p. 64It is clear at a glance, that there is no allusion in either of these passages to general or habitual confession; and that the case contemplated is that of a person troubled by some particular sin weighing on the conscience, and keeping the soul from peace. It is just in such a case that the ministry of the word is required for the help of the individual; and that something more is wanted than the general preaching of the truth. Such a person requires the Gospel to be applied to his own particular anxiety, in order that he may be assured of God’s forgiveness of that particular sin which keeps his soul in trouble. It is this assurance which is called in the Prayer-book “absolution.” There is a vast difference between a judicial act of forgiveness, and a declaration or assurance of the forgiveness by God. Thus, to “absolve” is not to “forgive,” but to assure the troubled heart of the full forgiveness, freely granted, by the Lord Himself.  Nothing can be clearer than this distinction in the absolution in the service for the Visitation of the Sick. “Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve all sinners who truly p. 65repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive thee thine offences: and by His authority, committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.” 界将 1. There must be the sacrifice of our sins. It follows, therefore, that the subject of the ministry is one respecting which it is of great importance that our views should be scriptural. And yet, for obvious reasons, it is one seldom preached upon. The great object of the servant of the Lord is to throw Self out of sight; and it is so hard to disconnect the office from the office p. 48bearer, that too little is often said about the office from the fear that too much attention should be drawn to the man. It will be well, therefore, for us to take the subject of the ministry for our careful study this morning. And may God enable me so to speak, and you so to hear, that we may all receive God’s word in faith, and may, together, be compacted as a holy people in the Lord!
p. 281. That the sacramental bread is changed into the Lord Jesus Christ, the Living Saviour, God and man. 了荣 Sometimes it will be necessary to apply it to individuals, when the conscience is troubled by the conviction of sin. Our Church alludes to this in two passages often referred to. The first is from the close of the invitation to the Lord’s Supper,—“And because it is requisite that no man should come to the Holy Communion but with a full trust in God’s mercy, and with a quiet conscience; therefore, if there be any of you, who by this means cannot quiet his own conscience herein, but requireth further counsel or comfort, let him come to me, or to some other discreet and learned minister of God’s word, and open his grief: that by the ministry of God’s holy word he may receive the benefit of absolution, together with ghostly counsel and advice, to the quieting of his conscience, and avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness.” 4. Nay more, it is contrary to the words of our Lord. The words, as given by St. Matthew (xxvi. 26-28) were: “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” Of the bread, therefore, p. 14He said, “This is my body;” and of the wine, “This is my blood.” The bread did not represent the body and blood together, but the body only, and the wine the blood; or, if the doctrine of transubstantiation were taught, the passage would teach that the bread was changed into the body, and the wine into the blood. But the teaching of Rome defies all such distinctions, though thus plainly laid down by no less an authority than our Lord Himself, and fearlessly hurls her anathemas against all who do not believe that the bread, and the bread alone, is changed into body, blood, soul, and divinity, and becomes, to use their own expression, “a whole Christ,” to be exalted, carried in processions, and adored as a living God. The words themselves, taken literally, are dead against such a doctrine. I am not surprised, therefore, when I read our 28th Article, which says: “Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture.” But I am surprised that Christian people in the Church of England should sit so light as some seem to do to a heresy of so fearful a character, and that men p. 15should be so indifferent to truth as even to speak of the possibility of peace with Rome.
p. 11The wafer, therefore, or the piece of bread, is here said to be after consecration nothing less than a real, living Saviour, with body, soul, and divinity, to be worshipped with that holy, reverential worship which belongs exclusively to the God of heaven and earth, for that is the meaning of the word Latreia. There is something very awful in such a statement. It shows that there can be no peace with Rome—no compromise, no middle path. If they are right, we are awfully wrong. If we are right, they are guilty of idolatry. If all these pieces of bread are living Saviours, we have been terribly guilty in never worshipping any one of them; but if, on the other hand, they have remained bread still—plain, simple, unchanged bread—then we have idolatry of the most unquestionable character when that bread is exalted by the priest for adoration, and men fall down and worship it as the living God. 已经 THE MASS. II. Such, then, is the contrast; and now let us turn, in the second place, to the reason of it. Why were those ancient sacrifices so often repeated? and why was ours once and for ever? The same passage that brings out the contrast explains the reason of it; and the reason is that, p. 24in themselves, they have no saving power, and that ours has. They were ineffectual for the blotting out of sin, but the one offering of our Blessed Lord was perfectly effectual in the very point where they failed. There was as great a contrast in respect of efficiency as there was in respect of frequency; and, in fact, the repetition was the result of weakness, as the oneness was the result of complete sufficiency. This insufficiency is placed in two points of view in the chapter, for we are there taught, first, that these sacrifices could not take away sin, and, secondly, that they could not satisfy the conscience.
One thing is perfectly clear. It is not done by the offering of any fresh sacrifice. This was the chief duty of the Jewish priests, but it forms no part of that of the Christian minister. From one end of the New Testament to the p. 56other you can find no allusion to any such thing as a Christian sacrifice for sin. The one sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ was once and for ever, final, complete, and sufficient for all the sins of the whole world. The work of sacrifice is finished, as we are taught in the words, “To wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself;” and if there can be no sacrifice, it is perfectly plain that there can be no sacrificing priest. Nor can the idea be gathered from the Prayer-book any more than it can from the New Testament. There is not an allusion there, either to a sacrifice or a sacrificing priest, except where it says, in Art. xxxi., “The sacrifices of masses, in the which it was commonly said that the priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits.” There is no Christian sacrifice recognised by the Church of England but the thankful dedication of heart and life on the part of those who have been saved by the sacrifice of the Lord. But this sacrifice requires no priest to offer it. It may rise at any moment, and from any place, from the depths of any thankful heart. Thus, according to our Communion Service, all offer p. 57it together, and the whole congregation having together met around their Father’s table, and together tasted the joys of their Father’s love, together bring their sacrifice, and say, “Here we offer and present unto thee, O Lord, ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and living sacrifice unto thee.” 波纹 THE MASS. p. 64It is clear at a glance, that there is no allusion in either of these passages to general or habitual confession; and that the case contemplated is that of a person troubled by some particular sin weighing on the conscience, and keeping the soul from peace. It is just in such a case that the ministry of the word is required for the help of the individual; and that something more is wanted than the general preaching of the truth. Such a person requires the Gospel to be applied to his own particular anxiety, in order that he may be assured of God’s forgiveness of that particular sin which keeps his soul in trouble. It is this assurance which is called in the Prayer-book “absolution.” There is a vast difference between a judicial act of forgiveness, and a declaration or assurance of the forgiveness by God. Thus, to “absolve” is not to “forgive,” but to assure the troubled heart of the full forgiveness, freely granted, by the Lord Himself.  Nothing can be clearer than this distinction in the absolution in the service for the Visitation of the Sick. “Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve all sinners who truly p. 65repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive thee thine offences: and by His authority, committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.” ”
They could never, therefore, satisfy the conscience; as you read, Heb; x. 1, 2:—“For the law, having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged shall have had no more conscience of sins.” 恶佛 Let any one search the Scriptures, and they must be convinced that this is the truth there plainly taught. But what can be more palpably contradictory to it than to suppose that He is present, in body, soul, and divinity, in the form of the small piece of lifeless bread which we receive in the Lord’s Supper? In other words, that there is not only the one Saviour in heaven at the right hand of God; but that there are two or three hundred living Saviours collected together on the table every time that the Lord’s Supper is administered. I am not surprised if some of you feel shocked at such a statement, and I know that there is enough to shock any religious mind. I am shocked at it myself, and am sorry to have to make it. But this is the real teaching of p. 10the Church of Rome. The decree of the Council of Trent is as follows:—“If any man shall say that the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, together with his soul and divinity, and, in short, that a whole Christ, is not contained, truly, really, and substantially, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; but shall say that he is in it only in sign, or figure, or power, let him be anathema.” (Sess. xiii. Can. 1.) Another decree goes on to declare, “If any man shall say that in the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, Christ the only begotten Son of God, is not to be adored, and that outwardly with the worship of latreia, and that he ought not to be carried solemnly about in processions, or that he ought not to be set before the people that he may be worshipped, and that the worshippers of him are idolaters, let him be anathema!” (Sess. xiii. Can. 6.)  ”