice of the Christian chiu'ch and that of the Judaical in this, that they were often repeated; this was perfoiTQed once for all, and is a living, abiding sacrifice, constant in the church for ever, Heb. x. 1, 2: so that, by this rule, the repeti- tion of the same or any other sacrifice, in the Christian church, can have no other foundation but an apprehension of the imperfection of the sacrifice of Christ ; for, saith he, where the sacrifice is perfect, and makes them perfect that come to God by it, there must be no more sacrifice. This, then, seems to be the real difference between Pro- testants and Roman Catholics in this business of sacrifice : — Protest- ants believing the sacrifice of Christ to be absolutely perfect, so that there is no need of any other, and that it is odhg TpSff^parog xai ZfiGa, — " a fresh and living way," — of going to God continually, with whom by it obtaining remission of sin, they know there is no moj'e offering for sin; they content themselves with that sacrifice of his, continually, in its virtue and efficacy, residing in the church. Romanists, looking on that as imperfect, judge it necessary to institute a new sacrifice of their own, to be repeated every day, and that without any the least colour or warrant from the word of God or example of the apostles. But our author puts in an exception, and tells us those words of Luke, Acts xiii. 2, Aiirovpyo-juruv dh auTuv rw KvpiM, are well and truly rendered by Erasmus, '' Sacrificantibus illis Domino;" which one text, saith he, "gives double testimony to apostolical sacrifice and priestly ordination." And he strengthens the authority of Erasmus with reason also; for the " Avord can import nothing but sacrifice, since it was made rw Kupitfi: for other inferior ministries of the word and sacra-
ENTITLED FIAT LUX. 11.0
ments are not made to God, but the people; but the apostles were 'KiiTODf'yoiivTig rQj Kvpio), — administering, liturgying, sacrificing to our Lord." For what he adds of ordination, it belongs not unto this dis- course. Authority and reason are pleaded to prove, I know not what sacrifice, to be intended in these words. Erasmus is first pleaded ; to whose interpretation, mentioned by our author, I shall only add his own annotations in the explication of his meaning: " Asirovpyovi/ruv," saith he, "quod proprium est operantium sacris. Nullum autem sacri- ficium Deo gratius quam impartiri doctrinam evangelicam." So that it seems the preaching of the gospel, or taking care about it, was the sacrifice that Erasmus thought of in his translation and exposition. Yea, but the word is truly translated " sacrificantibus." But who, I pray, told our author so ? The original of the word is of a much larger signification. Its common use is, to minister in any kind ; it is so translated and expounded by all learned, impartial men, and is never used in the whole New Testament to denote sacrificing. Nor is n2f ever rendered in the Old Testament by the LXX. "kuToupyUx, or 7.siTovpyiCi}, but ^uc/a, Suff/aff/ia, 3D/Aa, ^v/miu/jm, oXoxaiirw/a-a, c;pdyiov, Suai, etc. Nor is that word used absolutely in any author, profane or ecclesiastical, to signify precisely sacrificing. And I know well enough what it is that makes our author say it is properly translated " sacri- ficing/'' and I know as well that he cannot prove what he says; but he gives a reason for Avhat he says, — it is said " to be made to the Lord, whereas other inferior ministerial acts are made to the people." I wish heartily he would once leave this scurvy trick of cogging in words to deceive his poor unwary reader; for what, I pray, makes his " made" here? what is it that is said to be "made" to the Lord ? It is, " when they were ministering to the Lord;" so the words are rendered, — not, v/hen they were making, or making sacrifice, or when they made sacrificing unto the Lord. This wild gourd, " made," puts death into his pot. And we think here in England, that in all minis- terial acts, though performed towards the people, and for their good, 5''et men administer to the Lord in them, because performing them by his appointment, as a part of that worship which he requires at their hands.