7. CHAP. VII. Of Sacraments, and namely of Circumcision.
CHAP. VII. Of Sacraments, and namely of Circumcision.
T he word which signifieth a Sacrament in Hebrew is Sod and Razi.
The first of these words is common unto all secretes and hidden things, and is more in use. And the other Isaiah used in the 24th chapter when he said: Razi-li Razi-li, that is, a secret unto me, a secret unto me.
Daniel also in his second Chapter, setting down the interpretation of a mystery useth the selfsame word. Such is the nature and condition of Sacraments, that they contain things hid, known yet unto some, but not unto all. And from this Etymology the Greek word μυστήριον differeth not much, which is derived ἀπό τοῦ δεῖν μύσαντας τηρεῖν ἔνδον: that is, because we ought to keep things close inwardly. After such a sort were the mysteries of Ceres Eleusina in the Country of Athens, which were opened unto none but those who had been first instructed. And they are called μύσται, to whose secrecy these things are committed. Chrysostom when he interpreteth the 11th chapter of the Epistle of Paul to the Romans, where
Paul saith, that he writeth a mystery of the Israelites, partly blinded and partly to be restored, saith, that a mystery signifieth a thing unknown, and
unspeakable, and which hath in it much admiration, and which is above our opinion. The same father when he interpreteth the second Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, where it is said: We speak wisdom in a mystery, thus writeth: It should be no divine or perfect mystery, if thou shouldest add anything of thyself. By which words it is manifest, how much they are to be blamed which at their own pleasure and judgment ordain
Sacraments, and from that which Christ himself hath ordained, pluck away what they will. Those words of Chrysostom do manifestly reprove them.
Neither let them think themselves to be anything relieved, by saying that he speaketh of that mystery which is found in the holy scriptures, whereunto he saith nothing must be added nor taken away: Forsomuch as the Sacraments whereof we entreat are of no less weight than the holy
Scripture. For they (as Augustine very aptly saith) are the visible words of God. Furthermore Chrysostom expounding the place before alleged saith, that we in the Sacraments see one thing, believe another thing, behold with our sense one thing, and understand in our mind another thing. Whereof it followeth, that all are not after one and the self-same manner affected towards these mysteries. For an Infidel when he heareth that Jesus Christ was crucified, thinketh it to be a thing foolish and of no value. But the faithful man acknowledgeth in that mystery, the most high power and wisdom of God. If an Ethnic hear that Christ was raised from the dead, he will think it to be a fable. But a Christian not only believeth that the same was done, but also will not doubt but that he himself as a member of Christ shall one day be raised up from the dead. Afterward Chrysostom cometh to the visible Sacrament, and saith: If an Infidel see Baptism, he will judge that there is but water only: but the faithful beholdeth the washing of the soul by the blood of Christ. And in the Eucharist by the senses is known
only the bread and wine: but the believers refer their mind to the body of Christ. Hereunto he applieth a similitude of a Book. For if an unlearned and rude man that cannot read a word, should light upon a Book, he only may behold and wonder at the pricks, figures and colors, but the sense and understanding of them, he cannot find out: but he which is learned, draweth from thence either Histories, or else other things pleasant and worthy to be known. Now that we have declared the interpretation of the Greek and Hebrew word, there resteth that we speak somewhat of the Latin word.
Among the ancient writers Sacramentum, that is, a sacrament, signifieth a bond which passed between men by an oath. Wherefore we are accustomed to say, Sacramento cum aliquo contendere, that is, to contend with a man by an oath, and Sacramentum militare, that is, an oath which a man taketh when he goeth to warfare. And perhaps these our mysteries, are therefore called Sacraments, because in them God bindeth himself with covenants and promises, being after a sort sealed: and we on the other side bind ourselves unto him. Now then we treat not of a mystery or Sacrament generally, whereby (as Chrysostom saith) is signified anything that is unknown and unspeakable, which hath in it much admiration, and is beyond our expectation: for after that manner, there are a huge number of Sacraments. For so the Nativity of Christ, his Resurrection, the Gospel, the blinding of the Jews, the calling of the Gentiles, and many other things may be called Sacraments. But we speak of Sacraments after that manner that Paul speaketh of Circumcision.
2. Now because we have sufficiently spoken of the word, we will add the definition of a Sacrament, and this definition is most received. A Sacrament is a visible form, or visible sign of an invisible grace. And that is called a sign, which besides the form which it offereth unto the senses, bringeth
some other thing into our knowledge. And a sign (as Augustine writeth and the master of the sentences affirmeth) is divided into a natural sign and a sign given. Smoke is a natural sign of fire, and clouds a natural sign of rain.
But a sign given and devised at our own will, is diverse, as Letters, Words, Gestures, Beckes, and many such like. And these signs may pertain to diverse and sundry senses. But consider that the things which are signified, are either past, present, or to come. The tables of the law, Manna, and the rod of Aaron which were kept, signified things past: for God would have them to remain as certain monuments of things past. Other signs betoken things to come, as the rainbow in the Clouds, which was given in the time of Noah, the fleece of Gideon, and the shadow of the sun, which in the time of Hezekiah the King, went backward. Sometimes things present are signified, as in the garments of the Priests, in the apparel of the Levites, in the ornaments of Magistrates, and in the miracles of Christ. For all these signified the present power of God. Our sacraments are visible signs, not in deed of their own nature, but given unto us by the will of God: and they pertain to many senses. For the words which are set forth in the Sacraments, are received with the ears, but the notes and outward signs are perceived either by sight or feeling, or smelling, or tasting, howbeit the matters themselves do make demonstration of things present, and things past, and things to come. For the death of Christ which is now past is represented in them: and so is the promise and gift of God, which in the mind and by faith is presently embraced, and so is the pureness of life, and mortification, and duties of charity, which are afterward to be performed of us. By these it is manifest, what manner of signs we account Sacraments to be. But it may seem to be better to take the definition out of Paul: namely to say, that sacraments are σφραγίδες, that is, sealings up of the righteousness of faith.
For they seal the promises, by which (so that faith be adjoined unto them) we are justified. If a man demand, what it is that God promiseth unto us: to answer briefly, it is, that he will be our God: the which when it comes to pass, saveth us, and maketh us blessed and happy. This is the promise, which is by diverse outward signs sealed in the Sacraments. And this we have in the Book of Genesis the 17th chapter, where circumcision is given, whereby was confirmed the covenant made between God and Abraham.
The sum of that promise was (as we have said) that God would be his God, and the God of his seed. The very which thing Jeremiah also testified as touching the new covenant of the Gospel, where he saith, that the laws should not only be written in the bowels and hearts of the believers, but also that God would be unto them their God: and they again on the other side, should be unto him his people.
3. That also we will allow, which is commonly said, that the Sacraments consist of two things, namely, of outward signs, which the Schoolmen count for the matter: and of the thing signified, which is chiefly expressed by the words adjoined unto the signs, whence we may gather the form. Which is not so to be understood, as though those things which are signified, are bound to the outward signs or lie hidden under them: otherwise as many as should receive the outward elements, should together therewithal receive the things signified. And it is necessary, that between the sign and the thing signified, there be kept some analogy, that is, proportion and conveniency: for if signs had no similitude with those things that are signified, then should they not be signs of them. And yet notwithstanding, with this conformity is to be kept a diversity between that which is signified and those things which signify. Which Augustine most manifestly teacheth against Maximinus the Arian, in his third book, where he saith, that
Sacraments are one thing, and signify another thing: whereby oftentimes it cometh to pass, that those things which are attributed unto the signs, agree in no case with the nature of them, but only are to be referred unto the things by them signified. And he citeth a place out of the Epistle of John, where this matter is manifestly showed: for he saith, that there are three things which bear witness, Blood, Water, and the Spirit, and these three
(saith he) are one. This can by no means be true, if we have a consideration to the nature of blood, water, and the spirit; for these indeed are not one (as they use to speak) in essence, or in kind. But this verily agreeth to the father, the son, and the holy Ghost, which are the thing signified: And that which Augustine here writeth we may easily perceive in the Sacraments which we now entreat of, wherein the outward sign and inward matter of the Sacrament have their properties ascribed one to another. Now that I have sufficiently spoken of the name, and definition, and also of the matter, and form of the Sacraments, there resteth to speak of the final and efficient cause of them. The end for which the Sacraments were instituted, is, that our mind being admonished by the senses, might be stirred up, and by faith take hold of the promises of God: and so be inflamed with a desire to attain unto them. For we see, that signs tend to no other end, but to transfer and to imprint those things, which we ourselves have in our minds, into the mind of another man: that thereby he may be made the more certain of our meaning and will. And this is not commonly done but in matters of great weight. For if they be but light matters, we are not accustomed to confirm them with signs: but in things of great importance, they are commonly used.
As when princes are consecrated, when matrimonies are contracted, when bargaining's and gifts, or other like covenants of great weight are made: for
we desire to have them to the uttermost witnessed, and to be known, not only by reason, but also by the senses.
4. But there can be no other efficient cause of the Sacraments given, but either God, or our Lord Jesus Christ, who also is verily God: and of them ought we to have an evident testimony out of the holy Scriptures. Which is most plainly declared, by the definition which we have now set forth: for thus we defined them; namely that Sacraments are signs not in deed natural, but given and that by the will of God. And this his will cannot be made known unto us, but only out of the holy scriptures. And therefore it is no hard matter to know how many there are in number in the New Testament.
We see that Christ instituted Baptism, and the Eucharist: but the other Sacraments with the school divines set forth, cannot by the word of God be proved to be Sacraments. We speak not this, as though we deny that matrimony is to be had in reverence, or that the institution of ministers is to be retained still, or the penance is to be done: although we reject auricular confession, and other the abuses thereof, and deny it to be a Sacrament, otherwise even we also do highly esteem those things, but not as Sacraments. Neither mislike we with that confirmation, whereby children when they come to age should be compelled to confess their faith in the Church, and by outward profession, to approve that which was done in Baptism when they understood nothing: but yet in such sort, that of such an action we frame not a Sacrament. But as touching extreme unction, it is manifest, that it nothing pertaineth unto us: especially seeing it had no longer any force, than whilst the gifts of healing were extant in the Church.
And for as much as those gifts are now long since taken away, it were a folly to keep still a vain sign thereof. Neither yet did Christ command, that this unction should be perpetually used in the church. But those other
things, which we before spake of, although they may still be retained with profit, yet are they not properly Sacraments, either because they have not outward signs, or because they want manifest words of promises: which should by a visible sign be sealed: or else because there is no commandment of God extant, whereby we are bound to observe those things. Basilius in his book de spiritu Sancto, where he reckoneth up the traditions of the Church, maketh mention of the sign of the cross, wherewith we ought to defend ourselves: and that upon the Sunday, and from the resurrection unto the feast of Pentecost they should worship upright and standing. Among others also he reckoneth holy unction. Hereby we see that this father held not, that this unction is had out of the holy
Scriptures, which our adversaries rashly do. Further by his words we gather of how great weight it is, since it is accounted but of the same value with those things which have now long since grown out of practice.
5. Now let us see, what be the effects of the Sacraments. The master of the sentences, in the fourth book, in the first Dist. putteth three effects of the sacraments: for he would, that as men for pleasure sake have made themselves subject unto things sensible and inferior unto themselves, so now they should for piety sake do the same, that of a certain modesty, or (as they speak) humility, they should suffer themselves to be made subject unto these visible signs of the Sacraments. But herein he seemeth not to say well.
For by the Sacraments we are not made subject unto creatures, neither ought we to worship them: only the mind is there erected unto God, that man may be restored unto his old dignity: for he is set to be above all things, which are seen, and not to be subject unto them. The second effect he putteth, to be of instruction, that by the outward signs we should be instructed of heavenly things. Which also we undoubtedly affirm. Lastly he
saith, that therefore they were instituted, that we should not be idle: but be profitably exercised in true ceremonies, casting away superstitions. But this, unless it be declared, is not very plain: for we are sufficiently occupied in believing, praying, reading of the word of God, and doing good to our neighbors. But outward ceremonies, although they be instituted of God, yet without faith they nothing profit: wherefore the exercising of them doeth not of itself please God. Howbeit if faith be present superstition can take no place: For faith hath always a regard unto the word of God: And so after this manner they may be called exercises of faith, and of piety, and be counted acceptable unto God. But we will after a better sort, set forth these effects of the Sacraments. First we say, that they instruct us: which thing is already said. Secondly, that they kindle in us, faith, and a desire of the promises of God. Thirdly, that they knit us together in a more straighter bond of charity, for that we do all take upon us the selfsame mysteries. And to those may two other effects also be added: for by the sacraments we both are separated from other sects, and also are admonished to lead a holy life.
But touching grace, whether it be given by the Sacraments or no, we shall afterward see. These things being thus set down, there are two things which are contrary and repugnant unto the nature of the Sacraments. The first is, if we attribute too much unto them: for by that means is Idolatry easily brought in: when that which belongeth unto God only, is ascribed unto a creature. And if at any time the sacraments are said either to save or to remit sins, or any such like things, the same ought to be understood, of the thing signified, and not of the signs: for these things only proceed of the promise and liberality of God, which is sealed unto us by visible signs. And oftentimes it happeneth, that both the scriptures and the fathers, seem to attribute unto the signs, those things which only belong unto the promises.
But now they which after this manner attribute more than is meet unto the sacraments, may be called Sacramentaries, because they put too much affiance in them. The other thing which we said is repugnant unto the nature of Sacraments, is, when we count them to be nothing but bare and naked signs. For by that means, they should nothing differ from Tragical and Comical significations, and from colors and garments. Neither are they only signs of our actions, but also of the promise, and of the will of God, and are sealings thereof. And the holy Ghost doth no less use these signs to stir up our hearts, than he useth the words of God which are in the holy scriptures.
And hereby also we may see, that they likewise are against the Sacraments, which will have them to be sacrifices: for the nature of a sacrifice is, to be offered of us unto God: but the nature of a sacrament us, to be offered of God unto us. I confess in deed, that in the celebration of the Supper of the Lord, are contained thanksgiving, alms, prayers, and other such like things, which may have the consideration of a sacrifice. But we deny, that the very sacrament of the Eucharist may properly be called a sacrifice: and much less is that to be borne withal, which the sacrificing Priests make their boast of, namely, that they offer up unto God the body of Christ. Our Lord hath offered up himself, neither hath he need of any other to offer him up.
6. Now that we have well considered all these things, we need not many words to express the instrument, whereby the thing of the Sacrament is received. For Paul hath most manifestly declared it, when he said That circumcision is the seal of the righteousness of faith: for it is faith, whereby the righteousness, which is signified in the Sacrament, is received of us, for neither can our sense or reason thereunto attain. Augustine, expounding those words of John, Now ye are clean, because of my word, saith that in that the Sacraments do make us clean, they have it of the word of God: for
if thou take away (saith he) from the element, the word, there will nothing remain but water only. The word cometh unto the element, and it is made a Sacrament. For how cometh it (saith he) that water toucheth the body, and washeth the heart? He answereth, that the same cometh to pass through the force and power of the word, not because it is spoken, but because it is believed. By these things it is manifest, that faith is it, whereby we receive cleansing and sanctification. Which thing also is written in the Acts of the Apostles: By faith purifying their hearts. And Paul to the Ephesians saith, that Christ loved the Church, and cleansed it with the washing of Water. But there is added, In the word, that is, by the word: which (as Augustine saith) is understood to be done, because it is believed, and not because it is spoken: for by the pronunciation of the words, are neither changed the natures of the signs, nor the benefits of God given, for so it might seem an enchantment. Faith (I say) is the instrument, whereby we receive the words of God, and let them down into our minds. But now touching the manner of administering the sacraments, there ought none other manner to be brought in than that which Christ himself, the author of the Sacraments, hath commanded unto us. For if the Jews durst not deal otherwise in their
Ceremonies of the old law, then was prescribed them of God, much more ought we to observe those Ceremonies which Christ hath prescribed unto us, after the self-same manner that he prescribed them. Further, for as much as those signs came from the will of God, and of their own nature signify nothing: what is more reasonable than to refer all things unto his will, which hath given them? But his will can by no other means be known but by the holy Scripture. And undoubtedly no man will presume to alter the letters patents of king's grants: much more ought the same to be taken heed of in the Sacraments of God. And the minister by whom these things ought
to be exercised, and distributed, although it be convenient, that he be godly and of an honest life: (For such a one is to be maintained, and when he behaveth himself otherwise, and is known so to do, he ought no longer to be suffered) yet though he be wicked, so long as he keepeth still that function, he cannot hurt the Sacraments, so he do those things which Christ commanded to be done. Augustine hath a very trim similitude, of a pipe of stone, through which water is brought into a garden. For although the Pipe be made nothing the more fertile by means of the running through of the water, yet is the garden by it watered, and made fruitful. The dignity of the sacraments dependeth not of the minister, but of the institution of God: which the Donatists not understanding, raised up many tumults against the Church. That is true which is commonly said of living creatures, that by a dried up member, the spirit of life can have no passage into the other member. For if the arm be dead and withered up, the life and spirit cannot come unto the hand. But in the Church there is no such great conjunction between men. For the power of the Sacraments is to us, as the light of the sun: which light although it be dispersed through vile and filthy places, yet is it not therefore defiled or corrupted.
7. But the times of the sacraments we will divide into two parts: For some were before the coming of Christ, and some after. And these differ the one from the other by outward notes and signs. Neither was that done rashly or without great consideration: for we also (as saith Augustine) do after one sort signify things to be done, and after another sort affirm things already done, and this do these two words now pronounced sufficiently declare. But here are two errors to be taken heed of us: as the same father against Faustus very well admonisheth us: first, that we think not, that though the signs be changed, therefore the things also are diverse, or that for as much
as the thing is one and the self-same, therefore the signs ought not, nor cannot be changed. For if a householder may command straighter things unto those servants whom he knoweth it expedient to be kept under with great servitude, and may lay easier burdens upon their necks, whom he will count as his children, why then may not God do the same towards men?
Physicians also use according to the diversity of the diseases of the sick persons, to minister diverse and sundry medicines, of all which medicines yet the force is one and the same, namely, to restore health: But whether the signs of the Old Testament have now utterly ceased or no, Augustine answereth in his book de vera religione, that they remain by interpretation and faith, but are in very deed taken away. But touching the very things themselves, those which were set forth unto the Elders in their sacraments, and which are set forth unto us in our sacraments, were one and the same.
And if thou demand, what were those things which were common unto the fathers and unto us, it may in few words be answered, God, Christ,
Reconciliation, Grace, Remission of sins, and such other like matters. These things in times past were signified, and set forth to be believed in the sacraments of the old fathers, and the self-same are in our time signified in the New Testament, and set forth in our sacraments. But the signs and symbols, which the fathers used, were changed by the coming of Christ: at whose second coming also, those which we now have, shall in like manner be taken away. For when we have once the fruition of that chief felicity which we wait for, we shall then need no sacraments. Further besides the alteration of the signs, are also out of Augustine gathered some other conditions, whereby is declared that our sacraments are more excellent than were the sacraments of the forefathers. For ours (saith he) are in power greater, in profit better, in act easier, in number fewer, in understanding
most full of majesty, in observation most pure, and in signification most excellent. Those things in deed are great, but yet they alter not the nature of the things signified. Neither cause they, but that our sacraments and the sacraments of the old law are as touching the substance one and the same.
Paul in his Epistle unto the Romans, saith, that the Jews as unprofitable branches were cut off from the holy tree, and we grafted in their place. And the root (saith he) carrieth thee, and not thou the root. Whereby it is manifest, that both we and the fathers as touching the substance of salvation, are in one and the same stock, and in one and the same root. So then the better and worthier part of the sacraments is one and the self-same.
And whatsoever difference there is between us and them, the same consisteth wholly in the coming of Christ, past, and to come. Wherefore
Augustine against Faustus saith, that our sacraments are signs of things now fulfilled, but the sacraments of the forefathers were signs of things to be fulfilled. And upon the 6th chapter of John he saith, that in signs, they were diverse from ours, but in signification of things, they were both alike.
8. I know in deed and I remember that the fathers are sometimes wont above measure to extenuate the sacraments of the old law. Chrysostom in his 27th Homily upon Genesis denieth, that circumcision anything profited unto salvation: but that the Israelites carried it about with them, as a token of gratitude and as a sign and seal, to the end they should not be defiled by mingling themselves with other nations. And in his 39th Homily he saith: that it was a bridle and a pair of fetters unto the Jews, that they should not mingle themselves with other nations. And he affirmeth that God commanded it unto Abraham and unto his posterity, that by an outward sign he might declare, that he was the possessor of him. And for that cause he changed his name. For so do we also when we take into our possession a
beast or bondman: for we give unto them a name, and we mark them with our sign or mark. And upon the same book in the 40th Homily, he saith, that the Jews by circumcision might be known. And hereunto may be added
Ambrose: for he declareth that circumcision did only put a difference between the posterity of Abraham and other nations. Howbeit they do not everywhere speak after one manner. For the same Ambrose when he expoundeth that place in the 10th chap. of the first to the Corinthians: That the old fathers were baptized in the sea, saith, that their sins were not imputed, and that they were without doubt purified. These things are of much more excellency than to be separated, or to differ from other nations.
And Augustine against Faustus in his 12th book and 19th chapter, expressly saith, that the sea, and the cloud was baptism consecrated in the blood of Christ, and by them the sins of the Jews were forgiven. All which things are common with our sacraments. Further all the school divines hold, that circumcision was a remedy against original sin: whereby we may perceive, they hold not, that circumcision was a bare and naked sign. There may also for proof hereof be brought places of scripture, which teach the self-same thing. For in the 10th chapter of the first Epistle unto the Corinthians, the old fathers are said to have been baptized, and to have eaten the self-same spiritual meat, and to have drunk the self-same drink which we at this day eat and drink. And again in the 2nd Chapter to the Colossians he saith, that we are circumcised with circumcision not made with hands: And he addeth: by the washing away of the sins of the flesh. Where he declareth, that in the sign of circumcision was through Christ given the washing away of sins.
And in the book of Genesis the 17th chapter is most manifestly declared, that circumcision was the sign of the covenant, wherein God promised, that he would be the God both of Abraham and of his seed.
9. But against those things which have been spoken, is objected unto us out of the 10th chapter of the first to the Corinthians, that Paul there affirmeth not, that the sacraments of the old fathers were one and the same with ours: but only writeth this, that the elders and fathers had one and the self-same sacraments amongst themselves: and yet many of them shamefully perished, and were destroyed in the desert, although in the sacraments they had communicated with other godly men. Wherefore they say, that Paul of the lesser, or of the like would conclude, that we also if we live wickedly shall perish, although we be initiated in Christ, and use the self-same sacraments that the elect of God do. But against this exposition the words of the Apostle himself are most plainly repugnant: for he saith, that the old fathers had in their sacraments the self-same meat that we have, that is, Christ. For thus he writeth, And they drank of the spiritual rock following them: and the rock was Christ. Now if they had Christ, doubtless they wanted not the meat of our sacraments, which cannot be said to be any other thing than Christ. Further we see that the Apostle hath expressly appointed names unto our sacraments: for he nameth baptism, and spiritual meat and drink. Further if we follow the expositions of our adversaries, we shall make Paul's argument of small force. For he meant to reprove the security of the Corinthians, which seemed to promise unto themselves salvation. For this cause only, because they were Christians, and partakers of the holy mysteries: although in the mean time they lived loosely, and dissolutely. Wherefore he declareth that God would severally punish them, except they repented, as we read that he punished the fathers of the Old
Testament, when he sundry ways afflicted them in the desert. And if their sacraments and ours were not one and the self-same, Paul concludeth nothing. For the Corinthians might have said: yea but our testament is a far
other thing, than was the testament of the old fathers, and our sacraments are far more excellent than were their sacraments. Wherefore God will not afflict us, neither oughtest thou to compare us with them. By this means is
Paul's argument made of no force, if we take away the similitude and proportion which the things of our sacraments have with the things of the sacraments of the old fathers. Besides also Augustine in his 26th treatise upon John most plainly teacheth that the old fathers as touching the spiritual matter had in their sacraments the selfsame that we have. In outward form
(he saith) one thing was given unto them, and another unto us: but as touching the thing signified, he acknowledgeth no difference at all. So that the place of the Apostle, which our adversaries have by their expositions gone about to wrest from us, is by these reasons to be defended.
10. They object moreover that the fathers in many places say that the sacraments of the old fathers were shadows and Images of that truth which is exhibited in our sacraments. Unto them we answer, that Images may two manner of ways be taken. For some are outwardly vain and void, and contain nothing: other Images have in deed the thing itself, but yet intricately and obscurely if they be compared with other Images more evident. In the second sort we will easily grant, that the sacraments of the old fathers were Images and shadows of ours, not that the old fathers had not in their sacraments the self-same things that we receive in ours, but because their sacraments more intricately and obscurely shadowed the same. For the better explication hereof Chrysostom seemeth to bring a very apt similitude, in his Homily which he made upon these words of Paul: Our fathers were baptized into Moses. And in his 17th Homily upon the Epistle to the Hebrews: Painters (saith he) when they intend to paint a king, first they draw out the proportion upon a table with shadows and dark colors: but
yet in such sort that a man may by these lines although it be somewhat obscure, easily perceive, that the image of the king is there painted, and horsemen, and chariots and such other like, which things yet are not straightway known of all men. But afterward, when the Painter hath laid on fresh colors, and hath finished the work, those things which before by those first lines appeared scarce begun and rude, are now manifestly and expressly perceived. Such (saith he) were the Sacraments of the old fathers, if they be compared with ours. By these words it is manifest, that Chrysostom was of the opinion, that one and the self-same thing is represented in our sacraments and in the sacraments of the old fathers, although in theirs more obscurely, and in ours more manifestly. But how great a nearness there is between both these kinds of Sacraments, Paul seemeth hereby to teach, in that he putteth the names of the one, for the names of the other, and maketh them common to both. For in the 10th
Chap. of the first Epistle to the Corinth. he affirmeth, that the old fathers were baptized, and had one and the same spiritual meat, and one and the same spiritual drink, which we now have. And on the other side, to the Colossians, he calleth our baptism, circumcision: for he saith: that we are circumcised in Christ, but yet with a circumcision not made with hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh. In which place he ascribeth unto circumcision, the putting off of sins. But they think that this maketh against us, which is read in the viii. Chapter to the Hebrews, In that he saith, New, he hath abolished that which was before. But that which is abolished and waxen old, is even ready to vanish away. Of these words they conclude, that the Old Testament is utterly abolished. And this (say they) could not be possible, if the substance thereof were one and the same with the substance of the new. But these men ought to have considered, that the substance of
the Old Testament is not abolished. In deed ceremonies are abolished as touching the outward signs, howbeit the signification of them abideth the self-same that it was. Judicial precepts also, although in our days they be not all had in use, yet the sum and principal scope of them, is still retained, namely that sins should be punished, and Justice preserved in commonwealths. But the sense and observation of moral precepts, remaineth still perfect and whole, although they no more either accuse or condemn the conscience, to the destruction of the elect.
11. But they say that Augustine also is against our opinion. For in his Preface upon the 73rd Psalm, thus he writeth: That the sacraments of the old
Fathers promised a savior, but ours give salvation. But by these words Augustine meant only to put a distinction between the manner, whereby the Sacraments of the old Fathers signified Christ in one sort, and ours in another sort: for they so represented Christ, as him that should one day come: ours do so represent him, as now already come. For how could
Augustine think, that the sacraments of the old Fathers did by no means give a savior, when as he most manifestly testifieth that the fathers in the Manna had the self-same Christ which we now have in the Eucharist. And in his Book De nuptijs & concupiscentia ad Valerium, and other places he oftentimes confesseth, that the old Fathers were by circumcision delivered from original sin. Bede also upon Luke affirmeth the self-same thing, and saith, that circumcision differed nothing from Baptism, as touching remission of sins, but only that it opened not the gates of the kingdom of heaven: for to the performance of that, the death of Christ was looked for.
Touching this surely, I will not much contend, so that it be granted, that those fathers being dead, in what place soever they were, were in the presence and sight of God in happy state. For they had without all doubt the
fruition of God, neither is it to be thought, that they could be forsaken of him in whom they believed. But that they were carried up into heaven, before Christ ascended up, I know the Fathers do deny, neither do I therein anything contend against them. But let us return unto that, that these fathers of their own accord grant, namely, that circumcision took away original sin, how then can they say, that Christ by circumcision was not given at all? For what remission of sins could there be without Christ? The Master of the sentences very absurdly thinketh, that circumcision had the power of remitting of sins, but not of conferring of grace, as though forsooth remission of sins can be had without grace. They also feign that the sacraments of the Gospel had their force by the death of Christ, and forasmuch as this death is now accomplished, therefore are they of more efficacy and of more force than the sacraments of the old Fathers: as in whose time, the price of the death of Christ was not yet paid. But this their opinion, whereby they appoint the force of the merit of the passion of Christ, to be but for a time, cannot be but absurd. For of what more force to save, is the death of Christ now that it is already past, than it was in the old time, when it was looked for to come? Undoubtedly, on each side is required faith, whereby assuredly we do no less comprehend things to come, than we do things past. But if we will say, that God hath a respect unto the sacrifice of his son offered upon the Cross, undoubtedly this was from all eternity, and before the foundations of the world were laid, ratified, and most fully accepted of him. Of Christ also it is written in the Apocalypse: That the lamb was slain from the beginning of the world. And whereas they say, that circumcision had the power to take away original sin, from whence I pray you, had it such great power, but from the death of Christ? Doubtless our Baptism so agreeth with circumcision, that Augustine
against the letters of Petelianus in his second book and 72nd chapter, and in other places proveth, that the sacrament of Baptism ought not to be renewed, because circumcision in the old time was not renewed, if a man had received it of the Samaritans, and did afterward betake himself to the sincere Religion of Jerusalem.
12. But amongst other things, this seemeth not a little to have moved our adversaries, for that it is written unto the Galatians of the ceremonies of the old Fathers, that they were weak and beggarly elements of the world. But these words of Paul are to be understood of those old sacraments which are now abrogated by Christ. Or if this answer like not, then understand Paul so to speak of the sacraments of the old fathers, as he saw the Jews at that time used them: namely without Christ or his promise. But the first answer is both truer and plainer for that place. And if a man demand how it cometh to pass, that the sacraments of the old Fathers were more in number than ours, this question may be easily answered. Namely that the Church was than beginning, neither did they know so many things of Christ, as are made open unto us, now that he is come into the world and hath finished the sacrifice so long looked for. Wherefore it was requisite that God should at that time by many ceremonies and images shadow one and the self-same thing: but there is no need now of such painful instruction. For (as we have before said) the signs of the sacraments were therefore given, to confirm the promises of God, not as though those promises are not of themselves firm enough, but that our minds, being otherwise hard to believe, and wavering, should by sensible signs be strengthened. Chrysostom in his 60th Homily unto the people of Antioch: If (saith he) our nature had been utterly spiritual and without body, spiritual things should have been delivered us, without corporal signs. Hereby it is manifest, how absurdly they order the matter
which set forth the visible signs of the sacraments to be seen of all men: but the promise which should be confirmed by those signs, and ought to cleave unto our minds, they both pronounce in a strange tongue, and secretly mumble up, that it should not be heard of others. But that the sacraments of the Law, which were so many in number were seals of the promises of God, may by induction be easily known. The Tabernacle and Ark of the Lord sealed the promise, that God would dwell in his people, and that he would be in the midst of them. The consecration of the Priest, and the ornaments of his garments, shadowed Christ the only Priest, and the same perpetual and eternal, as the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews proveth. And of this self-same promise, David most plainly maketh mention, when under the person of Christ he saith, Thou art a Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. The sacrifices also foreshowed the oblation of Christ upon the Cross. But here some man will peradventure say: Ergo the sacrifices were sacraments. How then do we say, that there is great difference between the nature of a sacrament, and the nature of a sacrifice? So in deed we said before, and now again constantly affirm it, but thereof it followeth not, but that the consideration of either, may sometimes light upon one and the same thing. The nature of a sacrifice and a sacrament may concur in one and the same thing, for there were two things to be considered in sacrifices, first that there was something offered unto God, and therein consisted the whole strength of sacrifices: secondly that the oblation which was killed and burnt, represented Christ, which was to be slain for us, by whom we should have
God pacified and merciful. And after this manner we doubt not but that in them was a sacrament. And how all these things were scales of most certain promises, may easily be declared by every one of them particularly: as by the observation of the Sabbath, by circumcision, by choice of meats, by
washing and sprinklings of holy water, by the vow of the Nazarites, by the ceremony of them that were zealous, by the purification of the child-wife after her delivery, and by all such like kind of mysteries. But because we would be brief, we thought it sufficient to express those few now mentioned.
13. But there yet remaineth one doubt: whether the people of the Jews having such sensible ceremonies, understood also the promises of God, which were by them sealed. Augustine at large entreateth of this matter in his 4th Book against Faustus, and in his 3rd Book De doctrina Christiana, and saith, that the Patriarchs and Prophets, and the excellenter sort of men in the old Testament, being endued with a mighty spirit, know very well the signification of the ceremonies and of the sacraments: so that they took not the signs, for the things, which (saith he) is a miserable servitude: but he thinketh that the people and common sort of men used these signs as the things themselves, understanding only this, that there is one only God, whom they ought to honor with this kind of worshipping and service. For if there were any which when they knew those to be signs of other things, would yet notwithstanding interpret them after their own lust, that had been an error of an unsteadfast mind. By this doctrine of Augustine, may be affirmed three kinds of those men which use signs. For some there are which in very deed understand what is signified, and therefore stick not in the signs, but turn their eyes to the things signified. Others use the signs, but to what they are to be referred, they know not. And this Augustine thinketh to pertain unto servitude. Last of all there be others which are not ignorant, that those things which they use are signs, but yet notwithstanding they perversely, and as they lust themselves, interpret them. This is an error, and that not a little hurtful. As touching the first and the third, I am of the same
mind that Augustine is. But in the second as touching the common and vulgar people of the Jews, I do not so fully assent unto him, to grant, that the common people of the Hebrews knew nothing else of the Sacraments, and ceremonies of the law, but that by them they should worship the only and true God. For they were taught continually of the Scribes and of the Priests, and heard daily the Oracles of the Prophets. Whereby they might easily gather, at the least a general signification of their Sacraments, as well touching Christ, as all other things pertaining to the pureness of life and holiness of manners. The doctrine of the looking for Messias was so common amongst them, that as I suppose, it was hidden from none of them all. Philip (as it is written in the Gospel of John) thus spake unto Nathanael:
We found the Messias, of whom Moses and the Prophets have written. And the common people of the Jews, being amazed at the miracles of Christ, said: We know that Messias shall come and teach us all these things.
14. Hereunto also serveth that the Prophets ever taught, that Ceremonies being only done outwardly and without faith, are displeasant unto God. And that faith, which was required to outward rites, unless it had a respect unto
Christ, although not fully, yet someway, and that at the leastwise generally: of what force could it have been? And for as much as the Prophets were so diligent in obtruding, and everywhere beating into their heads the significations of the Ceremonies, do we think that they taught nothing of Christ? David most plainly speaketh of sacrifices, that God hath no delight in them. But a sacrifice unto God (saith he) is a troubled spirit, and a contrite and humble heart. Touching washings and cleansings, Isaiah instructeth them saying, Be ye washed and be ye clean. Jeremiah also, Wash
(saith he) thy heart from iniquity. And Ezekiel showeth, that by those waters is signified the power of the holy Ghost, when he bringeth in God,
promising that he would pour clean water upon them. Touching circumcision also they are very often admonished in the holy scripture, to circumcise their necks and their hearts. And that they should not think, that they were able to do this of themselves, and by their own strength, Moses in the 30th chapter of Deuteronomy saith: God shall circumcise thine heart that thou mayest love him. Touching purification and washings of garments, and such other like things, they were thus admonished in Leviticus the 11th chapter: I am the Lord thy God, which brought the out of the land of Egypt: ye shall be holy unto me, because I am holy. Touching the Sabbath they were oftentimes told that in it was signified the rest of God, and their sanctification. And if so be all these things were so manifestly and plainly declared, which no man can doubt, but that unto them they were good and profitable, and that it was not possible for them to be ignorant that the attainment of every good thing came through Christ or the Messias: I cannot be persuaded, but that they saw that in their sacraments was signified Christ. Moreover this also is another reason, which Isaiah most manifestly testifieth, that God did lay upon Christ all our sins, and that we were healed only by his stripes and death: Wherefore seeing in the Sacraments mention is made, that God by sacrifices is made merciful unto us, they could not but call to remembrance the only mediator Christ, by whom only God is made merciful unto us. Howbeit we cannot affirm, that the common sort of Israelites knew all the mysteries particularly. Only this we say, that they had a certain general knowledge of Christ in the Sacraments of the Law, when as otherwise we ourselves cannot particularly render a reason of these Ceremonies. The Apostles have only given them set forth unto us generally. And if there have been some amongst us, as Origen, and a great many other like which have attempted to frame for every
particular Ceremony a proper allegory, yet have they in a manner but lost their labor, for their inventions could bring no profit at all unto us: for they most plainly want the word of God. Neither is it to be marveled at, that they so much delighted in such inventions, for even as everywhere our own devices wonderfully please us, so in this matter the curiosity of man exceedingly delighteth itself.
15. Now those things which we have spoken, most plainly declare, how far the sophistical men have missed of the mark, which have affirmed this difference to be between the old sacraments and the new, that the old
Sacraments signified grace and Christ only, but ours largely and abundantly exhibit both. For the old fathers (say they) were holpen by the work of the worker. For when any man came with faith and a godly motion of the heart and of the mind unto these holy services, he had thereby merit. But the work wrought (as they call it) nothing profiteth them as touching salvation.
But in our Sacraments (they say) it is far otherwise, that not only faith and the spiritual motion of the mind, which they call the work of the worker, helpeth us, but even the outward sacrament itself, and the institution of God, which they call the work wrought, giveth unto us both remission of sins and also salvation. But I will demand of these men, what that is which the outward work and visible Sacrament exhibiteth unto us, that we do not attain unto by faith? If they answer it is Christ: as for him we comprehend him by faith: if remission of sins, that also we obtain by faith: if reconciliation, whereby we return into favor with God, this also we cannot obtain without faith: if last of all, the increase of grace and of the spirit, neither undoubtedly do we by any other means obtain this, but by faith.
What is there then remaining that this work wrought bringeth? This word is altogether strange, neither is it once mentioned of in the holy Scriptures.
Neither would I at this time have used it, but that I have to contend against the adversaries. But peradventure they will say: for as much as besides faith is also added the outward work, is there nothing to be attributed unto it? Yes undoubtedly, I attribute much, when it proceedeth of faith. For I know that such work pleaseth God, and that he useth to recompense many things unto such works. But what maketh that to this present purpose? Did not the old fathers unto their faith adjoin also these works, whereby they exercised and received the Sacraments of their law? And thus as touching this point, we see that they had in theirs as many things which pleased God, as we have in ours, unless peradventure they will contend, that the exercising and receiving of our sacraments, is either a better or nobler work, than was the exercising and receiving of the Sacraments of the old Fathers: which I will not grant unto them especially, seeing that the perfection of the work is to be considered by faith and charity from whence it proceedeth. Wherefore if Abraham and David had more faith when they received their sacraments, than any weak Christian, when he is baptized or communicateth, who will not judge but that their work is more notable and more excellent than the work of these men? And moreover as for that kind of speech which these men so often use, namely, that sacraments remit sins or give grace, we do not easily admit, unless peradventure in that sense wherein Paul affirmeth, that the Gospel is the power of God to salvation: and as unto Timothy, the reading of the holy scripture, is said to save. Which undoubtedly is nothing else, but that the might and power of God whereby he remitteth sins, giveth grace, and at the end saveth, doth use these instruments and means to our salvation. And even as to bring salvation, he useth the words of the Gospel, and the preaching of the holy scriptures, so likewise joineth he thereunto the sacraments. For by both of them is preached unto us the free promise of
God, which if we take hold of by faith, we shall obtain both salvation and also remission of sins. This is the true sense, according to which the fathers must be understood, when they say, that grace is the power of the sacraments. Which is all one, as if they had said, understanding and sense is the force of speech and of words.
16. And how unsafely the schoolmen speak of their stay or let, hereby it is manifest, for that they say, that he putteth not a stay or let, which although he have not the act either of loving or believing, yet objecteth nothing that is contrary or opposite unto grace, namely, the act of infidelity or of hatred.
Then in such case (say they) the sacraments of the Gospel give grace: But this is nothing else than to attribute unto creatures the cause of our salvation, and to bind ourselves too much to signs and elements of this world. This ought to be certain and most assured, that no more is to be attributed unto the sacraments as touching salvation, than unto the word of God. Wherefore if sometimes we hear (as Augustine also saith) that our sacraments are better than the sacraments of the old fathers, this ought to be understanded, that it be referred unto perspicuity. For we grant that our sacraments both speak and preach more plainly of Christ, than did the sacraments of the old fathers. Now then seeing we are more clearly and plainly instructed, faith is more fuller, and bringeth unto us more grace and spirit. And we gladly admit that which the fame Augustine saith: That sometimes it cometh to pass, that the sacrament is received without the matter itself. For so the wicked and infidels using the sacraments receive only the outward signs, and are utterly void of salvation and of grace.
Sometimes also it contrariwise happeneth, that the godly being excluded by any necessity from the use of the sacraments, yet are in no wise defrauded of the matter itself, and of the thing signified. Neither let any man here lay
to our charge that we affirm that sacraments depend of our faith: for neither teach we any such thing: yea rather we affirm that the sacraments are sacraments, although thy faith be either weak or none at all. And Augustine's judgment is very good concerning him, which only carnally receiveth the sacrament, when he saith: It doth not therefore cease to be spiritual, but unto them it is not spiritual. And now at length to make an end, we must never come to this point, to think that grace and our salvation is contained in the sacraments, as in bags, which may be poured out upon the communicants and receivers: for the sacraments are as certain messengers of our salvation which whoso giveth credit unto, obtaineth salvation. And thus much hitherto have I sufficiently spoken of sacraments in general.
Of Circumcision.
17. Now remaineth for us to speak somewhat of Circumcision. For the better understanding whereof we have spoken these things the more largely and with more words. But here we shall not need so long a treatise, for if we remember all those things which have generally been spoken of sacraments, it shall be no hard matter to understand all that which may be spoken of circumcision. And circumcision (not to go from the words of the Apostle) was the seal of the righteousness of faith, because it preached and confirmed the promise concerning righteousness, which the old fathers received by faith. And hereof it followeth, that the old fathers had by it remission of sins. For seeing that righteousness consisteth chiefly in the remission of sins, whosoever believes the promise set forth and by circumcision sealed, it followeth of necessity that he was partaker of the remission of sins. Some demand whether circumcision, and baptism which succeeded circumcision, bring remission only of those sins which are
already past, or also of those which are afterward committed. Let these men consider, that the use of circumcision and of baptism is not for a time but perpetual. For as the faithful oftentimes fail, so when they forthwith come again unto themselves, they think upon the promise of the Gospel, which is as touching the remission of sins. Wherein also even for this cause they are confirmed, for that they remember themselves to be either baptized or circumcised, and so by putting too of faith, they are delivered from sins, and are reconciled unto God. Hereby it is manifest, how they were in the old time deceived, which would not be baptized, but even when death approached, and that they were in a manner giving up the ghost. Neither let any man think, that this is repugnant unto the keys of the Church, whereby the penitent are received. For, that they may the better understand the matter, this they must needs grant, that those keys of the Church are nothing else, but the preaching of the Gospel, whereby the ministers do persuade the believers that their sins are forgiven them. But they which are to be persuaded, are by the benefit of the holy Ghost persuaded, and their faith concerning the promise is also hereby confirmed, for that they call to memory the sign of baptism or of circumcision, which in times past they received. And Paul when he said, For the remission of sins going before, meant that justification when it is applied unto us, always putteth away those sins which we have before committed. Yet that letteth nothing, but that the promise of the remission of sins, and sealing thereof, may oftentimes with profit be called to our memory. But so oftentimes as sin is so forgiven, it followeth of necessity, that the same sin went before:
Howbeit that which we speak of, tendeth to this, to declare, that the utility of sacraments is not for a time, but pertaineth to the whole course of our life. Circumcision differed from our sacraments, for that it was the
beginning and first step and visible entrance to the covenant of God. And what manner of men the uncircumcised were accounted to be, the Apostle declareth in the Epistle to the Ephesians. Remember (saith he) that ye were sometimes Gentiles in the flesh, which were called uncircumcision of them which are called circumcision in the flesh made with hands: ye were ye say sometimes without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of the Israelites, strangers from the covenants of the promises, without hope in the world, and without God. And in the Epistle to the Philippians he teacheth, which is the true and spiritual circumcision. For we (saith he) are circumcision, which serve the Lord in spirit, and glory in Christ, and have no confidence in the flesh. And to the Colos. he writeth: In whom (saith he) ye are circumcised with circumcision not made with hands, by putting off the sinful body of the flesh. By which place we see (as we have before also noted) that forgiveness of sins is to be put as well in circumcision as in baptism. Wherefore Augustine in his book against Julianus the Pelagian, (in that part wherein he heapeth up a great many of authorities of the fathers) reproveth the Pelagians by these words of the Apostle, for that notwithstanding they denied original sin, yet they baptized their infants: for seeing they affirmed that in them is no sin, how could that baptism (as Paul saith) be circumcision not made with hands, by the putting off of the sinful flesh? These places of the Apostle serve very much to expound the meaning and nature of circumcision. In Deut. the 10th chap. the Lord saith: Thou shalt circumcise the uncircumcision of thine heart, neither shalt thou harden thy neck. Instead of uncircumcision the Chaldey interpreter hath,
Tephashot, that is, foolishness: thereby signifying, that the first ground of sin herein consisteth, that we are blind to all things pertaining to God, and that we are in all heavenly things blind and want the knowledge of God.
The 70 interpreters have σκληροκαρδίαν, that is, hardness of heart. The promises which are offered unto them that are circumcised, are those, that God is made our God, and the God of our seed: in which only thing we have the horn of plenty, that is, the sum of all good things. Hereof also springeth our felicity, and consolation in all affliction. They were thereby also put in mind of the mortifying of the flesh: that is, of the cutting away of superfluous pleasures. And moreover by it they professed true religion. And briefly thereby was signified the covenant made with God. These were the things signified, and the matter of this sacrament, and do pertain truly unto the nature and substance thereof.
18. Now are there two things remaining to be discussed. The one is, why circumcision was commanded to be marked in the member of generation: the second, why it was commanded to be done the eighth day. Out of Augustine in diverse places we gather, that therefore God would have it so to be, to put us in mind, that original sin, is by generation drawn from the parents unto us, and that even as the foreskin being cut off in the parent, doth notwithstanding return again in the child which is begotten, so original sin being remitted unto the parents, buddeth up again in the children which are brought forth. We are thereby also admonished (which we have now oftentimes said) that the league of God pertaineth not only unto us but also to our children which we beget. Finally by that sign was chiefly signified, that Christ should spring of the seed of Abraham. Neither ought we here to follow our own sense or human reason, to think that to be a thing ridiculous or of small force, which God himself hath instituted. For otherwise the cross of Christ and the Gospel are an offense unto the Jews, and foolishness unto the Gentiles. Neither ought we to judge of things divine according to that which is showed outwardly. Otherwise Julianus and Celsus made a
laughing matter, that the apple was forbidden our first parents. And Naaman the Syrian thought it a ridiculous thing, that he should be seven times washed in the river of Jordan. Neither doubt I, but that there were some which derided Moses, when he cast the wood into the bitter waters, to heal their bitterness. In our days also, very many marvel, how it cometh to pass, that the stealth of one halfpenny bringeth eternal destruction. But these men ought to remember, that these things are not to be considered according to their own force: but unto them must be added also the weight of the word of God, which undoubtedly is of so great weight, as it weigheth heavier than the whole world. Neither is there anything so vile and abject, but that when the word of God is added thereunto, it is made notable and excellent. In deed kings and princes of this world have a care to have goodly and honorable seals. But as touching the promises and gifts, which are by them sealed, they oftentimes deceive men. But God when he useth even the most abject signs, never deceiveth any man. Now will I speak in a word or two of the consideration of the eighth day. The Hebrews affirm, that such is the dignity of the seventh day, that of it all things obtain (I know not what) force and strength. Wherefore they think, that after the seventh day there cometh into the infant newly born so much strength, that he is able easily to abide the pain of circumcision. But let us leave unto them such feigned toys, and let us rather thus think, that in the eighth day was betokened the resurrection of Christ, and therewithal ours. Which may easily be perceived by Paul: for he saith, that in circumcision was signified the cutting off of the sins of the flesh. But the sins of the flesh can never be perfectly cut off from us, until we are come to the holy resurrection. All the whole time of this world, and the time of this whole life, representeth a week of days. But the eighth day signifieth the resurrection. There is moreover another reason not
to be contemned, namely, that a child being so newly born, is able to do nothing of himself as touching the attainment of righteousness. Wherefore hereby we be admonished that justification cometh not of our works. And although it were so in the right of circumcision, yet are not we in baptism bound to any certain number of days. For Christ hath made us free from this kind of observation. Howbeit there have been some, which have gone about in baptism also to compel Christians unto the eighth day. But those the counsel held by Cyprian, hath condemned.
19. Circumcision was for a time observed in the Primitive Church. And Augustine upon the Epistle to the Galatians saith, that not every circumcision after Christ was condemned, but only that circumcision wherein was put a hope of salvation: but that circumcision, which was received for this cause only, to retain peace in the Church, and the more to advance the preaching of the Gospel, might well be borne withal. For this cause Paul suffered Timothy to be circumcised. But if it be required to be done as necessary unto salvation, it is by no means to be permitted And therefore Paul earnestly resisted and would not suffer Titus to be circumcised, as it is in the Epistle to the Galatians. They say that even now very many Churches in the East or in the South retain still to this day
Circumcision together with Baptism. How rightly they do it, let them see unto that. Doubtless it is most likely, that, forasmuch as they have retained it so long, and that so stiffly, they put some hope of their salvation in it.
Wherefore they should do much better, if they would utterly omit it. But it shall be good, in the meantime to declare how Paul to the Galatians saith,
That he which is circumcised is debtor to observe the whole law. For when Abraham received circumcision, the law was not yet given. Wherefore it seemeth that circumcision had not that of his own force, and nature, to bind
men to observe the law. But we ought to remember, that that which the Apostle saith, proceedeth out of another principle: namely that circumcision represented Christ as to come, and as to give himself upon the cross: and the law should so long be of force, until Christ came. Seeing then by circumcision they testified that he was not as yet come, it must needs follow, that they were kept still under the law, seeing the law could only by the coming of Christ be abrogated.
20. And with how great an observation God would have that sacrament to be kept, hereby it is manifest, for that in the Book of Genesis the 17th
Chapter he testifieth: That the soul which is not circumcised the eighth day should be cut off from his people. Ambrose in his book of Abraham the Patriarch, seemeth to wonder at this so great severity. For God (saith he) appointed Cities of refuge, that if any had by chance or unawares killed a man, he might have a place whither to go, that the friends and kinsfolk of the partly slain should not kill him, so that he had not of set purpose and willingly, but by chance and unawares committed the murder. Wherefore seeing infants did not by their own will refuse circumcision, what reason was there why they should be cut off? He answereth, that therefore peradventure God would have the children to be deprived of their corporal life, that in them parents might be punished for their impiety. But he saith, that there were others which were of the opinion, that this sentence pertained not unto the infants: but unto those, in whose power they were, as if it had been said, that they should be cut off. But the very words of the Scripture are against this opinion: wherefore he turneth himself to an allegorical exposition, as though that threatening should pertain to those, which circumcise not the mind which is the strongest and most excellent portion of the soul. But such allegories satisfy not this question. Wherefore
it seems to me that two things may well be applied to the absolving of this doubt. The first is, that threatening pertained unto him when he came to full age, if he should then allow the negligence of his parents and not receive circumcision, unto the which he was by the law bound. The second is, that God is not to be accused of injustice, if sometimes he killed the infant being so brought up uncircumcised. For such severity might be of force to admonish men, in how ill part God taketh it, to have his sacraments contemned. And if peradventure thou demand what is to be judged of the soul of a child so killed, having not as yet received the sacrament: I answer, that we either as touching his salvation or condemnation, can affirm nothing on either side. For if he pertained to the number of the elect, so that he was predestinate to eternal life, there is no cause but that he may be saved: forasmuch as grace is not bound unto sacraments. But if he were a vessel to that end made of God, to show forth in him his wrath, and so to be condemned, what can we complain of the severity of God, especially seeing we are all born the children of wrath, and of condemnation? Howbeit in my judgment we ought to hope well of him. For seeing the promise was given unto the seed of Abraham, and he being an infant hath not by any actual sin of his own withdrawn himself from the promise, it is most likely that he is admitted to the kingdom of God. Neither ought we to think, that he was slain of God to eternal condemnation, but rather to salvation, that wickedness should not change his heart: and that by his death he might testify unto his parents and elders, and unto others, how grievously they sinned in neglecting his circumcision, and might profit the whole Church, carrying in him a token of the wrath of God against the contemners of the sacraments. Moreover it is no hard thing to be believed that godly men which lived before circumcision was instituted, had other certain notes,
whereby their righteousness which was had by faith, was sealed. For we read, that they both offered first fruits and also sacrificed: but by what sign, they noted their first regeneration, the holy Scriptures do not teach.
21. And the Hebrews in circumcising of their children used a knife made of a stone: which nevertheless God commanded not. But they were moved so to do, by the example of Ziphora the wife of Moses, which used such a knife in circumcising of her son, when he was in danger to have been slain of the Angel. And although this sacrament was diligently observed and kept among the Jews, yet it spread abroad also to foreign Nations. For if we may give credit to Ambrose in his second Book of Abraham the Patriarch: the Egyptians, Arabians, and Phoenicians are circumcised. And he thinketh that they did it, because they thought that by such first fruits of their blood, are driven away evil spirits, to the end that they should not hurt him which is circumcised. So the Devil hath always gone about to corrupt the sacraments of God. For it was superstition to ascribe the power of salvation or of the delivery from Satan, unto the nature of blood shed forth. And at this day the Jews seem not to be far from this kind of foolishness. For while they circumcise the infant, there standeth one by with a little vessel full either of earth or of dust, whereinto they thrust the foreskin being cut off: as though the devil might seem by that means to have his meat. For the Lord said unto the serpent even straightway at the beginning: Upon thy breast shalt thou creep, and earth shalt thou eat. They seem to think that the devil having thus gotten his meat, departeth from the child and will not trouble him anymore.
Amongst the Ethnics also, as the same Ambrose affirmeth, was circumcision corruptly observed after another manner. For the Egyptians circumcised, not in the eighth day as God had commanded, but in the 14th year, in so much as Ishmael at that age received circumcision. Which
manner also it is most likely that the Arabians followed. For at this day the Turks are likewise circumcised at that age: although the Egyptians, as the same Ambrose affirmeth, were wont also to circumcise their women kind, and that in the 14th year, as they did their male children. And for the same they used this reason, because they might signify thereby, that lust must be restrained, which in both kinds at that age beginneth very much to be kindled. But God commanded that only the male kind should be circumcised. And yet were not the women of the Hebrews therefore counted either strangers from the Church, or from the covenant. For they are always numbered together with the men. They that are unmarried, with their fathers; and the married, with their husbands.
22. There have been some, which by deceitful arguments have spoken ill of circumcision, and after a sort reproved the God of the Old Testament. For first they said, that the foreskin which was cut off, is either according to the nature of the body, or else it is against the nature thereof. If it be according to the nature, why would God have it to be cut off? If it be against the nature, why doeth God suffer it to grow? Ambrose in his 77th Epistle to Constantius answereth, that that foreskin is according to the nature of our body: but it is not absurd, that those things which are agreeable with our body, or our flesh be cut off, if the spirit may thereby be holpen. Which we perceive to be done in fasting's and other mortification of the flesh, and in bearing of the Cross, which God hath laid upon all the faithful. In which we are compelled to suffer many things against the flesh. Further they say that God feared away the other nations from the law of Moses, when he laid upon them this yoke of circumcision. Which if it had been away, many strangers and outward nations would have come unto the religion of the Hebrews. But after the self-same manner also, they might cavil against
Christ himself, for that he seemed to fray away the world from his religion: partly by reason of the severity of his doctrine, and partly by reason of the persecutions and Martyrdom, which in the first time, the most part of the faithful were like to suffer. But they which truly pertain to the number of the elect, do in no wise start back for the difficulty of the calling. But they which go backward were not of us, and therefore they are fallen away. They marvel also, why God would in so tender an age, have such a ceremony exercised, which might oftentimes bring weak little bodies into danger. As touching age (saith Ambrose) As every age is subject unto sin, so likewise it is meet for the sacrament. And that Infants are subject unto sin, their diseases, weeping's, pains, and deaths abundantly declare. And if peradventure they were brought in danger of their life; yet was there no cause why they should complain, forasmuch as they ought the same all wholly unto God. And yet as they write, very few have by that occasion died. And that pain and danger brought some utility. For even as valiant soldiers when they remember that they have before suffered many things, for that they should not fly away, are the more animated to stand by it, least they should dishonor those scars and wounds which they before suffered, rather than they would forsake their place and standing. So would God that the Hebrews being now of full age and at man's state should defend the profession of their law, even against all dangers, when they called to remembrance that for religions sake, they had been wounded even from their infancy. But now he saith, Circumcision is worthily refused of Christians. For that seeing Christ hath shed his blood, the price of our redemption, there is now no need that every particular man should privately shed his own blood. And as touching the Sacrament of Circumcision, these things we think sufficient for this present purpose.